Can one be both conservative *and* tolerant?

Post Reply New Topic

Surprise surprise, another unsupported rant about how everyone misunderstands and misconstrues you, without actually explaining how and where it happened. Since this seems to be such a common problem for you, perhaps you should consider changing your writing style to something, you know, coherent.

You can't seem to read even my plainest sentences. Most people will have no trouble seeing how deliberately wrong you get it.

Most things speak volumes about you when you've any say in the semantics.

Honestly I think just about any & all conventional American ethics viewpoints are mutually exclusive with tolerance. No one on this page is making much of a case for themselves in such regards anyway.

There were no goalposts to move. Respect one another & you're there.

Hard to form plain sentences when you've allowed yourself to be run up a tree, or are just saying something only to be contrary...

Tolerance also means a fair shake. Were you actually being tolerant you'd probably be a Socratic member of the discussion, without the selective ignorance. If you want a monopoly on tolerance I suggest you begin by tolerating the people right in front of you.

I find it hard to be tolerant.

What is offensive about lefties:
-they love bureaucratic control
-taxes
-they think they know how everyone should live

Imagine if I told you, "You don't exist right. You need to change your behaviors. And start giving me money because I will help you change. I know how you should live. Your mind is wrong".

Being offended compromises your judgment & should NOT be seen as an excuse for intolerance. I'm sorry nobody managed to help you keep these things to yourself.

I don't really care one way or the other about taxes, but then I don't have much of anything good to say about the two party system whatsoever. IMO taxed or not, some jerk will probably be having the same money either way so I don't give it too much thought.

No one is challenging your mind, or if they are it's at least partly on you for remaining unguarded; the left, when it's orated tactfully challenges false preconceptions about FACTS. I have no idea about what your ideal life scenario is; for instance I'm just 99% certain you don't want to spend it breathing from the tailpipe of your neighbor's GMC so I endorse controls thereof. I don't think anyone ever said that to you so I see a failure to tolerate a stereotype.

Your sentences are rather plain (and boring) - probably why I ignore them and move on to more important posts. I prefer to read sentences from much more brilliant people who always have words of wisdom - like MR. D. does! I always look forward to reading Mr. D. 's posts.

Official PPR tee shirt:

This thread has a number of examples of posting to harass a member rather than posting to debate a topic. Post a comment on the topic or respond to a post on the topic yes, but posts to demean the previous or another poster is harassment. In this thread there appears to be several posters acting in coalition to harass another member. From this point on, if this responding with attack on another poster continues, then formal warnings will result.

The guy who makes no sense, then claims everyone is twisting what he said? It's kinda hard to rebut a guy like that without pointing out that he's not making sense, so if you're going to regard that as a personal attack...

Posters were distinctly advised to post about the topic and not about posters, and to continue in the same vein immediately after such a caution may merit formal action. I will refer this to the team.

Are you kidding about liberals telling people how to live?!?! It's the right that has traditionally stood against not just interracial marriage, and same sex marriage, but any sort of intimate relationship involving them. It's the right that has always censored books, TV shows, and movies for anything sexual.
And might I remind you, without taxes, nothing keeps the country running. The real problem the right has with taxes is because it goes to help people in need, who the right considers deadbeats.
And while no one likes bureaucrats, the fact is, bureaucracy grows with need for it. The notion that the country could be run by the same number of functionaries as in 1776, as the right seems to believe, is ridiculous.

That sounds a lot like a church. Well, some churches.

Everyone benefits from the interstate highway system, but the most benefit accrues to and the most wear comes from industry. I think the people who benefit the most should pay the most for public goods.

The right likes to claim that the rich pay all the taxes. Well, if you only consider Income taxes, they do. However, if all taxes are included, such as the share of property taxes included as rent charges, and sales taxes, people in the US pay roughly the same share of their income in taxes.

I thought that from those to whom much has been given, much will be required.

What vein? No specific poster's name was mentioned.