Hunter_Worthington: Of course, because Gay Rights groups have the sole authority to hand out meaningful declarations of "bigotry". This is a non-story.
TheFark5000: If people didn't want to called bigots, they should stop doing bigoted things. Simple.
doubled99: He certainly is a deserving candidate. But who won for c**ksucker of the year?
dothemath: The award included a box of condoms and a day pass to Six Flags.
fruitloop: Oh now the sponsors have a problem with the Bigot of the Year award.
Elroydb: One thing I've learned in all my years on this earth is that the best way to end hateful stances of others is to show them more hate in return
factoryconnection: Bigot is used as a pejorative, but it is a word with a definite meaning. If the best defense you have is "calling people names doesn't help" instead of "I don't know why you called me a bigot, as my actions have not been bigoted as supported by a., b., and c.," then I'm not sure you've got ground to stand on.He compared them to pedophiles. He said, in effect, that gays marrying is ruining Scotland. None of this is supported with evidence, and thus it is wholly opinion and conjecture. How is he not bigoted against gay people?Do we have to start calling it the "B-word" now?
Rostin: Calling someone a bigot is a form of ad hominem fallacy because it replaces discussion about the actual issue--what ought to be tolerated--with allegations about an opponent's supposed motives and/or flaws.
factoryconnection: Rostin: Calling someone a bigot is a form of ad hominem fallacy because it replaces discussion about the actual issue--what ought to be tolerated--with allegations about an opponent's supposed motives and/or flaws.Not all labels are ad hominems.
Spiralmonkey: His battle is already lost so I can't understand why he keeps whining about it. Same sex unions are legal in Scotland and have all the same rights as marriage, the change to call it a marriage is a change in name only. Everything else is the same, including all rights and responsibilities, so getting his panties in a twist about it is pointless.
Rostin: You're describing how Stonewall and its allies have framed their position, but you're not telling me why I should think that the Cardinal and the Roman Catholic Church are bigots.
Rostin: I understand that you strongly disagree with his point of view. But calling him a bigot seems to go beyond disagreement to speculating, in a completely unwarranted way, about what's really "behind" his opinions.
Rostin: How do you know that what they are expressing is bigotry? Does the Cardinal say what he does because he is actually "prejudiced", or does it just seem to you that he is because you and he simply have incommensurable understandings of right and wrong?
RobSeace: Rostin: I understand that you strongly disagree with his point of view. But calling him a bigot seems to go beyond disagreement to speculating, in a completely unwarranted way, about what's really "behind" his opinions.At some point, it just doesn't matter why someone is expressing a clearly offensive and bigoted viewpoint... Sure, they might just be completely ignorant that they're even doing so, but it doesn't make them any more worthy of any level of respect... If someone were making the same offensive claims this guy is making in opposition to interracial marriage, would you say it's wrong to call him a racist despite the fact that he's making obviously racist arguments? If they went all slippery-slope like this guy and other gay marriage opponents do, and said something like, "What's next, letting a white man marry a monkey?!", you don't think they should be called racist? They may not think themselves a racist, and this guy may not think himself a bigot, but merely the fact that they are both arguing against fundamental human rights for a specific group of people tells me all I need to know about their actual bigotry... The fact that they're both doing so in a very offensive way, just adds to my view of them both as assholes in addition to being bigots...
Rostin: A racist is someone who believes in the natural superiority of some races over others. If someone argues, just for example, that white people and black people shouldn't marry because the purity of the white race should be protected against genetic pollution, then he's almost certainly a racist.
doubled99: So your worldview and opinion of them is intellectually superior to theirs because you say it is?
Rostin: It's hard to think of any reason why we would call someone a bigot except, as I said above, to prejudice others against him by calling his character into question.
RobSeace: Rostin: A racist is someone who believes in the natural superiority of some races over others. If someone argues, just for example, that white people and black people shouldn't marry because the purity of the white race should be protected against genetic pollution, then he's almost certainly a racist.And, this guy thinks society will be ruined if we allow gays to be seen as equal with the same right to marry each other as straight people have...
If you like these links, you'll love
$5 a month since 19 aught diddly.
Sign up for the Fark NotNewsletter!
Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.
When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.
Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.
You need to create an account to submit links or post comments.
Click here to submit a link.
Also on Fark
Submit a Link »
Copyright © 1999 - 2018 Fark, Inc | Last updated: Jun 20 2018 12:18:41
Runtime: 0.344 sec (344 ms)