XPost: rec.food.baking, alt.politics.usa.constitution, alt.politics.republicans   
   XPost: alt.politics.homosexuality, misc.legal   
   From: noway@nowhere.com   
      
   On 9/28/2018 7:32 PM, Peter Franks wrote:   
   > On 9/25/2018 5:58 PM, Josh Rosenbluth wrote:   
   >> On 9/25/2018 1:48 PM, Peter Franks wrote:   
   >>> On 9/19/2018 2:36 PM, Josh Rosenbluth wrote:   
   >>>> On 9/19/2018 12:03 PM, Peter Franks wrote:   
   >>>>   
   >>>> {snip}   
   >>>>   
   >>>>> If they (the "Liberals and gay activists") demand tolerance of   
   >>>>> their viewpoints and behaviors, then they are under the same   
   >>>>> obligation to be tolerant of others viewpoints and behavior, which   
   >>>>> means that they can not call for boycotting of the baker or other   
   >>>>> tactics designed to interfere with the baker's business.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Not tolerating a person because they belong to a certain class of   
   >>>> people (what the baker is doing) is far different than not   
   >>>> tolerating behavior (what the boycotters are doing).   
   >>>   
   >>> Both are manifestations of intolerance.   
   >>   
   >> Yes.  One is a good form of intolerance, the other isn't.   
   >   
   > LOL!  Good form of intolerance?!  I've never heard such a moronic   
   > statement in my life.   
   >   
   > You just justified intolerance.   
   >   
   > What a joke.   
      
   I don't tolerate a lot of conduct such as drunk driving, not paying your   
   taxes or public nudity.  I'm guessing you don't tolerate a lot of   
   conduct as well.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)