What would you do

[DeniseJH]

You don’t have to agree with it, but he shouldn’t be told he is wrong for having it.

And the pp I was responding to does the same thing so, not sure what laughing at a post has to do with anything.

In some instances wrong is wrong. So yes, some opinions are wrong. Not speaking of him in this instance specifically.

Don't know about whoever you were responding to. What I was speaking of is someone laughing at other people's opinions, and therefore not deserving of respect for his own.

 

[Hikergirl]

The discussion turned to the fact that people have the right to their own beliefs. I gave my opinion. This is a discussion board, no?

you could have just answered the questions luvjacks proposed and left your rude opinion to yourself. But you are right it's a discussion board and you are free to be disrespectful to ironically "call out" a poster who you think is.

 

[DeniseJH]

you could have just answered the questions luvjacks proposed and left your rude opinion to yourself. But you are right it's a discussion board and you are free to be disrespectful to ironically "call out" a poster who you think is.

And you're entitled to your opinion. I don't find it to be "calling out". I find it to be pertinent. As I said, a person who does not respect other's opinions does not deserve to have theirs respected. He and others are discussing his beliefs - I did not open that door.

 

[luvsJack]

And you're entitled to your opinion. I don't find it to be "calling out". I find it to be pertinent. As I said, a person who does not respect other's opinions does not deserve to have theirs respected. He and others are discussing his beliefs - I did not open that door.

My goodness you do seem offended by a laughing face! There are several here that do that.

We weren’t discussing his beliefs. We were discussing that he has a right to them whatever they are and he does. Just like you do.

 

[DeniseJH]

My goodness you do seem offended by a laughing face! There are several here that do that.

We weren’t discussing his beliefs. We were discussing that he has a right to them whatever they are and he does. Just like you do.

And I agree - he has the right to his beliefs, and I'll say again: that doesn't mean they have to be respected.

 

[ronandannette]

You are so right. It's just awful, for example, that a public servant could think that they have the right to refuse to issue a legal document to a couple, simply because the couple are the same gender. Or that an ER doctor or pharmacist could refuse to give care to someone just because they are trans, or a prescription to a woman because the medical professional doesn't "believe" in birth control. There truly is grave danger in some of those kinds of scenarios, and the people who think like that should remember that they should not judge or dictate that kind of thing.

As for confronting someone, it's certainly not illegal to do so, depending on the method of confrontation. And, while people have rights to opinions, even as vile as those, there IS absolutely room for confronting abhorrent viewpoints. This country is built on people doing just that.

I agree that all citizens should abide by the law of the land (whatever it might be). I also believe that freedom of conscience is a right and where the two intersect, common sense rather than vindictive ideology should prevail. In cases where services are readily available from other providers, medical professionals and civil servants should be free to step aside.

By law here, that is the case and it doesn't have to be a big deal, unless somebody makes it one. Referrals must be given or even more simply, the client/patient turned over to another worker on the spot. Just this afternoon I was at a WalMart pharmacy and the customer ahead of me asked for the morning-after pill (which is freely available here without a prescription). The pharmacist that took the request asked the customer to wait a moment and within seconds the other pharmacist on duty came up and served the customer. Was it an issue of conscience? IDK, but I do know nobody made any big deal because it wasn't a big deal. Similarly, marriage licenses are issued here by private registry services. There are dozens of locations and I've never been to one that didn't have several employees - a similar hand-off I'm sure could be achieved.

In remote locations where options for service are limited, like in many parts of rural Canada, the service providers must be prepared to offer them. As a person of faith, I believe strongly that one should not do anything that violates their own conscience, even if the hard choice means one's career opportunities are self-limited. That said, where a decent, civil compromise can exist, simply holding "unpopular views" shouldn't necessarily cost a person their career, nor should a workplace be used as a ideological platform or to stage a personal protest of any kind.

 

[LSUmiss]

I have some family members there, & they are are divided. Some are wearing LSU purple, & a few others are wearing crimson.

However, wherever they're sitting (way, waaaay up in the stands), they're in a mix of both LSU & AL fans, so it's fine. One of them just posted a video of some LSU fans that are sitting about 2 rows in front of them, & they were awesome... doing a dance & cheering & high-fiving!

Geaux tigers! It feels really good to be the ones to end the reign! They may back into a playoff again, but I think we can handle them again if necessary!

 

[LSUmiss]

No. If they have a reason for that opinion then that is their opinion and they are welcome to it. Same if a woman felt women shouldn’t vote. I don’t have to agree.

I don’t want to speak for the pp, but I think I know where his opinion and beliefs come from. He has every right to his own belief/opinion.

Of course, everyone has a right to believe anything they want, but that doesn’t make those beliefs any less self-sabotaging.

 

[ronandannette]

Of course, everyone has a right to believe anything they want, but that doesn’t make those beliefs any less self-sabotaging.

Wouldn't that only be accurate if the person actually wanted to personally do the thing (s)he professes to be against?

 

[luvsJack]

Wouldn't that only be accurate if the person actually wanted to personally do the thing (s)he professes to be against?

Just what I was coming back to say. If the poster doesn’t want the right to marry his partner, then there can’t be sabotage. .

 

[Wishing on a star]

Wow, has this thread gone off the rails!
I will say one more thing, before I bow out here.
I would have a huge problem with anyone who thinks that they do not have to respect another human being just because they might believe differently.
Freedom of beliefs, and basic human rights and respect for ALL is what this country is supposed to be all about.
Sadly, that does not seem to be the case.

Basic human respect is something that too many people lack, and do not even value.
It seems that basic civility is just gone.

This thread, which has now, as always happens, devolved into disrespecting and personally attacking anyone whose beliefs do not seem to align, is just another example.

Personally, for me, I do not judge anyone based on any difference in beliefs.
I judge people on whether they treat others with respect.
I judge people on whether they think it is okay to expect everyone else to feel and believe exactly as they do.

 

[DeniseJH]

Personally, for me, I do not judge anyone based on any difference in beliefs.
I judge people on whether they treat others with respect.

That was my point exactly - thank you.

 

[DeniseJH]

Wouldn't that only be accurate if the person actually wanted to personally do the thing (s)he professes to be against?

If L&L is against gay marriage I think that of course that is his prerogative - but it does seem to be an acceptance of the discrimination faced by other gays. I think that may be what LSUmiss is saying. If I, as a woman, was ok with other women being denied something on the basis of gender that others took for granted that would be self-sabotage in that discrimination is discrimination. None should be considered ok. If I accept it for them, who will fight for me when MY interests are at stake?

 

[luvsJack]

If L&L is against gay marriage I think that of course that is his prerogative - but it does seem to be an acceptance of the discrimination faced by other gays. I think that may be what LSUmiss is saying. If I, as a woman, was ok with other women being denied something on the basis of gender that others took for granted that would be self-sabotage in that discrimination is discrimination. None should be considered ok. If I accept it for them, who will fight for me when MY interests are at stake?

Are you saying that we should be for any “right” that others “like us” think we should have? So if some women’s rights group starts demanding some “right” that I feel is morally and ethically wrong, I should support their actions simply on the basis of being a woman?

If that is what you are saying, I don’t agree at all.

 

[DeniseJH]

Are you saying that we should be for any “right” that others “like us” think we should have? So if some women’s rights group starts demanding some “right” that I feel is morally and ethically wrong, I should support their actions simply on the basis of being a woman?

If that is what you are saying, I don’t agree at all.

No, that is why I said "denied something based on gender that others took for granted". It's about equality, not some imagined extremism.

 

[LSUmiss]

Wow, has this thread gone off the rails!
I will say one more thing, before I bow out here.
I would have a huge problem with anyone who thinks that they do not have to respect another human being just because they might believe differently.
Freedom of beliefs, and basic human rights and respect for ALL is what this country is supposed to be all about.
Sadly, that does not seem to be the case.

Basic human respect is something that too many people lack, and do not even value.
It seems that basic civility is just gone.

This thread, which has now, as always happens, devolved into disrespecting and personally attacking anyone whose beliefs do not seem to align, is just another example.

Personally, for me, I do not judge anyone based on any difference in beliefs.
I judge people on whether they treat others with respect.
I judge people on whether they think it is okay to expect everyone else to feel and believe exactly as they do.

Sorry I do judge ppl who align themselves with the ideology of a previous group of ppl who annihilated 6 million ppl including children in the name of race purification. That’s not just a difference in beliefs. That’s evil.

 

[3smithboys]

Run...and don’t look back.

 

[shelemm]

The Confederate flag is inextricably linked with slavery. Just as prohibitions against gay marriage are inextricably liked to Matthew Shepard. You can't isolate a people within a society without irreparable harm. The logical conclusion is violence.

 

[Wishing on a star]

LSU MIss, I never, ever, said that I did not judge racial violence or 'purification'.
Read again.
I have said, several times, that I would judge and remove myself and my child as far as possible from this family.
I am not sure what any confusion is here. Or is it trying to purposefully misinterpret what I said, or put words in my mouth.
That seems to happen all the time.

This thread has now gone further than that.

I said I did not feel that it is okay to be openly disrespectful of people just based on some differences in belief.
Everybody thinks and feels that they are right, and the other person is 'wrong'.
I would have a problem with anyone who think that only their beliefs are right, and they have the right to be the judge and jury and to disrespect people who are different than they are. That is exactly what these hate-groups do.

IF these hate groups (who I do feel are very very VERY wrong) feel it is okay to judge and disrespect and 'purify' feel this way. If they do this.
I simply will not stoop to that level.

I value our freedom of speech and beliefs, etc... I know how important these are.
These freedoms seem to be eroding every day. Only 'approved' speech allowed.
Hate and negativity are rampant.

I will add this... If the OP, or anyone in a similar position, thinks that another family is actually a danger to anyone in society. Yes, by means report them to the high level intelligence sources who are following this kind of thing.
I would not be surprised if this family were not already being watched, due to their online activity.

I would not confront them.
Confrontation is what can lead to violence.
I would not call the police and think that they would be arrested. Or that this would be a way to influence them. Because having a flag in your home is NOT illegal.
I would not add my own personal HATE to the mix.

 

[luvsJack]

No, that is why I said "denied something based on gender that others took for granted". It's about equality, not some imagined extremism.

Lol, I wasn’t imagining any extremism. Think about it. There are “rights” for women that not all women agree with. That some do find morally wrong.

IMO, although it can’t really be discussed here, no one should decide the pp is wrong simply based on a statement. You need to know his reasons.