Bigotry Tolerance Debate

For each of the questions you have listed, there is opposite viewpoints of some (questionable) legitimacy:White supremacists would argue that it is multiculturalists who seek the abolition of the white race through introduction of millions of high birth rate other demographics into white countries.Pro-conversion therapy anti gay people would argue they are saving the individuals from mental problems, social difficulties, and other negative side effects of what they believe is a consciously

Hating a group of people is not innocuous.

Not every choice other people make different from you is bigoted.

Idk, denying rights to 'bigots' seems possibly bigoted. Please turn in your speech card.

Here in the US we're in the middle of a debate about what views are socially acceptable and which are not. The tide is turning against views and policies which disadvantage gays as a category of people simply because they are gay.Thus it's not a question of whether someone's sub-human but whether or not we, as a society, find those views acceptable. Pro-slavery or nakedly white supremacist views fall into a similar category. I believe anti-gay bigotry is drifting towards that a

Hating your out group is not a virtue.

What's actually happening: society is justifiably deciding that some things that used to pass without notice, because people were very racist or sexist or homophobic or whatever, are now recognisably and irreparably awful. And we should probably stop doing them because they are hurting people. Both directly, by being the constant micro-aggression wallpaper of marginalised lives, and indirectly, by sustaining a cultural environment that comforts bigots in their bigotry.I don't expect

"I don't think people should be allowed to partake in a particular behavior" is not the same thing as "People of a specific group should be killed".

Stop making up groups of people to hate. Stick to the argument or don't comment.

Ideas don't confront each other, people do. And when the people representing one set of ideas refuse to engage in good faith and instead promote discrimination based on race, gender, and sexuality, they should lose the privilege to have those ideas amplified. 10 years ago it was not controversial that you should become a social pariah for broadcasting hate speech. This whole situation would be utterly juvenile and ridiculous if it wasn't so harmful.