Okay, Is This a Hypocritical Position?

[GiovanniC]

On another message board, someone posted a story about "bug chasers". If you're not familiar with this practice, it's supposedly where 25% of gay people who have AIDS got it on purpose by seeking it out. The story is at this link: http://www.inoohr.org/bugchasers.htm and I wouldn't visit that site unless your curiosity just completely gets the better of you.

In summary, some doctor claimed that's how 25% of gays got HIV/AIDS. It was published in Rolling Stone. That site, the "International Organization of Heterosexual Rights" printed the story on their website because they are fucktards. The story has been debunked at this website: http://www.salon.com/opinion/sullivan/2003/01/24/rolling/print.html

So I said... "I will point out that the site in question is done by some of THE most homophobic, xenophobic, gap-toothed, cousin-fucking, sheep-raping buckets of liquid shit on the Internet."

Someone pointed out that I was basically being judgemental and intolerant myself, to which I replied: "I am only intolerant of the intolerant."

Now, I'm sure most will agree with the sentiment, but the statement itself is paradoxical. Do you think it is also hypocritical?

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

1. No it's not a hypocritical position. This is another RW fallacious

argument. One does NOT need to condone bigotry and idiocy to demonstrate tolerance. Calling people on their lies is not the anti-thesis of tolerance.

[applegrove]

2. Jesus! 25%? isn't that the exact same number of people who smoke?

It seems if you smoke cigarettes you are just in denial cause you want to be skinny or you are addicted or something. If you get aids and don't practice safe sex then you did it with full knowledge of the reprocussions.

No - sorry! I've never heard any smokers being called cancer chasers.

[seabeyond]

4. are you kidding, smoke cig and a liberal will want to take your kids

away

[seabeyond]

3. I am only intolerant of the intolerant."

you are asking if this is being hypocritical. i say yes. i live in an area bloomin in intolerance. one of my biggest challenge is being tolerant of the intolerant. also one of my greatest freedoms spiritually was being able to embrace the intolerant. be tolerant of the intolerant.

but, that said. i can still love the lying bush i dont need to create a false story to love him. i can still love my fundie friends, though now if i looked at them i would blow into them, lol lol. did it tonite

a friend came and said you dont call. told her i cant call any of my firends. i am mad at you all. i love you dearly, but i am mad. so i cannot call you right now. and sure enough she told me of going to church and how lovely this church is except they did have to say all in new york city and las vegas are evil. and that is when i went into why i was so mad at my firends, adn they go on in life blindly, sheep, allowing this hate to fester

but i love her. and i know why she feels as she does. conditioned raised in belief. and i love her

[Kinkistyle]

5. Freedom to Enslave

Tolerance includes Tolerancy of the intolerant.
Freedom includes the Freedom to Enslave.
Benevolence includes being benevolent to malevolents.

These are all contradictions.

[johnaries]

6. The very name...

"International Organization of Heterosexual Rights" broadcasts their prejudice. If I posted a site called "International Organization of Caucasian Rights" or "International Organization of NFL Football MVP Rights" or "International Organization of Rich White CEO Rights", would you suspect that they had an ulterior motive.

Now, if you named your site "International Organization of Computer Geek Rights", I would believe you, because everyone knows that Geeks always get beat up and are oppressed by the Jocks. :evilgrin:

Seriously, though, there are a lot of people in our nation who enjoy certain privileges that have nothing to do with their own ability or effort. When they see those privileges threatened, they will do anything to protect them. Even mimic the "charges" of inequity leveled against them.

There are plenty of unbiased, actually "scientific" reports that are available. All kinds of interest groups come up with all kinds of reports to prove their points. That's why Science Education is so important! Studies using Scientific Methods have to be verified and re-verified using methods designed to be totally objective and eliminate personal opinion.

Which is why the Fundies and BushCon don't like them.

So, no, you're not being intolerant. You are trying to expand other's comprehension to allow them to get beyond their intolerance.

So, when perhaps a better answer might have been "I am intolerant of those who chose to only believe what they WANT to believe, rather than consider that what they believe might actually be wrong."

[Az]

7. Its the paradox and trap of the Post Modern society

Tolerance is the watch word. Adherance to the notion of tolerance is required at all times. Actions and words which appear to be intolerant are to be avoided. But what to do when you come across a belief system that defines certain behaviours and actions as evil. Do you proclaim them hateful and become intolerant of their beliefs? Or do you allow them to pursue their course of hatred and thus allow intolerance.

Its a lovely little trap.

[KharmaTrain]

8. What Explains GOOP Self-Hating Gays?

Years ago I posted on an AOL political message board with some real "hivedwellers" on there...Clinton-haters, Fundies and your average GOOP white male assholes, but the most vicious of the group identified he was gay and, amazingly, the right wingers flocked to him like his words were divined. I still can't understand it.

I can see how a "Gannon" can get himself compromised and then "turned"...just like Nazis and Soviets would seek out closeted gays with information that could blackmail them and these people became some of the most productive spies.

Maybe someone can explain why someone who claims to be open, not only side with people who detest all about him, but these people seem to love him?