att Whiting wrote:
> Daniel J. Stern wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 9 Nov 2004, Wound Up wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>> No one deserves to be the target of blind, ideological, prejudicial
>>>>> hate.
>>>>
>>
>>
>>>> ...unless they're, y'know, gay and living in the YSM (Yoonaad'd States
>>>> of Mairca).
>>>
>>
>>
>>> Homosexuality does not serve as an acceptable excuse for being the
>>> target of hatred ;)
>>
>>
>>
>> Are ya sure? A lot of voters seem to hold the opposite view.
>
>
> What is the evidence of this?
>
> Matt

Intolerance of many groups in our society is self-evident. Many of
those who are intolerant are voters. Therefore, that statement is true.

att Whiting wrote:
> Daniel J. Stern wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 9 Nov 2004, Wound Up wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>> No one deserves to be the target of blind, ideological, prejudicial
>>>>> hate.
>>>>
>>
>>
>>>> ...unless they're, y'know, gay and living in the YSM (Yoonaad'd States
>>>> of Mairca).
>>>
>>
>>
>>> Homosexuality does not serve as an acceptable excuse for being the
>>> target of hatred ;)
>>
>>
>>
>> Are ya sure? A lot of voters seem to hold the opposite view.
>
>
> What is the evidence of this?
>
> Matt

Intolerance of many groups in our society is self-evident. Many of
those who are intolerant are voters. Therefore, that statement is true.

Dan,
You have brilliant, thoughtful posts regarding Chrysler products, but you're
showing your ignorance regarding politics. You are from Michigan, right?
Michigan threw their electoral votes to Kerry, but even Michigan residents
voted overwhelmingly for a constitutional amendment to define "marriage" as
an institution between a man and a woman. Maybe it is dissent ... not
hatred.

So, here is your chance to redeem yourself: Why would so many other states
add the same amendment to their constitutions?



"Daniel J. Stern" > wrote in message
n.umich.edu...
> On Tue, 9 Nov 2004, Wound Up wrote:
>
>>>> No one deserves to be the target of blind, ideological, prejudicial
>>>> hate.
>
>> > ...unless they're, y'know, gay and living in the YSM (Yoonaad'd States
>> > of Mairca).
>
>> Homosexuality does not serve as an acceptable excuse for being the
>> target of hatred ;)
>
> Are ya sure? A lot of voters seem to hold the opposite view.

Dan,
You have brilliant, thoughtful posts regarding Chrysler products, but you're
showing your ignorance regarding politics. You are from Michigan, right?
Michigan threw their electoral votes to Kerry, but even Michigan residents
voted overwhelmingly for a constitutional amendment to define "marriage" as
an institution between a man and a woman. Maybe it is dissent ... not
hatred.

So, here is your chance to redeem yourself: Why would so many other states
add the same amendment to their constitutions?



"Daniel J. Stern" > wrote in message
n.umich.edu...
> On Tue, 9 Nov 2004, Wound Up wrote:
>
>>>> No one deserves to be the target of blind, ideological, prejudicial
>>>> hate.
>
>> > ...unless they're, y'know, gay and living in the YSM (Yoonaad'd States
>> > of Mairca).
>
>> Homosexuality does not serve as an acceptable excuse for being the
>> target of hatred ;)
>
> Are ya sure? A lot of voters seem to hold the opposite view.

Wound Up wrote:
> att Whiting wrote:
>
>> Daniel J. Stern wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, 9 Nov 2004, Wound Up wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>>> No one deserves to be the target of blind, ideological, prejudicial
>>>>>> hate.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>> ...unless they're, y'know, gay and living in the YSM (Yoonaad'd States
>>>>> of Mairca).
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Homosexuality does not serve as an acceptable excuse for being the
>>>> target of hatred ;)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Are ya sure? A lot of voters seem to hold the opposite view.
>>
>>
>>
>> What is the evidence of this?
>>
>> Matt
>
>
> Intolerance of many groups in our society is self-evident. Many of
> those who are intolerant are voters. Therefore, that statement is true.
>
>

What part of hatred didn't you understand? That was the subject under
discussion, not intolerance.

Matt

Wound Up wrote:
> att Whiting wrote:
>
>> Daniel J. Stern wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, 9 Nov 2004, Wound Up wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>>> No one deserves to be the target of blind, ideological, prejudicial
>>>>>> hate.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>> ...unless they're, y'know, gay and living in the YSM (Yoonaad'd States
>>>>> of Mairca).
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Homosexuality does not serve as an acceptable excuse for being the
>>>> target of hatred ;)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Are ya sure? A lot of voters seem to hold the opposite view.
>>
>>
>>
>> What is the evidence of this?
>>
>> Matt
>
>
> Intolerance of many groups in our society is self-evident. Many of
> those who are intolerant are voters. Therefore, that statement is true.
>
>

What part of hatred didn't you understand? That was the subject under
discussion, not intolerance.

Matt

M100C wrote:

> Dan,
> You have brilliant, thoughtful posts regarding Chrysler products, but you're
> showing your ignorance regarding politics. You are from Michigan, right?
> Michigan threw their electoral votes to Kerry, but even Michigan residents
> voted overwhelmingly for a constitutional amendment to define "marriage" as
> an institution between a man and a woman. Maybe it is dissent ... not
> hatred.

Except that to liberals and homosexuals, anyone who disagrees with them
is either intolerant or full of hatred.


Matt

M100C wrote:

> Dan,
> You have brilliant, thoughtful posts regarding Chrysler products, but you're
> showing your ignorance regarding politics. You are from Michigan, right?
> Michigan threw their electoral votes to Kerry, but even Michigan residents
> voted overwhelmingly for a constitutional amendment to define "marriage" as
> an institution between a man and a woman. Maybe it is dissent ... not
> hatred.

Except that to liberals and homosexuals, anyone who disagrees with them
is either intolerant or full of hatred.


Matt

>>>>
>>>>>>> No one deserves to be the target of blind, ideological, prejudicial
>>>>>>> hate.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> ...unless they're, y'know, gay and living in the YSM (Yoonaad'd
>>>>>> States
>>>>>> of Mairca).
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Homosexuality does not serve as an acceptable excuse for being the
>>>>> target of hatred ;)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Are ya sure? A lot of voters seem to hold the opposite view.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> What is the evidence of this?
>>>
>>> Matt
>>
>>
>>
>> Intolerance of many groups in our society is self-evident. Many of
>> those who are intolerant are voters. Therefore, that statement is true.
>>
>>
>
> What part of hatred didn't you understand? That was the subject under
> discussion, not intolerance.
>
> Matt
>

And I even started this part of the thread (head shake).
I was just stating (the wrong) fact in a dry way, I didn't mean to
ruffle your feathers.
A LOT of people -HATE- gays? Well, not having been the target, I can't
say how it feels, but a LOT in terms of likening it to the election?
No, I'm with you; give me some evidence, because that's a very flimsy
argument.

And you might say - it's an unfair generalization...

>>>>
>>>>>>> No one deserves to be the target of blind, ideological, prejudicial
>>>>>>> hate.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> ...unless they're, y'know, gay and living in the YSM (Yoonaad'd
>>>>>> States
>>>>>> of Mairca).
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Homosexuality does not serve as an acceptable excuse for being the
>>>>> target of hatred ;)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Are ya sure? A lot of voters seem to hold the opposite view.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> What is the evidence of this?
>>>
>>> Matt
>>
>>
>>
>> Intolerance of many groups in our society is self-evident. Many of
>> those who are intolerant are voters. Therefore, that statement is true.
>>
>>
>
> What part of hatred didn't you understand? That was the subject under
> discussion, not intolerance.
>
> Matt
>

And I even started this part of the thread (head shake).
I was just stating (the wrong) fact in a dry way, I didn't mean to
ruffle your feathers.
A LOT of people -HATE- gays? Well, not having been the target, I can't
say how it feels, but a LOT in terms of likening it to the election?
No, I'm with you; give me some evidence, because that's a very flimsy
argument.

And you might say - it's an unfair generalization...