Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
User Journal

Journal smittyoneeach's Journal: Bigotry 83

Journal by smittyoneeach
noun

intolerance towards those who hold different opinions from oneself.

So, when you have a specific instance of me being intolerant toward an individual in a given context, the "bigot" accusation will seem less a dishonest ploy to silence. Not that one comes to /. expecting anything resembling honest inquiry, mind.
I, for one, completely reject the decadent modern Politically Correct cowering in the face of falsehoods, and think Progressives and their enablers can return to Hell and take their noise with them.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Bigotry More

Bigotry

Comments Filter:

  • It ain't gonna change a thing. Since you don't supply the link, I guess I have to provide the example [slashdot.org]...

    The pertinent part: From what I did read, Communism, like Islam, is just a cheap trap for the intellectually weak.

    The words by themselves, mean nothing, being merely an opinion, just like religion itself. When it comes to denial of rights, like you want with women and gays, the words accurately reflect action... of an arrogant bigot, a person that sees equality as oppression and as decadent hedonism. Tha

    • I regret that I initially omitted the link to that definition source.
      The simple truth is that your charge,

      Try as you might to redefine words

      is inaccurate. I request you reply with a clarification indicating that I am not "redefining words". Given that "meaning" is such a moving target in the present age, I'll fall short of pointing out who might be the one engaged in actual redefinitions here.
      Too, I won't waste time in speculating regarding the potential dodgy motives for doing so.

  • Although the definition of bigotry that you just used is an accurate assessment of how you often regard myself and others who are not in your political party.

    • Bigotry is more than just opinion. I don't consider your opinion... I am only pointing out that you consent to and advocate bigoted action through law. Tell you what, let's use "dogmatist" instead, since dogma is what you preach.

    • Whoops! Sorry! That wasn't wasn't mean for you at all! Well, not entirely, since you too are dogmatic in your own faith in the democrat party. But the post was directed at Mr. Smith.

      • You fall into your own trap as a result of your own faith in that statement. My faith is not in the democratic party to make things better, it is just in the republican party to make things much worse. As I said before, the sitting democrats want to amputate my little finger, while the republicans all want to take off my entire arm. If I could vote for someone who didn't want to harm me at all, without giving the republicans a stronger suit in the same action, I would do that.

        • Oh please, save it. That's just so much bullshit.

          • I'm glad I can count on you to tell me how I feel, it saves me so much time. Do I have an opinion on Donald Trump's presidential campaign as well? Or on more important matters what do I think about Speaker Paul Ryan claiming to be a fan of Rage Against the Machine?

            • No, I'm just saying you're full of shit. It's not complicated. How you feel is irrelevant.

              • How you feel is irrelevant.

                You are so steeped in Politically Correct bigotry. . .

                • Nope, it's just an opinion, nothing to do with actual restraint, like you want.

                  • actual restraint, like you want

                    As always, I am fascinated that you and damn_registrars both possess such fascinating insight into what I do and do not want. Especially, since, as a Christian, I have no interest in restraining anyone. I have vast interest in encouraging others to grow into a full, Christ-like human maturity, true. But that's an entirely separate thing which I doubt you'll view honestly.

                    • I have no interest in restraining anyone.

                      Yes, you do. You want to deny equal rights and liberty for all. The vision problem is yours. You are stuck in your cultural monkey trap.

                    • Whom? Name the name of the person(s) whom I have personally denied anything. Nah, I have complete confidence that you'll fetish your Oppressive Tolerance Strawman more or less endlessly. It sure beats an honest discussion, doesn't it?

                    • Wow, you are the very definition of obtuse and run the perfect circle every time. I surrender! How many internets have you won now? I hope you have space on the mantle for one more. You better add a new trophy room onto the house.

                    • Your version of libety is the slavery of addiction to drug dealers.

                    • Hey: you just proved my point.
                    • Fustakrakich places great faith in hedonism and bogus equivalence. It remains to be seen if the Almighty will be impressed with him or the fellow-travelers.

                    • Equality is not slavery.

                    • I did, eh? Ooookay... I'll have to take that as a matter of faith.

                    • Fustakrakich places great faith in hedonism and bogus equivalence.

                      You would be saying the exact same thing about abolitionists 170 years ago.

                    • It's such a turn-on when you assert a counter-factual is the truth. You are teh best!

                    • Please, do tell.

                      Anyway I said nothing counter-factual at all. You are indeed arguing as a slave owner, or his obfuscating lawyer would. You denials are meaningless. We finally, after all these years, got d_r to reveal truth on his motivations, now it's your turn.

                      Who you gonna call? Trollbusters!

                    • No, really: you're as well-founded to compare me to pro-slavery types as you would be to trot out Adolf. Stop it. If you want to criticize me in a useful way, do so in a rightly divided Biblical context.

                    • Stop it yourself. As long as you actively believe that some people deserve less rights than others, I'll be all over it, your bible notwithstanding either. The truth is the truth. It stands out like the proverbial sore thumb. Acceptance is your only way out, but I'll assume you will continue to dig in your heels. It doesn't matter. If you wish to take offense, that is your problem, not mine. Your problem is the same as d_r's, distinguishable only by your respective targets, but he is out of the way and will

                    • BTW, since you called beetlejuice, I really shouldn't have to remind you he was a pretty popular guy. It's not a big stretch to bring up the name today, but I didn't do it...

                    • As long as you actively believe that some people deserve less rights than others

                      What a twisted, perverse, and false way to represent my viewpoint. I'm the guy standing there saying "Buy low, sell high" and you're screaming up and down about your right do the opposite. And I'm replying "Whatevs; just understand that I'll raise my sons to ignore your godless idiocy".

                    • The point that I was after is that comparing me to anti-abolitionists is as daft as homosexuality or a Godwin's Law violation, for all I wouldn't suspend your liberty to pursue either.

                    • Not false in any way. But I'm in a good mood, and for lack of foolish pride, I shall concede another trophy... Today, well, for the moment, I will think happy thoughts. The music does that to me.

                    • I'll just have to admit you are a lost soul and leave it at that. I cannot overcome the irrational. You'll have to do it yourself.

                    • Now that I can post again (I think) picking up where I left off.

                      Abolitionists- whether the ones 170 years ago or the ones protesting abortion now- invariably are of a privileged class arguing for the rights of an oppressed class.

                      Drug pushers and abusers are a privileged class arguing for more privileges for themselves.

                      There is a significant difference.

                    • What equality? The equality to give some jerk in Columbia all of your money in return for destroying your mind? You are more of a slave than ever.

                    • Drug pushers and abusers are a privileged class arguing for more privileges for themselves.

                      Well, the pushers get their privilege through prohibition. That is why the organized ones are for it, and pay off the government to get it, and sell it you with via their propaganda. With users, you have no right to punish or sanction them. You only have the right to take away the car keys until they sober up. An argument for equality is not an argument for privilege, it only appears that way from the point of view of

                    • Prohibition against growing our own is why the money goes to Columbia/Mexico/Afghanistan(That's what that war is about). Mine doesn't, I always buy locally produced, but that's not important here. You're just plain wrong. You cannot scientifically and without prejudice prove harm. You have no standing. You are simply expressing might makes right. And really the argument is moot. You just can't stop people. To me that is a good thing. The moment you realize it and put down the weapons, we will all be better

              • More than once you have insisted you know how I feel about something, in spite of my stating the opposite.
                • You have to understand that fustakrakich is the radical Solipsist who figures everything happens as a context-free, individual experience in the mind, yet he just kinda magically knows stuff about what everyone else is doing.
                  I suspect, if you'll forgive the conspiracy theory, that he has a magic mind-reading font that he got from Bulungi Intelligence that he uses here on Slashdot to pluck thoughts from the minds of others as they read his noise.

                  • I am fascinated how you can twist the simplest things to affirm your preconceptions. That bit of gibberish you posted there is a pretty nice example, worthy of a bookmark... as always TNX...

                • Your words and actions are in deep conflict then, just like the politicians you vote for. You are not doing what you feel (or you could be lying). That makes what you feel irrelevant. The only thing that matters at all is what you actually do. That is the only thing I will take into account. So, for example, when you continue to vote for democrats (or republicans in Mr. Smith's case), how you feel about it doesn't matter in the least, and you render all your complaints meaningless. You indicate a great diff

        • The only way that could be true is if you are living on welfare.

          • That is a strange and twisted conclusion there. My occupation is one that is held in high regard in most modern nations, but because it challenges some of the things that the GOP holds dear to their faith, they want me to be permanently unemployed. Granted the democrats certainly aren't making my occupation easier to get by on, but at least they offer some small chance for me to earn a liveable wage.

            • GOP holds dear to their faith, they want me to be permanently unemployed

              Don't ever bore me with the "conspiracy theory" charge again, please.

              • :-) We found something we agree on. He has to be a government employee to be thinking like that, or sorta like MH42 said, be on welfare. In regular life the party never made one bit of difference. If the toilet is broken, you will get paid to fix it. You only have to answer the phone and state your price.

                That reminds me of a little story. One president, or at least his administration made my life a little easier. Guess who it was... a republican, Ronnie Reagan (of all people)... They eliminated the requirem

                • You are vastly oversimplifying this. Frankly I'm not satisfied with the way the democrats have funded science in the past couple decades. I would happily vote for someone else, but the consequences are too high right now. The GOP openly hates science and will do everything they can think of to drive science research budgets to zero. Anything that improves their chances of success on that is unacceptable for my career.

                  • You are vastly oversimplifying this.

                    No, you are just trying to rationalize your bullshit. Your motivations are crystal clear. You needn't bother trying to hide it anymore.

                    • I have stated my motivations. You claim to be so certain that they are something else, but you are simply wrong. Your telepathic powers are nowhere near as extant as you keep telling yourself they are.

                    • No telepathy is involved, or needed. It has all been spelled out quite clearly, and without unicode. You're out, it's over... Your whole viewpoint is a poisoned cesspool (is there another kind?) of partisan banality, unsuitable for human consumption. Mr. Smith may have a cast iron stomach, but I don't. Now, if you want to talk about sports, or the weather, hangnails, gout, swollen prostates, the pain and itching of psoriasis, waxy buildup, I'm all ears (or eyes, I guess). And since you constantly find this

                    • Whoops! Didn't mean to get all ethereal with you. I'll come again:

                      I have stated my motivations.

                      You most certainly did! You finally admitted you depend on government money for your job, and that you will vote for anybody that will keep the money flowing. So, maybe you really aren't a democrat per se. You just have more faith in them at the present time. In other words, you've been bought. You are auctioning your vote. That is all.

                      To everybody else, this is the perfect example how the politician is a pure ref

                    • Go yourself on down to the nearest Whole Foods or equivalent and get some pumpkin seeds. Trust me on this. Natural steroid in them. Best thing ever. Word is bond, bruh.

                    • Shit, man! I thought you were still too young to be thinking about that! I really dread the thought of ever having to change my diet or drinking habits. So far everything here is still at 100%, and if family history is any indication, I have very little to worry about.

                    • Well, my dad has survived Lemmy [billboard.com] (I blew in unannounced for dad's 70th last year), but dad's lived almost as hard.
                      In contrast, I'm a rather boring soul, nattering on with people I've never met on sites such as this.

                    • Yeah, just remember to get up and walk around a bit. Thrombosis isn't cool either.

                  • Look, man: there is one Progressive Party, with two wings.
                    Universities don't get a pass on the Laws of Economics. The Higher Ed bubble is bursting. I'd recommend making some industry friends.
                    • We know your thoughts on education, you've made it perfectly clear how much you despise it. We know your party tells you to hate science, and you embrace that whole-heartedly because they tell you to.

                    • Higher Ed bubble

                      That is a fun little conservative sound bite, but few bother to say what (they think) it means. Care to inform the unwashed masses as to what you think is involved in a

                      Higher Ed bubble

                      and what you think will change when it "bursts"?

                    • :-) The plumbing industry, right?

                      FYI: The monolithic neo-liberal Reagan*/Thatcher party running the country today is not progressive. If you're going to try to knock ol' boy over, you need to come up with something real.

                      *Can you believe it? He was actually a more real liberal than Mr. Clinton!

                    • Actually, I'm considering an Executive MBA program next fall.
                    • Nope, and nope. There are a lot of erroneous assumptions there from the author. Even more so, you are making a hugely erroneous assumption about me and my work. If this fall we had zero new undergrads start my work would still continue just the same.
                    • That's a crappy use of a week or so [dilbert.com]. More to the point, an MBA isn't really grad school, or really even school. You're just paying some other managers to label you as a good manager after you talk with them about management.

              • GOP holds dear to their faith, they want me to be permanently unemployed

                Don't ever bore me with the "conspiracy theory" charge again, please.

                First, the GOP wants the federal budget for scientific research - excluding of course that which is done in the interest of killing people - to be zero. That puts me out of work quickly. There is no tinfoil hat required here, nor is there any conspiracy. The GOP doesn't hate me, personally, they hate all scientists fairly equally.

                Second, I would never insult a theory by calling your conspiracies to be in that league. Your conspiracies are uniformly fact-free, which means they are not worthy of being

                • First, the GOP wants the federal budget for scientific research... to be zero. That puts me out of work quickly.

                  Then you do work for the government, and thus exposes your partisan interests...

                  • No, no: his frequent furniture references in the context of the President absolve him of all such charges. Just ask him.
                    • Substitute the guy around 19 seconds with President Lawnchair and you'll see where I'm going [youtube.com]. This isn't about being "absolved of all charges" or any such thing, though you seem to think that your silly - and oddly self-contradictory - rodeo bit is somehow relevant.

                  • First, the GOP wants the federal budget for scientific research... to be zero. That puts me out of work quickly.

                    Then you do work for the government

                    The government funds my work but it has benefits for all. My science is not partisan, however some partisan people are specifically anti-science.

                    • Thank you for revealing. Your entire schtick is now moot.

                    • Anything funded by the government becomes so partisan that it is worthless to anybody else. Your conclusions are predetermined by the grant.

                    • Anything funded by the government becomes so partisan that it is worthless to anybody else.

                      In economics or political science that may be true. My work has no political agenda.

                      Your conclusions are predetermined by the grant

                      It seems reasonable at this point for me to expect that you don't understand how grants work for basic science research. In fact in my field there has been a push to encourage people to publish negative results more often, so that others can avoid spending time and money on dead end research.

                    • Negative or positive results, is still a prejudiced conclusion.

                    • That kind of sweeping generalization implies that no non-prejudiced conclusion is possible in any kind of study of anything, ever.

                    • Yep. That is correct. People don't do research without hoping to find answers, and Schrodinger's Cat has more philosophical implications than just in quantum mechanics.

                    • Just the facts, ma'am; The government gives him money. He wants them to keep giving him money. And you're a big meany if you don't vote for a democrat for president.

                      But I wouldn't say that mere curiosity (the other motivator for research) is always prejudiced or always kills the cat :-)

            • There is another option- you're an abortionist.

              • How on earth could you have misread what I wrote to such a severe degree to come to that erroneous conclusion?

                • "it challenges some of the things that the GOP holds dear to their faith"

                  The only thing the GOP seems to hold on faith- and not very much faith in that- is a pro-birther version of pro-life.

    • I bet you think this JE's about you, don't you?

Slashdot Top Deals

8 Catfish = 1 Octo-puss

Close