Alberta makes stupidity law

[Glacier]

I'm so sorry that people are intolerant of your intolerance. Must be really hard for you.

Do you know the difference between acceptance and tolerance?

Yes I do. I tolerate black people, but I don't accept them. <sarcasm>

Do you know the difference between what someone is and what someone does?

[Mr Danksworth]

I'm so sorry that people are intolerant of your intolerance. Must be really hard for you.

Do you know the difference between acceptance and tolerance?

Yes I do. I tolerate black people, but I don't accept them. <sarcasm>

Do you know the difference between what someone is and what someone does?

Holy Semantics 101?

[NAB]

Ahh, a door has opened and let some fresh air in. NotsoStraight in the Gay Nightclub thread who injects the idea of "respect".

Respect, like tolerance and acceptance, has to be a two way street to be effective IMO, for it is so much more effective and constructive to discussions of sensitive issues (and their potential solutions), than attacks involving such hate filled words as homophobe, bigot, racist, etc. Like tolerance and acceptance, respect (both ways) has to be carefully cultivated and earned, and it is not earned by broadly painting Canadian society, parents, our educational system and teachers, religion, homosexuals, and supporters of whatever part, ...as a whole with the bright colours demonstrated by the activists, extremists, and whackos of either side (who are for the most part just a small vocal minority in terms of percentage of the whole in either case anyway - it's the ability of the intolerant on both sides to influence the masses that is to me of greater concern, even though I think some tend to give their ability to do so far more credit and importance than it warrants, hence fear it.

Instead, real life paints all the rest of a multicultural society in various shades of grey, for it seems to me "culture" and "lifestyle" can almost be used interchangably. Respect and tolerance is key in that varied majority and grey domain, ....even if outright acceptance and/or support goes lacking sometimes, ...usually for very valid, and very individual, reasons - on all sides. Then again, even a simple sheet of paper has 6 sides, not just two. That's to me how our public schools should approach teaching sensitive and potentially contentious and conflict/divisions generating issues (if they must, and I am not convinced they must, or even should, ...that is the parental right and responsibility in a free and democratic society from my perspective)...

"Critical thinking" is not all about what is imprinted on the primary two sides of the paper... But rather what is imprinted on the other four sides.

Welcome to the boards by the way NotsoStraight.

Nab

[Putz]

Too difficult to answer?

[Mr Danksworth]

Maybe we should give out some of these.

[chrisv]

Soulra I think you have those on right now if you believe that everything in this world is simply the product of chance and evolution

[Mr Danksworth]

Otay, whatever you say. <pats on head>

[Putz]

Looks like the answers are no longer forthcoming from soulra. So who then is close minded?
Odd how the OP addressed the thread, foregone conclusion rather than critical thought on a provincial concept.

[Mr Danksworth]

What answers are you talking about? What have you asked that I haven't answered?

[Putz]

What answers are you talking about? What have you asked that I haven't answered?

Do you know the difference between what someone is and what someone does?

Too difficult to answer?

[Mr Danksworth]

What answers are you talking about? What have you asked that I haven't answered?

Do you know the difference between what someone is and what someone does?

A rather stupid question, but, yes I do understand the difference. Hopefully you are not trying to imply that you can be gay but not do gay. Because if you are, you are, in my opinion, *bleep*.

Too difficult to answer?

[/quote]

No it's not. Quite easy actually, I've seen this poor attempt at semantics before....straight outta the playbook.

[Putz]

I would love to hear why it is a poor attempt at semantics. You say that you know the difference, yet do not say what the difference is. Is it that difficult?
I am a kleptomaniac, yet I have the self control to not indulge in my desires. I must be *bleep*. I am an alcoholic, but choose to abstain from drinking beer, I must be real *bleep*. I'm sure the best you will be able to do is agree (with the *bleep* part). Hopefully that makes you "feel" better, I just don't see how the addition of throwing out a name helps in understanding.

[Mr Danksworth]

I think I've made myself clear. Are you implying that homosexuality is the same thing as alcoholism and kleptomania. I sure hope not.

[I Think]

OK which drunk f@660t stole my heshe?

[Mr Danksworth]

I did, and I wasn't drunk.
You can have heshe back, but heshe will never be the same.....nor will I.