And Tebow’s free to kneel on the football field, and I’m free to think he’s an ass, and you’re free to get butthurt about that. World without end, amen.
One difference, sweetheart. I haven’t gotten butthurt over anything.
Please see above.
You think it’s intolerant for someone to make jokes about Tebow?
That’s the issue: making fun of Tebow’s excessive displays of religiosity in public primarily during sporting events.
He exceeded the norm, people notice and some make jokes.
God Almighty!
No, there are a million ways to make fun of Tebow for the reasons you gave. Maher was just being a dick and people called him on it.
I agree, Maher seemed kind of over the top, too emotionally invested, the SNL thing was much better. But John Mace appeared to be saying that it’s intolerant to say anything.
I think it’s intolerant for you to decide whether he is being “excessive” or not. That’s between him and hid God.
And the 20 million people watching him on TV.
Gah. Stoopid laptop. Never mind.
But that position basically says that social norms don’t matter. That anyone exceeding any kind of social norm should be “tolerated”.
Oh please. He’s being made fun of on Twitter and a message board thread. Calling that intolerance is a disservice to actual intolerance.
Oh, and I neither know nor care what his views are.
If it was just between him and his god he wouldn’t be doing it during a public event.
No, that’s what makes it public, not what makes it excessive.
Regards,
Shodan
I think you just agreed with Acsenray. He stated it’s public (not just between him and god) and you agreed it’s public.
No, he agreed with you, and I pointed out that you are both wrong.
Your idea that tolerating what Tebow does is abandoning all social standards is equally wrong, to the point of being grotesque, but I think everyone knows that already.
Regards,
Shodan
This is not a flagrant violation of the “no tampering with quotes” rule, but it really looks like your toenails are over the line, even if your toes are on the line.
.
Let’s avoid this sort of thing.
[ /Moderating ]
He stated it’s public, you stated it’s public.
Is that not correct?
That’s not a very accurate rephrasing of my response to John Mace. There is a subtle yet substantial distinction between what I posted and what you posted.
Nobody said anything about what it means to tolerate Tebow’s actions. Any individual can choose to tolerate it or not.
But to classify an objection to it as “intolerant” legitimately raises the question as to why that particular behavior is exempt from being objected to. Clearly it exceeds social norms, I think few would debate that. So if objecting to this situation that doesn’t follow social norms is “intolerant”, how do you defend objecting to other types of behavior that exceed social norms?
Regardless of how you feel about Tebow or religion, you do see the issue with categorizing an objection as intolerant, right?
I guess there is the literal sense of intolerant in which any objection could be considered intolerant, regardless of the behavior being objected to, but that’s not really an interesting position to take.
I can read Tim Tebow’s mind! I know what he’s thinking as he kneels! - Lobohan
You claimed it was “excessive”, he agreed with you, you are both wrong.
What do you propose to do if you choose not to tolerate it - lynch him? Whine about it like Maher did?
This appears to be related to an earlier post, where it was alleged that there was no substantive difference between public prayer, and rape or dog fighting. It was ridiculous then, and is equally ridiculous now.
No, there isn’t any issue.
Regards,
Shodan