In response to:

Obama's Dangerous Equivalency: "Intolerance Is Itself a Form of Violence"

DedeGreene Wrote: Sep 26, 2012 2:59 PM
“Intolerance is itself a form of violence and an obstacle to the growth of a true democratic spirit.” Obama's Next State of the Union? What CHOIR is he preaching to, ... as if we all don't already know.
FlamingLiberalMultiCulturalist Wrote: Sep 26, 2012 3:19 PM
Yes, statements and beliefs like Gandhi's and Obama's often lead to what is commonly called "politcal correctness" when they are applied with too much zeal, or when they are applied dishonestly by people trying to win partisan points with moral camouflage. But that is the Bathwater, there is as well a precious Baby in that statement.
Happy Jake Wrote: Sep 26, 2012 3:22 PM
Happy Jake Wrote: Sep 26, 2012 3:24 PM
The truth is that such a statement is, itself intolerant nowadays (perhaps more so now than in the 1940s), because on the Left EVERYTHING that disagrees with Leftist thought is considered "intolerant." Don't like Abortion? Intolerant! Think man-man "marriage" is ridiculous? Intolerant! Don't necessarily believe the globe is wamring? Intolerant! Think Romney would be a better president than Obama? Intolerant!
shall Wrote: Sep 26, 2012 3:27 PM
"political correctness" is merely a politically correct term for propaganda, it is a purely evil denigration of ideas by name calling which eschews reason and argument.
FlamingLiberalMultiCulturalist Wrote: Sep 26, 2012 3:37 PM
"And that is...?"

Much evil comes (and came) from intolerance. Countless numbers of people have been slaughtered due to intolerance. Anyone with a brain recognizes intolerance as a bad thing, and as a thing dangerous to the 'Democratic Spirit'.
FlamingLiberalMultiCulturalist Wrote: Sep 26, 2012 3:39 PM
"And that is...?"

It would have to be a very, very, very LONG list of virtues before you'd add 'intolerance' at the end of it. How about that?
shall Wrote: Sep 26, 2012 4:21 PM
Much evil comes (and came) from tolerance. Millions have been slaughtered because people tolerated the Fascist and Communist parties rise to power in Italy, Germany, USSR and China. Anyone with a brain would not make such a foolish blanket statement as all intolerance is a bad thing, a thing dangerous to the concept of a republic and the rule of law.
Rob ID Wrote: Sep 26, 2012 6:27 PM
Anyone with a brain recognizes that "intolerance" and "violence" are entirely different things!
FlamingLiberalMultiCulturalist Wrote: Sep 26, 2012 3:15 PM
Most of us have values, a belief system, a code of Right and Wrong as best as we can determine it, and there is far more overlap than difference between the core values defining Right and Wrong held by mainstream Liberals and Conservatives.

We are rightly intolerant of Evil, but this is not the intolerance of which Gandhi spoke and Obama cites.

Theoretically, I supposed it may be possible to be entirely internal in our intolerance towards some person or group that we just do not like, and from a position of authority treat such people identically as with everyone else. But I suspect our feelings and opinions manifest themselves far more in our behavior than most would admit. Gandhi and Obama call this manifestation violence.
Mag14 Wrote: Sep 26, 2012 3:20 PM
You've not described the manifestations. Are you saying that ANY manifestation would be violence?
FlamingLiberalMultiCulturalist Wrote: Sep 26, 2012 3:28 PM
Mirriam-Webster's definition of violence is quite a long one, and goes far beyond the material and physical. It seems to me the answer to your question is a function of how far-ranging we choose to be in defining the term 'violence'. I don't know that I'd like to call *every* possible manifestation violence. For example a person of conscience might recuse themselves from judging over someone towards whom they feel intolerant. I'd be hard-pressed to call that violence.
FlamingLiberalMultiCulturalist Wrote: Sep 26, 2012 3:02 PM
Jeez, you guys will disagree with anything if you can be convinced that some Liberal agrees with it.
Happy Jake Wrote: Sep 26, 2012 3:08 PM
So you believe that Intolerance is a form of VIOLENCE?

Wow, you guys will agree with anything if you get wind that some Liberal agrees with it.
shall Wrote: Sep 26, 2012 3:15 PM
I disagree with foolishness, regardless of what fool said it. 1. Intolerance is not a form of violence, it is a form of judgment. 2. Mob intolerance has always been the hallmark of the democratic spirit; which is why we formed a republic not a democracy.
RINO Detector Wrote: Sep 26, 2012 3:25 PM
Flaming is having a very gay day.

Intolerance is not violence, it means that one refuses to tolerate a condition. Could be dealt with by walking away, etc. If by intolerance one means having an opinion of disapproval. Is that still okay in this freak nation? Being intolerant does not necessitate violence.

President Obama's United Nations address has received a great deal of scrutiny, including yesterday's sharp take from Katie.  She and Allahpundit both pointed out Obama's contradictory admonitions and behavior.  In an interview taped Monday, the president told the ladies of 'The View' that the best course of action is to ignore offensive speech -- then he highlighted and denounced an inflammatory YouTube video six times in an internationally-televised speech the very next day.  Obama took care to sound all the right notes for his domestic...