XPost: rec.food.baking, alt.politics.usa.constitution, alt.politics.republicans   
   XPost: alt.politics.homosexuality, misc.legal   
   From: none@none.com   
      
   On 9/28/2018 8:52 PM, Josh Rosenbluth wrote:   
   > 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.   
      
   Drunk driving violates the rights of others.   
      
   Not paying your taxes violates the rights of others.   
      
   Does not baking a cake violate the rights of others?   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)