IOW, you concede that you are "bigoted" intolerant of my religious views vs. cults.
Well, fine. Be intolerant vs. my views; I will continue to object to certain worldviews.
Lest you think I am suddenly making up my convictions-on-the-fly to address personally you and/or Williams, allow me to quote from a post from Nov. 1, 2011...excerpt below the **********:
*************************
All "bigoted" means = intolerant
All "cannot stand" = intolerant
So you are intolerant of Mitt Romney based upon his stances
Now here's the interesting part. Mormons are my relatives. Highly valuable people. Worth the love.
Yet, for a reason, you have "personalized" what you can not stand -- personalized it in a person (Mitt Romney).
Me? I get along with the Mormons in my life. They are worth the love exchanged. I make a distinction 'tween the "ISM" and the person, much the same way many will treat the homosexual well and yet vehemently oppose the homosexual agenda.
You've bought into the liberal, homosexual activist worldview that if you oppose the agenda, you oppose the person, and are therefore guilty of bigotry. (You can thank the MSM and your liberal campus educators for such a perspective gleaned from them)
According to your perspective -- if you were to embrace any modicum of consistency, that is, the Christian and conservative elements in society should shut down any and all opposition to homosexual activist demands because that, too, is deemed as "bigotry."
Here's the fact: Everybody is tolerant and everybody is intolerant of something. Everybody draws the line somewhere on what they won't oppose. But opposition in and of itself does not = "hate" (I get the feeling some people grew up in homes of conflict and project any disagreement as hate-filled)
Yet you are bigoted toward religious views (like mine) because you draw the line at some point. It shows you are intolerant of some things. I say, "Well, good for you. Everybody's intolerant of some things. And some people are tolerant of false teachers, deception, and counterfeiters." (That's just the way things run)
But bottom line, "tolerance" is not touted as any great virtue in the Bible. Why? Because it's so dependent upon what is being discussed! It actually falls more into the licentious camp.
******************************
Upon posting the above, poster Eternal Vigilance posted:
"Tolerance is the virtue of the man without convictions." -- G.K. Chesterton
Recognizing a bigoted statement, action or opinion does not make one a bigot, and it is absurd to claim that it does.
The repeated actions on this board of posting an anti-ISM screed, waiting for folks to respond, then pouncing 2, 3, 4 at a time - sometimes calling in others to witness the feeding frenzy - for something as benign as commenting in a way that does not loudly declare that one is ANTI_ISM!!! - that practice on this forum has lead many “visitors” to quickly discern a bigotry (btw - much that is true is not original, so the “that’s original, are you an anti-anti...” response is a complete non sequitur.
I am not the lone observer of this practice. The interesting irony is that you have created an insular orthodoxy around hating a specific insular orthodoxy - and woe betide the unwitting “wanderer” who dares ventures here without promptly displaying their hatred for the ISM. Similar to news items about folks wandering into the “wrong” neighborhood. Just wondering - would the person who commenting on the bigotry of those who killed the carload of folks “not from around here” be rightly considered a bigot himself?