HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » "Me, racist? YOU'RE ...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Thu Aug 2, 2012, 01:38 PM

"Me, racist? YOU'RE the intolerant one for not allowing my racist remarks!

It's my First Amendment Right to say whatever I want! And you are violating that right by not allowing me to do so!"

Ever hear that one on the forums? I heard it this morning from a caller to the Stephanie Miller Show. He was furious at liberals for speaking out against him when he shows his Christian evangelist hatred of gay marriage. He thought the Chick Fill A CEO was being unfairly attacked for his open intolerance of the LGBT community. How dare we violate his rights?

Me intolerant? Like most liberals I'm pretty much incapable of being intolerant. We accept everybody into our Democratic Party:racial minorities, the poor, the hated, the sick, the
elderly, those rejected by society as beneath them. Liberals want to help them, not hide them.
We really really like The People. AAAAALLL the people. It's just who we are.

However, there are exceptions.

We hated the intolerance of the Nazis, so we entered World War II under a Liberal president, FDR. We were willing to die to protect the rights of others, even those in other countries. That was US, meaning the entire United States of America. Of course this was fought against by conservatives in Congress, who felt it wasn't up to us to meddle with the intolerant policies of other countries. Guess what? Most of the country didn't agree with that.

We hated the intolerance of the Dixie South. So liberals --against the lengthy, fierce objections of conservatives --passed the Civil Rights Act in 1964. And the Voting Rights Act, since the intolerant South was still suppressing the African American vote. Liberals fought intolerance, conservatives fought to preserve it.

Liberals hated slavery and fought against it. Conservatives loved slavery and tried to preserve it to the point of causing thousands and thousands of deaths in the Civil War. Conservatives still wanted to preserve such injustice, and did so even after the Civil War, do so now, in the form of Jim Crow policies, poll taxes/IDS to vote, sweat shops, non-union labor and jailings, beatings and assassinations of labor leaders and civil rights workers through the decades.

When the conservatives changed parties from Dixiecrats to Republicans, liberals still fought against their racist policies, no matter which party they belonged to. It was still intolerance, and liberals are against that.

We hated the intolerance of Apartheid in South Africa, so liberals around the globe and SA citizens, after a long and bloody struggle with SA intolerant conservatives, ended it. Liberals around the world helped, and conservatives in the US and elsewhere hindered. Freedom and tolerance won.

We felt it was wrong for women not to be full participating citizens, so liberals, against decades of vicious and violent obstruction from conservatives, finally got women the right to vote.

The anti-segregation struggle in the US was a hard fought war against racism and intolerance in almost all the states. Liberals fought against intolerance, conservatives fought to preserve their culture of hatred and elitism.

Liberals will always be angry, loud and aggressive against blatant racism, sexism, bigotry and intolerance of every stripe. That's how we roll. Count on it. To the death.

Silly conservatives imagine us powdering butts at Guantanamo, psychoanalyzing terrorists and hand feeding caviar to welfare moms--that's nothing but ridiculous fantasy. Liberals don't have time for such nonsense since wages have been flat for decades,and we all work 3 jobs, thanks to conservatives fighting unions and minimum wage increases.

Nope, you can't think of us as weak little flowers that allow anything and everything in our country because we are so open accepting and yes, tolerant.

Nope, we will NOT tolerate intolerance--nor racism, bigotry or ethnic hatred. In fact if you display any of those traits in public you will find probably eventually yourself surrounded by disagreeable and intolerant liberals who won't allow that atrocity in their vicinity. And we liberals are mean and persistent when we encounter bigotry. Just ask Hitler.

We do have our limits.

33 replies, 4740 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 33 replies Author Time Post
Reply "Me, racist? YOU'RE the intolerant one for not allowing my racist remarks! (Original post)
librechik Aug 2012 OP
Smilo Aug 2012 #1
Lint Head Aug 2012 #2
librechik Aug 2012 #3
Lint Head Aug 2012 #5
sarisataka Aug 2012 #4
Zorra Aug 2012 #6
Jeff In Milwaukee Aug 2012 #7
liberallibral Aug 2012 #8
librechik Aug 2012 #9
LynneSin Aug 2012 #20
eShirl Aug 2012 #10
Zorra Aug 2012 #14
MADem Aug 2012 #16
Zoeisright Aug 2012 #17
librechik Aug 2012 #24
Nye Bevan Aug 2012 #30
JoeyT Aug 2012 #22
fascisthunter Aug 2012 #27
gollygee Aug 2012 #28
William769 Aug 2012 #32
rurallib Aug 2012 #11
GoCubsGo Aug 2012 #12
Igel Aug 2012 #13
librechik Aug 2012 #15
mac56 Aug 2012 #18
zeemike Aug 2012 #19
NickB79 Aug 2012 #21
bayareaboy Aug 2012 #23
Zorra Aug 2012 #25
fascisthunter Aug 2012 #26
Kurovski Aug 2012 #29
William769 Aug 2012 #31
99Forever Aug 2012 #33

Response to librechik (Original post)

Thu Aug 2, 2012, 01:42 PM

1. k&r

Thank you for posting this - love it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to librechik (Original post)

Thu Aug 2, 2012, 01:53 PM

2. I myself am bigoted against bigots.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lint Head (Reply #2)

Thu Aug 2, 2012, 01:57 PM

3. yeah! Liberal Bigots against Bigotry

We HATE Intolerance! I should start a club or a bumper sticker...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to librechik (Reply #3)

Thu Aug 2, 2012, 02:07 PM

5. Great idea! I'll join. It's a double entendre but not sexual, of course.

It demonstrates bigotry by turning it inside out.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to librechik (Original post)

Thu Aug 2, 2012, 02:06 PM

4. I am not at all in tolerant of racist remarks

I believe their CEO can say what ever he pleases about whom ever he pleases.

I may just exercise my 1A right to compare him unfavorable to the packaging of a popular feminine cleansing product or slightly used TP.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to librechik (Original post)

Thu Aug 2, 2012, 02:08 PM

6. A 5 star OP. Thank you. Bravo, bravo, bravo, librechik!



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to librechik (Original post)

Thu Aug 2, 2012, 02:15 PM

7. Republicans want a "Consequences Free" life...

Conservatives want to be allowed to stand up and say the most hateful things imaginable, but they never, EVER want to be held accountable for the things they say. They never, EVER want to be criticized for spewing toxins into our public debate. No consequences for them. Not now. Not ever.

On the other hand, if you're Jeremiah Wright, you're NEVER allowed to say what's on your mind and if you do, we're going to beat you over the head with it. And we're going to bash anybody who you know or who you've ever met. There's going to be some god-damned accountability, you can be certain. Words of meaning, you know!

The point of free speech is not so I can stand up on a soap box and spout whatever damned nonsense comes into my head. It's so that you and I can argue and debate. So that I can point out to you where I think you're wrong and you can do the same for me. And I mean "for" me and not "to" me. Civil debate makes our society stronger and makes me smarter.

But conservatives have never exactly been known for their civility or their smarts....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to librechik (Original post)

Thu Aug 2, 2012, 02:21 PM

8. We Tolerated President Obama...

 

Remember when HE was against gay marriage?? We seem to have tolerated that belief and position, whether we disagreed with him or not.....

I'm a proud liberal, but also happen to be very tolerant of people who have different religious beliefs than I.

I support gay marriage. I also support the rights of those who do not support it, to speak freely about their beliefs. The CEO of Chick-Fil-A didn't discriminate against anybody. He just believes in traditional marriage. He's allowed... Just like you and everyone else upset by his beliefs are allowed to boycott his food chain. That's the way America works.

But thinking, like Rahm and the other mayors have, that business like Chick-Fil-A are unwelcome in their cities, because they have different religious beliefs, is a very dangerous road I don't think ANYONE wants to go down........

When we liberals become In-Tolerant of law abiding people, who just hold opposing religious beliefs, we act just like the anti-muslim, anti-immigrant fools on the right!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to liberallibral (Reply #8)

Thu Aug 2, 2012, 02:33 PM

9. he has a history of not hiring LGBT. It's the hiring bias that gets him in trouble with cities

It's probably illegal, and they don't want to be in the position of supporting that. They have an obligation to their citizens to allow only businesses which DON'T violate civil rights.

And speaking out against intolerance doesn't make me intolerant, just socially responsive. You are buying in to the nonsese argument my OP first complained about.

And we DIDN'T tolerate President Obama's position, we screamed long and hard about it. Eventually he agreed with us. That's being a true citizen!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to librechik (Reply #9)

Thu Aug 2, 2012, 03:51 PM

20. I have to agree - we weren't very tolerable

Especially when Obama picked Rick Warren to give the Inauguration Prayer.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to liberallibral (Reply #8)

Thu Aug 2, 2012, 02:33 PM

10. You must have missed the excoriation of Obama here...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to liberallibral (Reply #8)

Thu Aug 2, 2012, 03:25 PM

14. No. Many of us did not tolerate it. We put relentless pressure on the President in order

to force him to come to terms with reason and logic.

When people hate others, and deny human rights to others because of their religious beliefs, their actions warrant the intolerance of every decent person. We do not have to, and must not, stand for hatred and injustice simply because someone believes that their religion sanctions their hatred for, and subsequent oppression of, of innocent people.

The hateful, RW pseudo christian fundamentalist wackos who oppress others can be law abiding, but they are never innocent of wrongdoing. I don't have to tolerate them. I do have to stop them from continually harming innocent people. This is every decent human being's responsibility.

Unfortunately, it is still legal for religious bigots in the US to cause harm innocent people.

Morality is doing what is right, regardless of what your are told to do. Religion is doing what you are told regardless of what is right.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to liberallibral (Reply #8)

Thu Aug 2, 2012, 03:28 PM

16. Why don't you just stop with the misrepresentation about what the mayors said.

Go do your homework, particularly in regard to Menino.

He has a 1A right too, and he exercised it.

We elect Mayors to represent us, and to articulate our views.

I think everyone who spoke out against that homophobic chickenshit asshole acquitted themselves brilliantly.

I have no "tolerance" for bigots, and anyone who doesn't like that, too fucking bad.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to liberallibral (Reply #8)

Thu Aug 2, 2012, 03:36 PM

17. Wrong.

First of all, the President was NOT "against gay marriage." He simply didn't support it. You can't understand the difference between that and actively trying to suppress the rights of gay people? That's just sad.

Second, it is impossible to be tolerant against bigotry and hate. Hate and bigotry are not protected beliefs. You have fallen right into the trap of confusing protected speech and hate speech.

And I do NOT want ANY business that supports killing people because they are gay in my town AND to hate groups. Chick-Fil-Assholes give money to groups that are trying to have gays executed in Uganda. You think that's okay? If so, the board you want is a hard turn to the right.


WinShape Is Chick-Fil-As Charitable Arm. The WinShape Foundation is Chick-fil-As charitable arm, created by Chick-fil-A founder and chairman S. Truett Cathy in 1984. WinShape has received a substantial amount of funding from Chick-fil-A: in 2009 alone, WinShape received $7,814,788 from Chick-fil-A Inc.

WinShape Gave Over $1.7 Million To Anti-Gay Groups. In 2009 alone, WinShape donated $1,733,699 to multiple anti-gay groups:

Marriage & Family Legacy Fund: $994,199
Fellowship Of Christian Athletes: $480,000
National Christian Foundation: $240,000
Focus On The Family: $12,500
Eagle Forum: $5,000
Exodus International: $1,000
Family Research Council: $1,000

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zoeisright (Reply #17)

Thu Aug 2, 2012, 05:29 PM

24. thank you --good points all n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zoeisright (Reply #17)

Fri Aug 3, 2012, 06:07 AM

30. "I believe marriage is between a man and a woman..... God is in the mix"

Sorry, but someone who says that is against gay marriage.

I was very happy about Obama's recent evolution on this issue.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to liberallibral (Reply #8)

Thu Aug 2, 2012, 04:23 PM

22. A delightful word salad with nuggets of falsehood,

and garnished with a tangy false equivalence.

What are your feelings on female circumcision? How about genocide in the name of religion? Are those respectable religious positions? If they're not, what makes hating LGBT people more acceptable to you? To head off any argument about how those are openly causing real world harm, so do ideas like the CEO of CFA is pushing. Violence against LGBT people happens regularly, and that's even with most LGBT people afraid to come out of the closet or openly acknowledge who they are. And that's just here, of course. In other countries the CFA CEO and his ilk are supporting groups that pass laws to make homosexuality punishable by death. Their ideas you demand we tolerate are actually killing gay people.

Chick-Fil-A also discriminates against LGBT people in their hiring practices, that isn't accurate either.

Right wingers hate Muslims and immigrants because they're brown not because they want to purge an oppressed group, so no, there's no equivalence there.

Well, there is an equivalence, but you've got it backward. It has to do with who wants to purge an oppressed group. Christians aren't an oppressed group, neither are right wingers. The way you can tell is how often the government is willing to oppress other people to make them happy.

As for us having "Tolerated President Obama", I dunno what to tell you, other than you're flat out wrong. I distinctly remember not tolerating that at all, to the point I told a women that called on his behalf that "I don't donate to or vote for bigots.". I suspect that happened a lot, because he abandoned that position. Good thing too, because it was a terrible position. It's part of that "Holding his feet to the fire" thing he suggested when he was running. (The people that defended that position are still terrible people, as far as I'm concerned.)

FWIW, I think Chik-Fil-A should be allowed to open a chain in every state in the country, then be fined and sued into oblivion when they discriminate. It was the false equivalences and falsehoods in your post I objected to.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to liberallibral (Reply #8)

Thu Aug 2, 2012, 08:28 PM

27. sure...

wake up... liberals are not as goofy as you think.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to liberallibral (Reply #8)

Thu Aug 2, 2012, 08:38 PM

28. He's allowed to believe and say what he wants

And other people are allowed to refuse to spend money in his restaurants because of what he says and where he spends his money.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to liberallibral (Reply #8)

Wed Aug 8, 2012, 02:03 AM

32. Sorry, but I don't think you know what a liberal is.

Your also not telling the whole story on that ass wipe either. He's not just talking about it, his company is giving money to anti LGBT Groups some of which are listed as hates Groups from the SPLC.

I'll leave it at that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to librechik (Original post)

Thu Aug 2, 2012, 03:05 PM

11. Congress shall make no laws - that doesn't mean i have to listen to the nutcases

I am sure there must be a right someplace that I don't have to listen to the loons and the purposefully ignorant.
And guess what - they seldom let me speak.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to librechik (Original post)

Thu Aug 2, 2012, 03:09 PM

12. It's the latest right wing meme.

"I know you are, but what am I?" They're spinning this Chick-fil-A thing every way they can. They've been harping on the small handful of mayors who were grandstanding about not granting this chain a business permit, claiming it's religious discrimination, and violates the CEO's free speech. And, they don't like it when you remind them that THEY and their ilk actually prevented a Muslim congregation from building a community center in NYC a few years ago.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to librechik (Original post)

Thu Aug 2, 2012, 03:23 PM

13. Public versus private.



What do you and/or say in the privacy of your bedroom or living room (or do/say between consenting adults in private) is none of my business.

Period.

Agree or disagree?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Igel (Reply #13)

Thu Aug 2, 2012, 03:28 PM

15. It's none of my business's business either

Businesses serving the public should serve --and employ--everybody, just like the Woolworth Sandwich Counter in Alabama. (since 1970)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to librechik (Original post)

Thu Aug 2, 2012, 03:50 PM

18. Hubert Humphrey said

"The right to be heard does not automatically include the right to be taken seriously."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to librechik (Original post)

Thu Aug 2, 2012, 03:50 PM

19. We did not go to war because we hated the intolerance of the Nazis.

We went to war because that intolerance led to crimes and murder and making war on people.

And we passed the civil rights bill not because we hated intolerance that cause it but because if denied the legal rights to American citizens...And the same is true for other examples.

When you try to make it about ideas and believes it is a loser...and is compromising basic principles of fairness and the first amendment guarantee of free speech.

Now the right has something to pin on us and in this case they are right...we seek to limit the speech of those who offend our sacred group of abused people...and we error in it...we now have made this man a victim and he will make some big bucks from it...and will probably run for congress or governor soon...but more importantly to the right is that they firmly locked in some votes for Rmoney.
But we just can't admit it.
And what I have said is unpopular I know but someone has to say it....we are getting punked.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to librechik (Original post)

Thu Aug 2, 2012, 04:21 PM

21. Here's my short response to crap like this:

"Too many people these days confuse the right to freedom of speech with the expectation to be free of criticism. You can say whatever stupid shit you like, that's your right. And it's also the right of people who disagree with you to call you out on it using THEIR right to freedom of speech."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to librechik (Original post)

Thu Aug 2, 2012, 04:50 PM

23. Two things from the right ...


That always pissed me off.

They seem to think that the 1st amendment works everywhere. It does not. It is the 1st amendment that keeps government from taking action against individuals not any one else.

The other thing they don't seem to understand that a boycott is acceptable for any reason that a person might have.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to librechik (Original post)

Thu Aug 2, 2012, 08:25 PM

25. kick

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to librechik (Original post)

Thu Aug 2, 2012, 08:27 PM

26. poor poor bigots....

fuck em!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to librechik (Original post)

Thu Aug 2, 2012, 10:55 PM

29. K&R. Nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to librechik (Original post)

Wed Aug 8, 2012, 01:58 AM

31. Kick, recommended & well said librechik.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to librechik (Original post)

Wed Aug 8, 2012, 02:36 AM

33. K&R

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread