Conquer Club

Tolerance, the much called for liberal notion that everyone and everything MUST be accepted to celebrate our diversity as people. As my English brethren would say, BULLOX! To tolerate all things makes you a weak person that does not think for yourself! "Tolerance" means there is NO absolute right and wrong. Everything is relative. I again say, bullox!


We can't search the middle eastern guy boarding the plane (even though he has a trench coat on in JULY!) because that would be intolerant and PI. (politically incorrect)


We must not have the Pledge in our schools for it may offend the atheist when saying, "In God we Trust".


Ya know, I'm starting to think we are to "tolerate" everything but Christianity.




Ok, Heavycola.... take it!

If I may...

jay_a2j wrote:Tolerance, the much called for liberal notion that everyone and everything MUST be accepted to celebrate our diversity as people. As my English brethren would say, BULLOX! To tolerate all things makes you a weak person that does not think for yourself! "Tolerance" means there is NO absolute right and wrong. Everything is relative. I again say, bullox!


We can't search the middle eastern guy boarding the plane (even though he has a trench coat on in JULY!) because that would be intolerant and PI. (politically incorrect)

When did this happen? We shot a Brazilian guy for wearing a trenchcoat, I don't remember letting any Arabs through. Racial profiling is technically illegal, although anybody I know who tangentially resembles the 9/11 hijackers in any way can count on a random search whenever he goes through an airport.

jay_a2j wrote: We must not have the Pledge in our schools for it may offend the atheist when saying, "In God we Trust".

This was a failed challenge by one guy. Atheists, although occasionally really freaking annoying, tend to let us have our God. Fun trivia time: Guess who came the closest in our nations history to taking "In God We Trust" off our nation's coinage? Answer at the bottom, written backwards. No cheating.

Ya know, I'm starting to think we are to "tolerate" everything but Christianity.

That is such a logical conclusion to this. Seeing as how our nation goes out of it's way to harass it's white Christian inhabitants. Luckily, we on the forces of right have jay. Thanks be to God.


tlevesooR erodoehT That was really hard to type.

I know what you are getting at jay, but I'm not sure that tolerance is the correct term.

What concerns me mostly, is the amount of control that the government has "won" over the public. We are expected to not act upon things that are happening in our community...for example, a couple of 14 year old vandals, swearing, spitting and being a nuisance....in a not so distant (and better) past, it would have been common place for a man in the community to dish out a slap and a warning, which would have sent the wind up me, and I would personally have thought twice about being a menace. But now, that would be common assualt, which I believe then empowers the youths with the knowledge that they're "untouchable". This has lead to all sorts of social problems in the UK. This also applies to the police force, who are constantly stepping on egg-shells not to abuse the "human-rights" of these feral kids. It's ridiculous, the Police cannot refer to a group of youth's as "a gang", in case it hurts the youth's feelings.

Our government, and it policies, are under the control of the "liberal-do-gooder-minority" who are more interested in "understanding why a youth throws a brick through a window" rather than "stopping a youth throw a brick through a window".

Its all a load of BOLLUX

There is no such thing as absolute right or wrong. Where you get such notions that this is false is beyond me.

Maybe you're just intolerant to using your head?

b-o-l-l-o-c-k-s

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bollocks

Jay
For once your argument is not complete bollox,I actually partly agree with you
There are a ridiculous amount of petty restrictions imposed in the name of political correctness, you can never please everybody and some legislation is absurd and serves only to line the pockets of lawyers and the greedy few who will sue at the drop of a hat. I am an atheist but sing my National Anthem and am a Godfather several times over,to me these are simply indications of our Christian history and dont carry any further significance.
Where I would take issue with you is in your belief that there are a string of absolutes, very few things are black or white and its probably the desire to acknowledge the grey areas that seperates liberal thought from a closed mind. My politics are centre right economically but further to the left on social issues which probably encompasses a great many people, it is the fundamentalists with their entrenched left/right dogma that create most of lifes conflict.

jay_a2j wrote:Tolerance, the much called for liberal notion that everyone and everything MUST be accepted to celebrate our diversity as people. As my English brethren would say, BULLOX! To tolerate all things makes you a weak person that does not think for yourself! "Tolerance" means there is NO absolute right and wrong. Everything is relative. I again say, bullox!

There's a big difference between being tolerant of other people's structures, ideas, and beliefs and having a neutrally-aligned moral compass.

If someone had a bad limp and you wanted to walk beside them, I'm sure you'd tolerate the fact that they'll walk slower than you rather than shouting at them for not walking at normal speed.

And it's spelled, "Bollocks."

We can't search the middle eastern guy boarding the plane (even though he has a trench coat on in JULY!) because that would be intolerant and PI. (politically incorrect)

Yes, we can and we do actually. The only problem is when supposed terrorists on the watch list have the same name as some 4-year-old kid. The problem isn't it the illusion of Political Correctness but in the sheer stupidity of the illusion known as "safety."

We must not have the Pledge in our schools for it may offend the atheist when saying, "In God we Trust".

One man's complaint does not a massive problem make.

One a side note, have you ever actually asked yourself why we pledge to the flag and not to something a little more meaningful, like the Constitution?

Ya know, I'm starting to think we are to "tolerate" everything but Christianity.

Yes, of course.

I forgot about the oppression.

Of course you're being oppressed, other people have different beliefs than you and your pastors/preachers/texts tell you that they're not living their lives separate of you but rather are attacking your faith.

Except didn't Jesus say something about not trying to "help" others without paying attention to your own shortsightedness?

BULL and OX = Those two animals can't couple.

ignotus wrote:BULL and OX = Those two animals can't couple.

Well they can, but it would involve prosthetics.

jay_a2j wrote:Tolerance, the much called for liberal notion that everyone and everything MUST be accepted to celebrate our diversity as people. As my English brethren would say, BULLOX! To tolerate all things makes you a weak person that does not think for yourself! "Tolerance" means there is NO absolute right and wrong. Everything is relative. I again say, bullox!


We can't search the middle eastern guy boarding the plane (even though he has a trench coat on in JULY!) because that would be intolerant and PI. (politically incorrect)


We must not have the Pledge in our schools for it may offend the atheist when saying, "In God we Trust".


Ya know, I'm starting to think we are to "tolerate" everything but Christianity.




Ok, Heavycola.... take it!

logic dictates there is a jay

Guiscard wrote:b-o-l-l-o-c-k-s

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bollocks

There isn't an entry for "bollocks" or "bollox" on conservapedia, making me a better, more palatable, articulate person than you.

Guiscard wrote:b-o-l-l-o-c-k-s

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bollocks

The relative severity of the various British profanities, as perceived by the public, was studied on behalf of the British Broadcasting Standards Commission, Independent Television Commission, BBC and Advertising Standards Authority. The results of this jointly commissioned research were published in December 2000 in a paper called "Delete Expletives?". This placed "bollocks" in eighth position in terms of its perceived severity, positioning it (in an anatomically-correct coincidence) between "prick" (seventh place) and "arsehole" (ninth place).

more LOLs

Norse wrote:

Guiscard wrote:b-o-l-l-o-c-k-s

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bollocks

There isn't an entry for "bollocks" or "bollox" on conservapedia, making me a better, more palatable, articulate person than you.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/bollocks

You Fail.

ignotus wrote:BULL and OX = Those two animals can't couple.

Maybe if we were more tolerant they could.

jay_a2j wrote:

ignotus wrote:BULL and OX = Those two animals can't couple.

Maybe if we were more tolerant they could.

What are ya, a interspecies pimp?

McGrr wrote:

jay_a2j wrote:

ignotus wrote:BULL and OX = Those two animals can't couple.

Maybe if we were more tolerant they could.

What are ya, a interspecies pimp?

Doesn't matter, a bull ain't got the necessary 'equipment' for coupling.

Tolerance doesn't alter reality.

For being an individual who believes in strong liberal values such as minority rights and reaching the greatest possible liberty, without it extending to licence I was recently told that I was a man intolerant of intolerance. Surely, that must make me a man of conviction?

nagerous wrote:For being an individual who believes in strong liberal values such as minority rights and reaching the greatest possible liberty, without it extending to licence I was recently told that I was a man intolerant of intolerance. Surely, that must make me a man of conviction?

No, that makes you a man accepting of everything EXCEPT intolerance!

nagerous wrote:For being an individual who believes in strong liberal values such as minority rights and reaching the greatest possible liberty, without it extending to licence I was recently told that I was a man intolerant of intolerance. Surely, that must make me a man of conviction?

Noup, that means that you are a very intolerant person.

nagerous wrote:For being an individual who believes in strong liberal values such as minority rights and reaching the greatest possible liberty, without it extending to licence I was recently told that I was a man intolerant of intolerance. Surely, that must make me a man of conviction?

But if you are intolerant of intolerance, that would also make you a man of predeliction, since you have a partiality to being tolerant.

It also makes you a man of provocation, since you posted here.

And a man of Consternation, since you will cause Jay a headache or two.

What about a man of BurgerNation, assuming you aren't a vegetarian.

heavycola wrote:

jay_a2j wrote:Tolerance, the much called for liberal notion that everyone and everything MUST be accepted to celebrate our diversity as people. As my English brethren would say, BULLOX! To tolerate all things makes you a weak person that does not think for yourself! "Tolerance" means there is NO absolute right and wrong. Everything is relative. I again say, bullox!


We can't search the middle eastern guy boarding the plane (even though he has a trench coat on in JULY!) because that would be intolerant and PI. (politically incorrect)


We must not have the Pledge in our schools for it may offend the atheist when saying, "In God we Trust".


Ya know, I'm starting to think we are to "tolerate" everything but Christianity.




Ok, Heavycola.... take it!

logic dictates there is a jay

SWEET!

vtmarik wrote:

Norse wrote:

Guiscard wrote:b-o-l-l-o-c-k-s

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bollocks

There isn't an entry for "bollocks" or "bollox" on conservapedia, making me a better, more palatable, articulate person than you.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/bollocks

You Fail.

*whoosh*

There's another right over my head, courtesy of VTMarik

Syzygy wrote:There is no such thing as absolute right or wrong.

I see you stated that as an absolute.

jeez, jay, you don't have to be a full-time reactionary bigot.....you could take a year off and stop torturing us w/ these posts.....

Norse wrote:I know what you are getting at jay, but I'm not sure that tolerance is the correct term.

What concerns me mostly, is the amount of control that the government has "won" over the public. We are expected to not act upon things that are happening in our community...for example, a couple of 14 year old vandals, swearing, spitting and being a nuisance....in a not so distant (and better) past, it would have been common place for a man in the community to dish out a slap and a warning, which would have sent the wind up me, and I would personally have thought twice about being a menace. But now, that would be common assualt, which I believe then empowers the youths with the knowledge that they're "untouchable". This has lead to all sorts of social problems in the UK. This also applies to the police force, who are constantly stepping on egg-shells not to abuse the "human-rights" of these feral kids. It's ridiculous, the Police cannot refer to a group of youth's as "a gang", in case it hurts the youth's feelings.

Our government, and it policies, are under the control of the "liberal-do-gooder-minority" who are more interested in "understanding why a youth throws a brick through a window" rather than "stopping a youth throw a brick through a window".

Its all a load of BOLLUX

this is one time i feel happy to agree with norse