See what gay activists did to London's Dolce and Gabbana store today

[rainee]

Weren't these protesters exercising their free speech?

Is that what you call this? Isn't it more like drama queen overkill?

So something was said thoughtlessly, I agree on a scale of one to ten it shouldn't have been said like "I wish so and so was dead" shouldn't be said.


So as often as these protesting jerks are guilty of saying much worse things than that - so they turn their human hypocritical self righteousness into a thoughtful and purposeful way to do harm with words.

How, uhm, violent of them, actually.


Maybe they should be made mad over and over again until we can be sure they have control of their unique specious specialness and have to take it like the rest of us.

Who said homophobia is wrong?


At least they are not raping and killing like homosexuals did in one place. We should no doubt FEAR that evil is in their wheelhouse too, yes?

I mean only if they thought someone deserved it I'm sure.

Are they trying to prove homophobia is right?

 

[lovemeorhateme]

You can't have it both ways. If you want to voice your intolerance of a particular stance on a social issue, then it's ridiculous to expect other people to not do the same towards your own. It seems like you're arguing that free speech should come with some sort of mandate where people have to accept your statement and like it, or at least respect it. No one is obligated to play nice.

No not at all. You, like so many others seem to entirely miss the point in what I'm saying.

I don't think people have to be tolerant and I sure don't claim to be. I don't think people have to play nice and I am a great supporter of freedom of speech. My complaint is that those who consider themselves shining examples of 'tolerance' are some of the most bigoted, intolerant bullies around. They are hypocrites of the highest order.

 

[Quincy]

No not at all. You, like so many others seem to entirely miss the point in what I'm saying.

I don't think people have to be tolerant and I sure don't claim to be. I don't think people have to play nice and I am a great supporter of freedom of speech. My complaint is that those who consider themselves shining examples of 'tolerance' are some of the most bigoted, intolerant bullies around. They are hypocrites of the highest order.

I get what you're saying, they claim to be tolerant but won't be tolerant of your view. I don't think anyone has ever claimed to be tolerant of everything, tolerance is a very selective process. They might be hypocrites but my point is that it's ridiculous to expect otherwise. You can't voice your intolerance of same sex marriage and not expect criticism. Supporters of the issue have never claimed to be tolerant of supporters of traditional marriage, at least no one that thinks logically. People on either side of a social conflict are selectively tolerant and that's just how it is.

EDIT: I would add that being tolerant of intolerance defeats the purpose of your stance. You might disagree with the opposing side's stance but if you do nothing your own may lose traction.

 

[kmoney]

Yes, if they were always doing it, and being very arrogant about it (The gays said, Go against us, and you lose. This is 1.5 % of the population talking here.)

So to boycott you have to be a certain percentage of the population?

 

[Rusha]

Open disagreement can be verbal: "I think you're wrong, and here's why." Doesn't have to be a big boycott with signs. Ugh :nono:

Of course it *doesn't have to be* ...

That's the beauty of free speech ... they are free to use their big boycott with signs and you are free to respond.

I have a feeling you wouldn't be protesting if the signs in question were a protest to gay marriage. :think:

 

[Rusha]

Agreed - and this is why the LGBTQ community have become intolerant bullies.

Yeah, the way they have voted to stop heterosexual marriage and all. Big meanies!

 

[rainee]

Of course it *doesn't have to be* ...

That's the beauty of free speech ... they are free to use their big boycott with signs and you are free to respond.

I have a feeling you wouldn't be protesting if the signs in question were a protest to gay marriage. :think:

Yeah, the way they have voted to stop heterosexual marriage and all. Big meanies!

First Rusha, I am not stalking you!
But you are making great points I just ache to respond to.

Their boycott is useless in one way. When he first said what was said - I agreed with Elton John. It was unkind. I felt sympathy.

But he didn't want sympathy. He wanted an excuse to muster his "gang."
It was a call to arms and here it is.

Well guess what? The majority can't call to arms. They get to be the bullies not the majority.

 

[Rusha]

First Rusha, I am not stalking you!
But you are making great points I just ache to respond to.

I know you are stalking me, Rainee. I just know it!

:chuckle:

Their boycott is useless. When he first said what was said - I agreed with Elton John. It was unkind. I felt sympathy.

But he didn't want sympathy. He wanted an excuse to muster his "gang."
It was a call to arms and here it is.

Well guess what? The majority can't call to arms.

See, the only thing I am responding to is the idea that protesting is wrong. IF it's bullying and wrong, than it should be illegal right?

However, what do you want to bet that IF those involved were holding up huge signs in protest of gay marriage, GFR7 would be applauding them and arguing that it's about freedom of speech.

I am focusing only on the issue of freedom of speech and the right to protest.

 

[rainee]

I know you are stalking me, Rainee. I just know it!

:chuckle:



See, the only thing I am responding to is the idea that protesting is wrong. IF it's bullying and wrong, than it should be illegal right?

However, what do you want to bet that IF those involved were holding up huge signs in protest of gay marriage, GFR7 would be applauding them and arguing that it's about freedom of speech.

I am focusing only on the issue of freedom of speech and the right to protest.

Well I agree with you - if it was in protest of gay marriage I would also feel it was a free speech issue... :shamed:
But would that entail a boycott trying to put someone out of business?

Isn't that an attempt to wield power?

 

[rainee]

I'm telling you every time homosexuals try to rally as a "complaint" they also are either intimidating or doing harm to someone..

They may be careful of the government right now but one day they are going to have to be whacked.

 

[rainee]

I bet nobody thought I was going to say that.

Now watch them try to hunt me down, the little sh

ahhhhh....

 

[Rusha]

Well I agree with you - if it was in protest of gay marriage I would also feel it was a free speech issue... :shamed:
But would that entail a boycott trying to put someone out of business?

Isn't that an attempt to wield power?

Of course it would. That is exactly why I support the rights of business owners to decide who they will provide services to and what they will sell and publicly support. That doesn't mean, however, they are able to dictate how the public will respond to their actions.

 

[rainee]

Of course it would. That is exactly why I support the rights of business owners to decide who they will provide services to and what they will sell and publicly support. That doesn't mean, however, they are able to dictate how the public will respond to their actions.

True but the last time I wanted to boycott it was over tuna fishing and the killing of dolphins - do you think that is different from what you are seeing now?

 

[Rusha]

True but the last time I wanted to boycott it was over tuna fishing and the killing of dolphins - do you think that is different from what you are seeing now?

I don't think it's unreasonable for people to wish to be happy and voice their opinion.

Also, there are a lot of animal rights activists who would agree with you on dolphins. There is also a lot of criticism towards animal rights activists. BTW, I don't cross picket lines.

 

[Jose Fly]

If boycotts are so terrible, then right-wing Christians are just awful.

List of Companies Christians Boycott

Of course we all know this is really just a classic example of tribalism. Boycotts are good and righteous when Christians do it, but oppressive and intolerant when gays do it.

 

[Rusha]

If boycotts are so terrible, then right-wing Christians are just awful.

List of Companies Christians Boycott

Of course we all know this is really just a classic example of tribalism. Boycotts are good and righteous when Christians do it, but oppressive and intolerant when gays do it.

They are not. They are neutral. The author of this thread just sees this as one-sided.

 

[rexlunae]

Agreed - and this is why the LGBTQ community have become intolerant bullies.

:baby:

I think it's amazing you can't see the hypocrisy in your position. You claim for homophobes an unlimited right of free expression, but when people object to what they say using their own rights to free expression, they're somehow "intolerant".

 

[GFR7]

:baby:

I think it's amazing you can't see the hypocrisy in your position. You claim for homophobes an unlimited right of free expression, but when people object to what they say using their own rights to free expression, they're somehow "intolerant".

No, I am not a homophobe and I think they should shut up.

 

[zoo22]

They...held a peaceful protest? Oh, the humanity...?

It's unbelievable. From what I've seen, they not only brought signs... They actually had a banner. lain:

 

[rainee]

It's unbelievable. From what I've seen, they not only brought signs... They actually had a banner. lain:

Wow, there it goes again! Wonder what his sarcasm meter is reading?
Bet it's clocking 200 sardonics a syllable...if it still is working and hasn't melted or something :shocked: