What say the teeming millions?
I don’t understand the question. Could you define your terms? If you’re referring to gays, no, you don’t have to love me or even like me. Your opinions are your own. However, if you wish to fire me from my job or evict me from my apartment because I’m gay, then we have a problem.
If I understand the OP correctly then no…Non-Acceptance does not equal Hate.
I don’t accept Mohammed as the true prophet but neither do I hate or even dislike Muslim’s or their religion.
I don’t accept much of Republican/Democrat/Libertarian/Green political platforms but again, I would not say I hate them.
For me, at least, hate is a very personal thing. I never hate someone for their views (well ok…maybe some KKK types would do it for me). It’s how you act on your views that makes the difference for me. I don’t hate republicans, for instance, but I intensely dislike some republicans (Jesse Helms comes to mind).
Because he’s a republican? No.
Because he’s an asshole? Yes.
Goboy…
You might wish to change your sig line from …sceptic… (which reads like “septic”, as in, septic tank) to “skeptic.”
There are also certain people who claim to endorse only “non-acceptance”, yet whose actions reveal hate. See enough of those and “non-acceptance” might start to seem like a code-word for hatred, and the person who speaks of non-acceptance may find himself associated with those who hate.
[Hijack]
**Wrath{/B]
Blame George Bernard Shaw, not me. At least the sig doesn’t contain any of his other spelling reforms, like using contractions without apostrophes(e.g., using “cant” and “wont” for “can’t” and “won’t”).
[/hijack]
Fascinating question.
What does “non-acceptance” mean? Does it mean, “I respect your right to think/believe/do that, but I don’t accept your views/beliefs/actions as proper under my own code.” Nothing wrong about that – everybody does something of the sort except those benighted folks who fall in paragraph 2.
Or does it mean, “Since I know the truth, and I don’t accept something you think/believe/do, I don’t accept you.” Then it’s tantamount to hatred, and flat out wrong.
I know you, Navigator, know and apply the difference. But I see the point of your asking.
Sure.
[quote]
hate (hāt)
v., hat·ed, hat·ing, hates.
*v.tr.
[list=1][li] [list=a][/li][li]To feel hostility or animosity toward.[/li][li]To detest.[/list=a][/li][li]To feel dislike or distaste for: hates washing dishes.[/list=1][/li]v.intr.
[list=1][li]To feel hatred.[/list=1][/li]n.
[list=1][li]Intense animosity or dislike; hatred.[/li][li]An object of detestation or hatred: My pet hate is tardiness.[/list=1][/li][/quote]
Didn’t think the terms were ambiguous… 
Oh, the terms are straightforward enough, but…
–some moderator guy with a reptile .sig over at the Pizza Parlor
“Sceptic” is actually the standard modern British spelling, not one of GBS’s reforms.
I often hear conservatives complain that non-discrimination policies (barring, say, the exclusion of gay public school teachers) are violating their rights in that they are being “forced to accept” whatever it is.
I was going to get to that, first I wanted an un-contextual response…
I saw a thread in the Pit RE: non-acceptance of a group (homosexuals) by a church (LDS) that implied that the LDS church hated homosexuals.
I find it somewhat fascinating that in this thread with zero context the first post brought homosexuality into the picture. Not meant as anything more than a commentary, and not a slight against goboy.
I’m not a big adherent of the LDS church, so I can’t defend them, but I think it is quite a leap from non-acceptance of a group to the description of hate.
Does that add to the context some Poly?
Non-acceptance? Perhaps not.
Intolerance? Probably.
Discrimation? Illegal, and definitely wrong.
Esprix
In the context you mention, 'Gator, I can say that I generally would not try and litigate out of the existance people whose lifestyles (for lack of a better word) just happen to differ with what I myself (as in, for me personally) choose.
I may disagree with how some people choose to live their lives. I may even say that how they live their lives would not fit into my own personal morality (not speaking about gayness at this point, per se). But I couldn’t see me trying to litigate these things unless I felt some kind of contempt for the way people were living.
Which is why I really don’t do this… Does this help?
Yer pal,
Satan
*I HAVE BEEN SMOKE-FREE FOR:
Six months, four weeks, 18 hours, 57 minutes and 7 seconds.
8471 cigarettes not smoked, saving $1,058.95.
Extra life with Drain Bead: 4 weeks, 1 day, 9 hours, 55 minutes.
David B used me as a cite!*
Just to elaborate a bit on Satan’s post (hope he doesn’t mind):
It seems a matter of degrees.
People might not accept something but only some might hate because of it.
Take homosexuality (since it’s already out there as an example)…
Say you have two people who disagree with the practice of homosexuality. One person might disagree but leave it at that (not especially liking or disliking gay people) while the other may be some fundie zealot who flat out despises those who practice homosexuality.
Ok…so in this case it’s easy to say the fundie is cracked and thus should be ignored as much as possible (at least in my book).
However, take something that’s easy for all of us to hate (and/or not accept)…like pedophilia. I personally would have BIG problems with someone who even thought of it much less acted on it.
Again, as with many things, I guess it’s all a matter of degrees and the scale is different for different people.
Jeff_42 wrote:
**For me, at least, hate is a very personal thing. I never hate someone for their views (well ok…maybe some KKK types would do it for me). It’s how you act
on your views that makes the difference for me. I don’t hate republicans, for instance, but I intensely dislike some republicans (Jesse Helms comes to mind).
Because he’s a republican? No.
Because he's an asshole? Yes. **
I know lots of people who hate Jesse Helms, but it is widely recognized in NC (even among those that hate him) that if you have a govermental problem (passport, irs, etc) that could use some intercession, his office is the place to call. A friend of mine worked for him in DC a couple of summers ago. Said he was one of the nicect men hes ever known. Do you define asshole as someone who has different views than you and isnt afraid to voice them?
Satan said
**I may disagree with how some people choose to live their lives. I may even say that how they live their lives would not fit into my own personal morality (not speaking about
gayness at this point, per se). But I couldn’t see me trying to litigate these things unless I felt some kind of contempt for the way people were living. **
How is that differenct than the right trying to litigate morality because they have a contempt for a lifestyle?
Um… It isn’t? That was my point, I think?
Yer pal,
Satan
*I HAVE BEEN SMOKE-FREE FOR:
Six months, four weeks, 20 hours, 7 minutes and 42 seconds.
8473 cigarettes not smoked, saving $1,059.19.
Extra life with Drain Bead: 4 weeks, 1 day, 10 hours, 5 minutes.
David B used me as a cite!*
I don’t think you can use pedophillia/gays as a comparison mainly because people can rationalize with facts and/or law against pedophillia, but all that can really be said about gays is “Umm… the bible says so, SO THERE!”
As for the OP, it is really has to be in context. If you want to give examples I’m sure I and others could elaborate more.
I always figured that Canada and most or all of the U.S. are a “tolerant” society, but not an acceptant one. As a Canadian, I won’t go out and kill, for example, homosexuals. Even if I don’t like homosexuals, I won’t actually attack them. Unfortunately, this isn’t an “acceptant” society. I can’t claim that our society grants 100% equality for all (our laws do, as far as I know, but that’s not quite the same thing). I may (for argument’s sake) be uncomfortable around minorities (and therefore don’t fully accept them on every level), but I tolerate them.
I believe that an example of an "intolerant" society is Israel. From what I know, people in Israel attack and kill one another based on religious beliefs.
So, to answer the opening question: No, non-acceptance does not equal hate.
Maybe I can take all this talk about homosexuality and relate it to the OP:
Not liking or accepting homosexuality does not equal hate.
Not liking or accepting homosexuals because they practice homosexuality does equal hate.
I think This agrees with what Jeff was saying