Video: Liberal WaPo editor explains how tolerance is only for people who agree with him

posted at 8:41 pm on May 14, 2014 by Mary Katharine Ham

A career journalist and one-time Washington Post editorial board member, Jonathan Capehart explains on MSNBC how tolerance, despite its definition, is actually all about judgmenty judgment and forceful reeducation:

[T]olerance, no, is not – it should not be a two-way street. It’s a one-way street. You cannot say to someone that who you are is wrong, an abomination, is horrible, get a room, and all of those other things that people said about Michael Sam, and not be forced — not forced, but not be made to understand that what you’re saying and what you’re doing is wrong.

I love how he backs off of “forced” for the more genteel Orwellian formulation, “made to understand.” Who’s in charge of making you understand? How many will be made to understand? Just public figures who disagree with Capehart? Employees of important national organizations? Regular old private citizens chatting on the Twitterz? By what mechanism will we be made to understand by Capehart and his peers?

Sports writer William Rhoden offered a refreshing position on this, even though he’s firmly left of center himself. This is the controversial notion Capehart felt he had to push back on:

I think that to deal with things openly there has to be an open back-and-forth dialogue. Tolerance can’t just work one way. You can’t just be one way, that anybody who speaks out… this cannot turn into a Gestapo-type situation where if you express discomfort with something, then you’re cast as a homophobe and you’re fined by the league. I think that there has to be a back-and-forth.

It’s a shame that it’s a rare and noteworthy position for someone on the Left to accede that not every single person who disagrees with every one of their views is a bigot. Good on you, Mr. Rhoden.

I’m reminded of Keli Goff, writer for The Daily Beast and The Root, who risked the Left’s ire by making this fair and heterodox point after the “Duck Dynasty” row:

Though nearly half of the country opposes same-sex marriage, the media narrative has become dominated by the storyline that only a small segment of backward bigots who hate gay people oppose same-sex marriage. That simply isn’t true. (Reinforcing bias in reporting on this story is the fact that many outlets caved to pressure to use the term “marriage equality” in coverage, when such a term is an activist creation. Interracial marriage is called interracial marriage, not “marriage equality.” If supporters of same-sex marriage view the civil rights fights as comparable, the same language standard should be applied.)

Polls also show 59 percent of Americans now find same-sex couples morally acceptable. That means there are plenty of Americans who don’t have a problem with gay couples but seem to have a problem with the word “marriage” being used to define their relationships.

Among my family members who oppose same-sex marriage, I have been told to congratulate my gay friends whose weddings I have attended. But I have simultaneously been told that such unions don’t fit my relatives’ biblical definition of marriage. I have further been told that in the context of the oft repeated phrase “love the sinner, hate the sin,” they see gay people no differently than they would view a straight person like me who decides to live with someone “in sin” (as the biblical saying goes). It wouldn’t make me a bad person but one who according to biblical text would be “living in sin.” In other words, they wouldn’t throw holy water on me but also wouldn’t throw me a parade. Most of all, they wouldn’t really care how I live my romantic life at all, as long as I was happy.

There’s a big gulf between the relatives I describe and someone who “hates” gay people. The fact that so many liberals can’t see the difference speaks to the tremendous gulf that has grown in recent years between the increasingly vocal liberal wing of the Democratic Party and, well…everyone else.

But as we see at Brandeis and Smith College and Rutgers and the Washington Post, tolerance is no two-way street.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

The sun is hot. But I could be wrong.

coolrepublica on May 14, 2014 at 11:12 PM

Keli Goff is why Salon et al do not have more black writers. Black people will tend to wander ideologically based on culture. Except the ones that get the most air time they are reliable and loyal to the progressive ideology. Lookin at you house monica Toure.

Theworldisnotenough on May 14, 2014 at 11:30 PM

Lefties embrace ‘diversity’…..as long as they agree with it.

GarandFan on May 14, 2014 at 11:32 PM

To claim that you find gay people kissing who they love to be the most disgusting ever and then to claim you don’t hate gay people is so obviously a lie that of course pro-gay side is going to win. Why not just admit that you hate gays? Honesty is the best policy.

Disgust =/= hatred.

DevilishSoda on May 14, 2014 at 11:35 PM

I will tolerate your right to say what I agree with, and only that… which I shall call “tolerance”.

By this rule, every person on the planet throughout history has been “tolerant” and never has “intolerance” existed.

Was the goal really to define “tolerance” down to stupidity?

gekkobear on May 14, 2014 at 11:38 PM

Michael Sam and his boyfriend should have gotten a room. The whole thing, with all the cakeface, open-mouth kissing, was just plain tacky. And Jonathan Capehart is a bossy little miss mousefart.

BushyGreen on May 14, 2014 at 11:39 PM

The very definition of a fascist. No wonder they support village idiots for office. They are easier to control.

leader4hru on May 15, 2014 at 12:07 AM

To claim that you find gay people kissing who they love to be the most disgusting ever and then to claim you don’t hate gay people is so obviously a lie that of course pro-gay side is going to win. Why not just admit that you hate gays? Honesty is the best policy.

Disgust =/= hatred.

DevilishSoda on May 14, 2014 at 11:35 PM

I’m sure it is a winning argument on your planet to say I think you are disgusting and revolting, but I don’t hate you. But here on Earth, I don’t think you are going to get very far with that.

thuja on May 15, 2014 at 12:17 AM

Hey, really, shut up. Because, shut up.

It’s not really amusing at how the left evolves over time.

Ag80 on May 15, 2014 at 12:38 AM

The sun is hot.

coolrepublica on May 14, 2014 at 11:12 PM

It’s all those SUVs causing Anthropogenic Solar Warming.

malclave on May 15, 2014 at 1:08 AM

F*ck Lefties and Libtards and Perverts and F@ggots.

The answer to freedom of speech is simple: MORE freedom of speech.

Bubba Redneck on May 15, 2014 at 1:14 AM

To claim that you find gay people kissing who they love to be the most disgusting ever and then to claim you don’t hate gay people is so obviously a lie that of course pro-gay side is going to win. Why not just admit that you hate gays? Honesty is the best policy.

Sorry but disgust at a person’s behavior does not translate to hatred of said individual.

Bubba Redneck on May 15, 2014 at 1:18 AM

I would never say that all homosexuals are child molesters, but the homosexual community, as whole, seems intent on molesting my first amendment rights.

RockinRickOwen on May 14, 2014 at 10:05 PM

Actually, 33% per cent of child molesters are homosexual, according to multiple studies going back 30 years. Homosexuals are also 2% of the population. This means they are disproportionately represented among molesters as a group. Just sayin’.

The Thin Man Returns on May 15, 2014 at 1:24 AM

To claim that you find gay people kissing who they love to be the most disgusting ever and then to claim you don’t hate gay people is so obviously a lie that of course pro-gay side is going to win. Why not just admit that you hate gays? Honesty is the best policy.

thuja on May 14, 2014 at 11:10 PM

Most people instinctively find homosexuality to be disgusting. That does not mean most people hate homosexuals.

Saying “I don’t want to see it, because I find it repulsive,” is not the same as saying, “I hate anyone who does it.”

Once again, you try to define anything less than full-throated celebration as hatred.

There Goes the Neighborhood on May 15, 2014 at 1:24 AM

You cannot say to someone that who you are is wrong, an abomination, is horrible, get a room, and all of those other things that people said about Michael Sam, and not be forcednot forced, but not be made to understand that what you’re saying and what you’re doing is wrong.

You lack the firepower to become pharaoh son.

Exhibit A in regards to the Founding Fathers wisdom in placing Amendments I and II in the Constitution.
Without Amendment II his “glorious” vision of reeducation camps would be reality as it has been in every country where the populace has been disarmed.

Oh just to piss him off: Michael Sam is a pervert.

Bubba Redneck on May 15, 2014 at 1:28 AM

I would never say that all homosexuals are child molesters, but the homosexual community, as whole, seems intent on molesting my first amendment rights.

RockinRickOwen on May 14, 2014 at 10:05 PM

As homosexuals as a group cannot reproduce their only option in perpetuating their lifestyle is recruitment. Hence the desire not for tolerance but for acceptance.

Bubba Redneck on May 15, 2014 at 1:33 AM

I’m sure it is a winning argument on your planet to say I think you are disgusting and revolting, but I don’t hate you. But here on Earth, I don’t think you are going to get very far with that.

No. Just because I think that sauerkraut smells, tastes, looks disgusting and the odor gives me a headache sometimes, does not mean that I hate it or anyone making or eating it.

DevilishSoda on May 15, 2014 at 1:39 AM

If you want a good look at who hates who, check out the youtube video of Steven Hanks attacking Sarah Pakin via her daughter. And yes, Hanks is a militant dour. (That’s right, dour. As there is nothing gay about them.)

devan95 on May 15, 2014 at 1:47 AM

Wasn’t tying the rat cage to Winston’s Smith’s face all about his being “made to understand” how great Big Brother was?

What harm can there be in taking the mind–which is free–and just making it understand something you want it to understand?

Axeman on May 15, 2014 at 3:39 AM

These poor black guys have been penned in by the 95% support of Democrats and the election of OBozo into a skin-color-dictates-my-political-and-religious-opinions plantation of horrors.

Prior to the hilarious, head-snapping-fast reorganization of all voting blacks into a hyper liberal fringe left minority, they were the least interested group in America on queerness, being the most Christian and actively religious group in America. Blacks are famously the least environmentally rigid group of voters (by skin color, which is apparently everything in our new world of tolerance) in America.

I, for one, look forward to the huge sigh of relief blacks will collectively expel once this kook-left nitwit Obama goes back to Hawaii. They will be able to go back to church in their Escalades and avoid the queer-freak-show on MSNBC, once again. Poor things.

Jaibones on May 15, 2014 at 6:50 AM

Rational discourse with leftists/libs is fruitless – like talking to a cancer.
Divorce or destroy.

justltl on May 15, 2014 at 6:54 AM

The Left and their useful idiot liberals have zero interest in freedom.
They only want to control people and will do so by any means necessary. History and current events prove this. Literature such as Orwell’s 1984 vividly portray this.
The Revolutionary War was fought over encroachment of freedoms far less than that to which we have become inured.
We are the proverbial frogs being slowly but surely boiled.

justltl on May 15, 2014 at 7:22 AM

To claim that you find gay people kissing who they love to be the most disgusting ever and then to claim you don’t hate gay people is so obviously a lie that of course pro-gay side is going to win. Why not just admit that you hate gays? Honesty is the best policy.

thuja on May 14, 2014 at 11:10 PM

LMAO– I hated seeing my parents kiss when I was growing up, and thought it was gross.. Did I hate them?

melle1228 on May 15, 2014 at 7:32 AM

typical liberal
zero tolerance for any who diversify

say will they PUNISH all the liberals who run around screaming the insult tbagger??
we consider that an insult and derogatory.

sniffles1999 on May 15, 2014 at 7:37 AM

LMAO– I hated seeing my parents kiss when I was growing up, and thought it was gross.. Did I hate them?

melle1228 on May 15, 2014 at 7:32 AM

No, but one does tend to see enough people who never criticize lesbian relationships, but howls to holy hell about male homosexuality being little more than a poop fetish and a means to steal your children away.

It somewhat undermines those people’s credibility.

HikaruKitsune on May 15, 2014 at 8:28 AM

Photo is up, (from that NSFW site she can’t stay off of.) No fail

And what site would that be 0_0

DethMetalCookieMonst on May 15, 2014 at 8:30 AM

As the small minority of Americans (liberals) continue to dictate the terms of discourse for the great majority, the tinder box continues to prime. Guess who has all the guns?

Naked Emperor on May 15, 2014 at 8:44 AM

DethMetalCookieMonst on May 15, 2014 at 8:30 AM

Hey! First time we’ve posted in the same thread, I think!

HikaruKitsune on May 15, 2014 at 8:49 AM

No, but one does tend to see enough people who never criticize lesbian relationships, but howls to holy hell about male homosexuality being little more than a poop fetish and a means to steal your children away.

It somewhat undermines those people’s credibility.

HikaruKitsune on May 15, 2014 at 8:28 AM

Okay, how’s this? Homosexual females are as disgusting and intolerant as male homosexuals, even though lesbians don’t smear feces on their reproductive organs.
Factual and even-handed enough?

What undermines the credibility you revere is when people like you and thuja squeal like 12-year old girls and claim that if someone finds their public behavior repulsive and unnatural, that someone must hate them as individuals.

“You don’t like my new nipple-revealing tank top; you hate me! You want to ruin my li-i-i-fe!”
is what a 6th grader pouts to her mother, but no rational adult ever said to anyone.

But assigning hatred to every criticism does relieve you of the necessity of acknowledging that all them little snowflakes are not the darlings they imagine themselves to be, but instead actors on the public stage who must bear responsibility for their own behavior.

Not something that special snowflakes like to do.

Dolce Far Niente on May 15, 2014 at 8:53 AM

Hey! First time we’ve posted in the same thread, I think!

HikaruKitsune on May 15, 2014 at 8:49 AM

I believe so:-) Welcome to HotAir!

DethMetalCookieMonst on May 15, 2014 at 8:56 AM

What undermines the credibility you revere is when people like you and thuja squeal like 12-year old girls and claim that if someone finds their public behavior repulsive and unnatural, that someone must hate them as individuals.

I personally know Hikaru and I can tell you that he’s not like that. I believe his issue is the degree of repulsion that some people have when seeing two men kiss.

Which brings me to this. There was no “porno-toung” (to quote a very underated Adam Sandler flick) involved in the kissing. I don’t even get why peopel are freaking over the cake thing. I thought it was funny. Over the top, but funny.

DethMetalCookieMonst on May 15, 2014 at 8:59 AM

Which brings me to this. There was no “porno-toung” (to quote a very underated Adam Sandler flick) involved in the kissing. I don’t even get why peopel are freaking over the cake thing. I thought it was funny. Over the top, but funny.

I saw it more as an ESPN(/Disney/ABC)-orchestrated publicity stunt myself.

I know if I just barely got picked at the very end of the draft after nearly throwing it all away with a poor combine performance, I’d be relieved and getting ready to put in a better effort in training camp.

Not media-whoring.

HikaruKitsune on May 15, 2014 at 9:09 AM

“Shut up”, he explained.

bettercallputin on May 15, 2014 at 9:29 AM

I thought the gheys just wanted us to stay out of their bedrooms and leave them alone. It appears I was right all along when I countered that they will never stop until they are publicly celebrated as something special.

On another note, it is quite amusing to me to see the trolls in the comments prove the thesis of MKH’s post so quickly. Keep on believing black is white and up is down if it makes you feel better, trolls.

stvnscott on May 15, 2014 at 9:36 AM

No, but one does tend to see enough people who never criticize lesbian relationships, but howls to holy hell about male homosexuality being little more than a poop fetish and a means to steal your children away.

It somewhat undermines those people’s credibility.

HikaruKitsune on May 15, 2014 at 8:28 AM

That again though is a sexual preference thing. Neither male/male or female/female kisses bother me, although the Sam cake thing was disgusting and over the top. Guys find women attractive, so they are okay with watching two women. I would venture to guess that a lot of gay guys would either be grossed out, or at least unaffected by two girls kissing. Being grossed out by other’s kisses don’t bother me, anymore than gays being attracted to the same sex does. Preference is.. and that includes abhorrence or attraction.

melle1228 on May 15, 2014 at 10:03 AM

I don’t even get why peopel are freaking over the cake thing. I thought it was funny. Over the top, but funny.

DethMetalCookieMonst on May 15, 2014 at 8:59 AM

Call me a food-a-phobic.. I don’t like the cake thing when it is done at weddings. At my wedding, neither of us licked or kissed it off each other’s faces– we did however mash it in. :)

melle1228 on May 15, 2014 at 10:05 AM

Or as I learned as a kid back in the Golden Age of the Valley Girls:

PDATTFW

Public Display of Affection is Too Tacky For Words

Sidebar: Is there any greatest sign of our decay as a nation that the once regarded as vapid Valley Girl would today be considered a deep thinker?

dreadnought62 on May 15, 2014 at 10:18 AM

I don’t understand what is so confusing to everyone. A person has the right to their opinion, and to say whatever is on their mind. Conversely, private enterprises like TV networks, sports teams, etc, have the right to control their message and what their public representatives present to the public. You don’t like it? Go work somewhere else.

What is the issue here?

beverlyfreaks on May 15, 2014 at 10:20 AM

thuja,

You seem to have a problem understanding these peoples position so I will give a different example.

In college, I saw people drink to the point where then puked on themselves. I found that disgusting and revolting. I did not hate them though. Even when I knew that they thought it was fine to act that way, I was sad for them but didn’t hate them.

Not that kissing is the same as puking, but people have different views of what is right and wrong and react differently to each.

Action vs Actor. It is not that complicated. I often wonder how much of this hatred people envision on the part of conservatives is projection. Those making the accusations of hate hate those who disagree with them so they feel the response must be reciprocated.

OBQuiet on May 15, 2014 at 10:52 AM

You don’t like it? Go work somewhere else.

What is the issue here?

beverlyfreaks on May 15, 2014 at 10:20 AM

There are multiple issues, but you smacked right up against one of them right there. The NBA and the NFL are federal permitted monopolies. If you are a football player and the NFL treats you badly, you have nowhere to go with the skills you spent your life developing. If you are an NBA franchise owner and they force you to sell, you can’t go to a competing league. Instead, you are forced to sell and pay extortionate taxes.

So the NFL and the NBA can abuse its workers and franchise owners to please the mob (not the consumers – the mob) with no risk of competitive downside. They are most definitely not part of a free market.

fadetogray on May 15, 2014 at 10:57 AM

Didn’t Hitler tell the Jews that tolerance only works one way?

Sven on May 15, 2014 at 10:58 AM

No, but one does tend to see enough people who never criticize lesbian relationships, but howls to holy hell about male homosexuality being little more than a poop fetish and a means to steal your children away.

It somewhat undermines those people’s credibility.

HikaruKitsune on May 15, 2014 at 8:28 AM

No, not at all. Why are gays allowed their ‘preferences’ but someone else’s preferences ‘undermine their credibility’?

I like mexican food. I dislike brussel sprouts. They are both food, but this comment in no way undermines my comment about mexican food.

You guys are perpetually confused, it seems; if someone doesn’t agree with you in every possible way, you just can’t ‘tolerate’ it for some reason.

Midas on May 15, 2014 at 11:03 AM

The man is a moron on so many levels, it’s actually amazing.

Whitey Ford on May 15, 2014 at 11:04 AM

There are multiple issues, but you smacked right up against one of them right there. The NBA and the NFL are federal permitted monopolies. If you are a football player and the NFL treats you badly, you have nowhere to go with the skills you spent your life developing. If you are an NBA franchise owner and they force you to sell, you can’t go to a competing league. Instead, you are forced to sell and pay extortionate taxes.

So the NFL and the NBA can abuse its workers and franchise owners to please the mob (not the consumers – the mob) with no risk of competitive downside. They are most definitely not part of a free market.

fadetogray on May 15, 2014 at 10:57 AM

Thats a red herring. If you want to argue they are monopolies, please, be my guest. That doesn’t change the fact that a private organization has the right to control its message.

beverlyfreaks on May 15, 2014 at 11:07 AM

Guess who is gay: Jonathan Capehart:
http://lgbtpov.frontiersla.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/EQCA-gala-Jonathan-Capehart-and-Nick-.jpg

Homos are fascists.

chuckh on May 15, 2014 at 11:10 AM

Thats a red herring. If you want to argue they are monopolies, please, be my guest. That doesn’t change the fact that a private organization has the right to control its message.

beverlyfreaks on May 15, 2014 at 11:07 AM

I don’t need to ‘argue’ it. They are monopolies (or, if you want to be anal about it, trusts). They should not be.

That they are affects the principle you then call for about it being a private organization with the right to control its message, since allowing it to be a monopoly makes the people within it unable to deal with it the way you would deal with a normal, market based private organization that treats you unfairly.

Support the dissolution of the NBA and the NFL, and then we’ll have nothing to debate here. You may notice I didn’t refer to the Mozilla situation. Firing Eich was stupid and offensive and shows the fatal flaw in our campaign finance disclosure laws, but under free market principles Mozilla had every right to do it.

fadetogray on May 15, 2014 at 11:23 AM

Guess who is gay: Jonathan Capehart:
http://lgbtpov.frontiersla.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/EQCA-gala-Jonathan-Capehart-and-Nick-.jpg

Homos are fascists.

chuckh on May 15, 2014 at 11:10 AM

And bigots are bigots.

beverlyfreaks on May 15, 2014 at 11:23 AM

Michael Ramsden says it best on tolerance. Why is tolerance even a positive trait?

If you and I knew a 3rd party, and that 3rd party asked me what I thought of you, and I said I tolerated you. How does that make you feel?

It’s the same damn thing. The left has this notion that tolerance is the pinnacle of society when it is actually a surrender of principle and standard. Submission to the lowest denominator. It’s weak.

LaughterJones on May 15, 2014 at 11:26 AM

“Liberating tolerance, then, would mean intolerance against movements from the Right and toleration of movements from the Left.” –Herbert Marcuse

ConservativeLA on May 15, 2014 at 11:26 AM

Michael Ramsden says it best on tolerance. Why is tolerance even a positive trait?

If you and I knew a 3rd party, and that 3rd party asked me what I thought of you, and I said I tolerated you. How does that make you feel?

It’s the same damn thing. The left has this notion that tolerance is the pinnacle of society when it is actually a surrender of principle and standard. Submission to the lowest denominator. It’s weak.

LaughterJones on May 15, 2014 at 11:26 AM

The people asking for tolerance already accept gay people for who they are, just as they accept straight people for who they are. The tolerance is being asked of you guys. Please rise to the “lowest denominator” at least, it would make the world a little bit better place.

beverlyfreaks on May 15, 2014 at 11:42 AM

Those who can’t handle the truth,
try to silence those who speak it.

Red Pill on June 7, 2008 at 2:12 PM

ITguy on May 15, 2014 at 11:48 AM

The people asking for tolerance already accept gay people for who they are, just as they accept straight people for who they are. The tolerance is being asked of you guys. Please rise to the “lowest denominator” at least, it would make the world a little bit better place.

beverlyfreaks on May 15, 2014 at 11:42 AM

No, the people “touting” how tolerant and diversified they are; are not tolerant of a dissenting opinion. No one who “touts” them as tolerant is being asked; it is being FORCED..

melle1228 on May 15, 2014 at 11:52 AM

them as tolerant is being asked asking; it is being FORCED..

melle1228 on May 15, 2014 at 11:52 AM

FIFM

melle1228 on May 15, 2014 at 11:53 AM

The people asking for tolerance already accept gay people for who they are, just as they accept straight people for who they are. The tolerance is being asked of you guys. Please rise to the “lowest denominator” at least, it would make the world a little bit better place.

beverlyfreaks on May 15, 2014 at 11:42 AM

I wonder what else in life you have surrendered? To live life without a ontic referent is to accept everything anyone does or believes. Your argument breaks down before you even ask the question.

You haven’t begun to think of the consequences to living that way. Don’t be so quick to think you can always be on the right side of the line in the sand that shifts all the time.

LaughterJones on May 15, 2014 at 11:54 AM

The people asking for tolerance already accept gay people for who they are, just as they accept straight people for who they are. The tolerance is being asked of you guys. Please rise to the “lowest denominator” at least, it would make the world a little bit better place.

beverlyfreaks on May 15, 2014 at 11:42 AM

I wonder what else in life you have surrendered? To live life without a ontic referent is to accept everything anyone does or believes. Your argument breaks down before you even ask the question.

You haven’t begun to think of the consequences to living that way. Don’t be so quick to think you can always be on the right side of the line in the sand that shifts all the time.

LaughterJones on May 15, 2014 at 11:54 AM

Yikes, not interested in your apologetics.

Anyways, nothing wrong with being gay. Got a few gay friends, my brother is gay. They are fine, wonderful people, parents, friends, family. I’ve never shifted my position on it, and never would. I love them all unconditionally and always will.

beverlyfreaks on May 15, 2014 at 12:00 PM

The people asking for tolerance already accept gay people for who they are, just as they accept straight people for who they are. The tolerance is being asked of you guys. Please rise to the “lowest denominator” at least, it would make the world a little bit better place.

beverlyfreaks on May 15, 2014 at 11:42 AM

No, the people “touting” how tolerant and diversified they are; are not tolerant of a dissenting opinion. No one who “touts” them as tolerant is being asked; it is being FORCED..

Why do you keep putting tout in quotes?

beverlyfreaks on May 15, 2014 at 12:01 PM

Why do you keep putting tout in quotes?

beverlyfreaks on May 15, 2014 at 12:01 PM

Because the most intolerant people will tell you how tolerant they are..

melle1228 on May 15, 2014 at 12:05 PM

Tolerance is putting up with s**t you don’t like, not pretending you don’t like it.

There was absolutely nothing intolerant about Jones’s tweets. He was expressing an opinion, not calling for action. There is nothing intolerant about giving a contribution to a campaign to pass a proposition that keeps marriage the way it has been because you think the existence of marriage has to do with the creation of children.

The Left is working hard to twist the meaning of the word tolerance just as they have mutilated the meanings of other important words like ‘liberal.’

fadetogray on May 15, 2014 at 12:15 PM

The people asking for tolerance already accept gay people for who they are, just as they accept straight people for who they are. The tolerance is being asked of you guys. Please rise to the “lowest denominator” at least, it would make the world a little bit better place.

beverlyfreaks on May 15, 2014 at 11:42 AM

Well, good luck with that. If those calling for ‘tolerance’ (they actually mean acceptance, approval, celebration, and participation) are going to go the intolerant totalitarian route, then they will lose a whole lot of people like me, who are generally on their side.

Resist We Much on May 15, 2014 at 12:21 PM

Tolerance is putting up with s**t you don’t like, not pretending you don’t like it.

Sheeesh. That should have been:

Tolerance is putting up with s**t you don’t like, not pretending you like it.

fadetogray on May 15, 2014 at 12:26 PM

I find it interesting — and horrifying — that there’s not a dime’s worth of difference between today’s left and the Taliban.

lovesthesun on May 15, 2014 at 12:34 PM

In other news, that model is still hot.

Ward Cleaver on May 15, 2014 at 12:45 PM

In other words if you oppose homosexual marriage you have no opinion and I hate these activist judges overruling the will of the people like in Idaho.

sorrowen on May 15, 2014 at 1:13 PM

As a rowdy Irishman, I would have probably told the self-important Capehart to póg mo thóin.

Citizen Jerry on May 15, 2014 at 1:29 PM

“love the sinner, hate the sin,”

That is a bullshjt copout line. You cannot separate the action from the person. Should we love Hitler? Yeah, I didn’t think so. A thief is a thief and a murderer is a murderer. Therefore a pervert is still a pervert. And while I may not feel it is my place to tell other adults how to act (in the case of non-criminal acts and what I define as criminal is not necessarily what the law defines a criminal) that does not mean I approve of their actions. I only tolerate it. Tolerance does not mean approval or even acceptance.

earlgrey on May 15, 2014 at 2:02 PM

Sexual attraction is an extremely personal thing – most guys have zero problem with lesbian sex because they would probably in a fantasy love to join them for a threesome. But gays are something they don’t fantasize about, and when seeing themselves in the midst of it have a negative reaction at some level.

That is why all the pro-gay folks on this thread don’t get it – they fail to see the revulsion created in people at just viewing something so at odds with who they are, which is liking girls.

Subscribing some other motivation as thuja chooses to do is because thuja doesn’t want to lose the argument for which he has no real defense. You can’t make people love a sight that makes them want to puke. But just because they don’t want to see it, to be reminded of the activity, doesn’t mean they want to kill the person or “hate” them. It means they don’t like the activity. Clearly the only people who consistently seem to hate people are the leftists and political gay crowd. But hate is OK as long as you are on the “right” side.

beverly, you sound like a nice enough person but you very happily like to describe those you disagree with in some very uncharitable terms, thus proving the very points the more conservative minded people have posted here. Unless I have misinterpreted your responses, you are the bigot you claim others to be, its just directed so for a different reason. You don’t like biblical adherents of marriage. But that is OK, right?

To Sams himself, he did a very great job of realizing he wasn’t an NFL caliber player, or actually was very much on the fringe despite his college awards. Clearly, as he was more closely examined the concern was – can the guy play? And many find him wanting. He is cashing in on his 15 minutes of fame while it lasts (see Oprah). Part of me wonders if he came up with the gay thing just for marketing purposes – much like Warren came up with I’m an Indian. It worked.

The nice thing for Sams is that we will all soon know whether he can play or not. He is in an NFL training camp, if he turns out to be good at things his employer really likes – he will be playing. Sacks aren’t gay or straight.

Zomcon JEM on May 15, 2014 at 2:22 PM

I’m still pizzed off about the arrogation of the word “gay,” a previously perfectly functional and engaging part of our lexicon. But this is just one of dozens and dozens of examples of how the despicable lefties are have made their version of Newspeak the ‘new norm’.

I refuse to abdicate my right to… “call a spade a spade.”

mpower on May 15, 2014 at 3:16 PM

Sexual attraction is an extremely personal thing – most guys have zero problem with lesbian sex because they would probably in a fantasy love to join them for a threesome. But gays are something they don’t fantasize about, and when seeing themselves in the midst of it have a negative reaction at some level.

No, I get that. I just think it’s disingenuous to not consider girl-on-girl perverted and evil and an affront to God if you consider man-on-man perverted and evil and an affront to God.

Regardless of how hot one may find girl-on-girl.

HikaruKitsune on May 15, 2014 at 3:43 PM

No, I get that. I just think it’s disingenuous to not consider girl-on-girl perverted and evil and an affront to God if you consider man-on-man perverted and evil and an affront to God.

Regardless of how hot one may find girl-on-girl.

HikaruKitsune on May 15, 2014 at 3:43 PM

LMAO!! Now that I agree. :)

melle1228 on May 15, 2014 at 3:53 PM

I’m sure it is a winning argument on your planet to say I think you are disgusting and revolting, but I don’t hate you. But here on Earth, I don’t think you are going to get very far with that.

Dogs eat their own poo. That’s disgusting. I mean, really, what is nastier than dog poo, and dogs eat it!

I really love dogs. I mean, they’re my favorite critters of all time. In a dog-eat-dog world, I root for both dogs! I am grossed out when they eat their poo though.

Am I getting through? Bueller?

Immolate on May 15, 2014 at 3:59 PM

I couldn’t care less that Sam and his boyfriend are gay, but the cake smeared kiss was pretty horrible to behold. If I saw Tom Brady and Gisele doing the same thing, it would creep me out, too. The sloppy kiss was a stunt. What Don Jones wrote, horrible and omg, was vague. Maybe he was taken aback that Sam was drafted, or the cake thing icked him out, or maybe he just doesn’t find two guys kissing all that delightful. Whatever he thought, what he tweeted doesn’t amount to hate speech. He got suspended and designated for re-education camp anyway. Ray Rice beats his fiance unconscious, also an off the field activity, and the Ravens do nothing.

polly2150 on May 15, 2014 at 5:13 PM

Liberals only believe in equality if it’s defined by them or the government…

sorrowen on May 15, 2014 at 6:11 PM

I couldn’t care less that Sam and his boyfriend are gay, but the cake smeared kiss was pretty horrible to behold. If I saw Tom Brady and Gisele doing the same thing, it would creep me out, too. The sloppy kiss was a stunt. What Don Jones wrote, horrible and omg, was vague. Maybe he was taken aback that Sam was drafted, or the cake thing icked him out, or maybe he just doesn’t find two guys kissing all that delightful. Whatever he thought, what he tweeted doesn’t amount to hate speech. He got suspended and designated for re-education camp anyway. Ray Rice beats his fiance unconscious, also an off the field activity, and the Ravens do nothing.

polly2150 on May 15, 2014 at 5:13 PM

Jones should have clarified by saying that he thought it was “horrible” that food was being wasted when there are millions of children starving in China.

slickwillie2001 on May 15, 2014 at 7:01 PM

Ms. Ham,

I loved someone once whose initials were MK.

Good luck to you and your young family. Were I to do things again I don’t think I would bring children
in to this world.

tenore on May 15, 2014 at 8:02 PM

One man kissing, exchanging tongues and spit with another man, is one of the most disgusting, revolting sights I can think of. No, I do not want to see it. Ever. Disgusting. Nasty. Horrible. Yucky.

pdigaudio on May 15, 2014 at 11:03 PM

I’m sure it is a winning argument on your planet to say I think you are disgusting and revolting, but I don’t hate you. But here on Earth, I don’t think you are going to get very far with that.
thuja on May 15, 2014 at 12:17 AM

So, if I see a white guy on TV picking his nose, and I say “Eww,” that means I hate white guys? If I see a politician picking his ear and I say “Eww,” that means I hate politicians?

Okay, the last part is true, but that predates the ear-picking.

Maddie on May 16, 2014 at 7:15 AM

Unlike most people here, I do have a brother who I use to look up to and admire, and he turned out to be a pedophile. I am revolted by that. I do not visit him in prison. I cut him out of my life.

Does that make me a pedophobe? Guilty as charged.

So why isn’t anyone judging me right now?

JoseQuinones on May 16, 2014 at 11:22 AM

If anyone is truly ‘tolerant’ then they have to ‘tolerate’ being hated for who they are too. That’s literally what tolerance means. Gays are extremely intolerant of anyone who doesn’t worship their depraved lifestyle. So do I hate them? Yes. Not so much for being gay, as for trying to shove their agenda down my throat.

It’s the same reason I hate everyone who has a ‘Coexist’ bumper sticker, because they’re also trying to shove an essentially pro-Islam agenda down my throat.

No thanks.

nullrouted on May 16, 2014 at 12:35 PM

Pretty soon gaydar will go the way of the buggy whip. All you’ll have to do is look for the Rams jersey.

Akzed on May 14, 2014 at 9:01 PM

“Gaydar” is old and busted. The new hotness is “Flame detector”.

Freelancer on May 16, 2014 at 6:48 PM

Does that make me a pedophobe? Guilty as charged.

So why isn’t anyone judging me right now?

JoseQuinones on May 16, 2014 at 11:22 AM

Your point is valid, and I approve of what you’re saying. But I think the term in this case would be pedophilophobe. You aren’t turned off by children, but by child molesters. And even at that, it isn’t a purely accurate linguistic usage, since the suffix “phobe” means you are unnaturally frightened of such. I don’t guess that you are scared to death of your brother, just disgusted enough to, as you said, cut him out of your life.

I have two brothers who no longer have a part of my life, because they are completely intolerant of my immediate family’s faith, and express their opinion of it with great volume, vulgarity, and inhumanity. My wife and kids don’t need to have anything to do with them. I fear neither of them, and I hate neither of them. I pray for them, but otherwise they deserve no expression of emotion from me whatsoever.

Freelancer on May 16, 2014 at 6:55 PM

Forcing people to agree with you. That’s what America is all about.

That’s how liberals see it anyway.

Isn’t it odd how the children of the 1960s turned into the tyrants they ranted against all those years ago?

s1im on May 16, 2014 at 11:08 PM

Forcing people to agree with you. That’s what America is all about.

That’s how liberals see it anyway.

Isn’t it odd how the children of the 1960s turned into the tyrants they ranted against all those years ago?

s1im on May 16, 2014 at 11:08 PM

That is the opposite of how actual liberals see it. I do not accept the progressive’s hijacking of the word ‘liberal,’ and no one else should, either. Today those who think progress is movement in the direction of increasing the power of central government, toward tyranny, are the exact opposite of liberals, 180 degrees. Tolerance was the core of liberal thought upon which all of the rest was built. You cannot have freedom of speech without it.

We are now seeing the mask coming off completely with their embrace of rabid intolerance of any ‘illegitimate’ feelings or opinions.

fadetogray on May 17, 2014 at 12:53 PM

The sun is hot. But I could be wrong.

coolrepublica on May 14, 2014 at 11:12 PM

Compared to what? Let’s agree to disagree.

virgo on May 17, 2014 at 1:11 PM

In other news, that model is still hot.

Ward Cleaver on May 15, 2014 at 12:45 PM

I’d Lorien that. :pd:

S. D. on May 17, 2014 at 6:19 PM

The debate is over.

Akzed on May 17, 2014 at 7:31 PM

Comment pages: 1 2