Calling someone a bigot is by definition the exact same thing as being a bigot. It shows intolerance toward the opinions of others. I suspect this is a classic example of a catachresis where people want to use a word, but use it based on what they think it means, not what it actually means. The actual act of choosing the incorrect word is acyrologia. If you look at the opinions of those who disagree, several of them agree but try to explain it away. When you know the meaning of a word and try to use it to mean something else it creates gibberish, not a logical argument.
A bigot is someone who is not tolerant of opposing opinions, and to be tolerant is to allow opposing opinions to exist. Allowing them to exist means you are not actively trying to destroy or disallow them, even if you discourage or disagree with them. The only way you can disallow an opinion is to punish those who openly display it.
Therefore a bitgot is one who is actively trying to punish people who do not hold certain opinions/beliefs. If you call someone any insult ever, you are displaying intolerance and you are trying to socially punish them. If this is because of their opinion, you are the bigot. However, if it is because of their actions, then you are simply not tolerating certain actions which is both expected and required of anyone and everyone, and is no way being bigoted. This is because we can all at the very least agree everyone should be intolerate of serial killers. Therefore it is acceptable and expected to be intolerant based on someones actions. Trying to punish people for their opinions is an action, so being intolerant of bigots is acceptable. I said yes because again, most people dont call others bigots for thier actions, and in trying to punish an opinion they prove themselves bigots.
It appears to be a statement that said to someone else's as a statement of their own intolerance and hence bigoted in itself. In the end people should be allowed to believe what they want and essentially "agree to disagree". I think best use of "bigot" is properly used in the context of ethnic intolerance, i.e. Hating someone purely on skin colour. It's a quality that cannot be changed. Bigotry as is commonly referred to in a religious context or opinion relating to social, philosophical, or political arenas is an expression of the person who calls another a bigot, their own bigotry and in tolerance.
Calling someone a bigot automatically makes you a bigot because you're not tolerant to their opinion. Liberals are the first ones to label someone a bigot, to shut down an argument because they don't have any facts to support their position. Next time, before you label some a bigot, you should ask yourself the question, Am I the Bigot?
Yes it does, even openly calling someone a bigot shows you are intolerable to their opinion, surely this makes you more of a bigot for calling someone else one. Although I understand it depends on the subject. If the person who calls you a bigot also has an opinion on the certain subject in question, then they are definitely a bigot too, the fact that they called you out on your opposing opinion proves that they are intolerable of it.
I think it may be possible to identify bigotry without being a bigot. However, in the current and typical scenario, that is not the case. For example, in our age of political correctness it is typical for a LGBT supporter to identify a non-supporter as a bigot because of that non-support. In essence they are saying that to view non-heterosexual lifestyles as wrong is to be intolerant. But, the very act of viewing/labeling them as intolerant, is to be intolerant as well. Accordingly, to label someone a bigot typically means you are labeling yourself a bigot as well.
"a person who is intolerant towards those holding different opinions"
Everyone thinks that what they believe is correct; truth is subjective. There is no one size fits all. You cannot simply call someone a bigot because they are not politically correct; or have different believes to you that you perceive to be wrong - that's being a bigot yourself.
Simply calling someone a bigot doesn't necessarily equate to a biggoted action, however, if the individual labeling the other person a bigot feels angry and doesn't want to tollerate the opposing viewpoint of the other individual then, yes, they are themselves a bigot.
Most of the individuals throwing around the word on the Internet could certainly be labeled intolerent of the opposing view.
He does. All the time. It's really quite a bad habit of his. Doesn't agree with someone? Bigot. Someone doesn't believe in unbridled immigration and open borders? Bigot. He does it all the time. It's old and tired. But it happens. Again and again. Really not nice of him. And bigoted.
Calling Someone a "Bigot" will make you one because If you don't like anthers opinion then you somewhat have the nerve to insult another because how you hate their belief. "a person who hates or refuses to accept the members of a particular group", So therefore you don't like a or accept the "Bigot" view on certain things. Ha! Checkmate Liberals, pro-lgbt, people who use the word, etc.
Calling someone a bigot based on their acts of bigotry doesn't determine if you are a bigot too. You can call a person a bigot and still act tolerant towards said person. Even if that person is acting like a bigot towards you. I personally believe that this sounds more like a "tolerance of intolerance" point. The LGBT community is fighting this argument against people who do not wish to treat everyone equally because they disagree with them. You can disagree with me on something, and not kick me out of your store.
Solely calling someone a bigot doesn't imply that the bigot isn't tolerated, especially if the person does indeed express bigotry. That would simply be stating a fact.
Tolerance: "showing willingness to allow the existence of opinions or behavior that one does not necessarily agree with"
But, is it bigotry to not tolerate intolerance? To have someone disagree with you is one thing, but for them to not allow the existence of your thoughts or behaviors is not something that should be tolerated in return. The views or actions of bigots aren't tolerated because they're personally threatening, not because they're different.
Nothing wrong with intolerance. I don't tolerate a political system and media that have favored corporate interests over the wellbeing of humans for quite some time, and I think we need more bigotry against the influence of money on government. Corporations are unnatural and shouldn't have human rights. Where in any religious book is it said that corporations should be treated equally with natural persons? Hopefully future generations will have developed an intolerance for abuse of power that many in this day and age have developed against their fellow man who may look or act differently than they do. Bigotry is abhorrent when used to attempt to take away the inalienable rights of human beings, which is what certain political groups have done by conflating social issues with their designs to increase their grip on political power through corruptive lobbying and dismantling representative government.
If someone is a liar, what do you call them ? It's OK to call them a liar. A bigot is someone who has beliefs that are not based on truth, and they get mad if you don't accept and embrace what they TELL YOU. If that fits some people, then I guess they are bigots. Since when is telling the truth wrong ? Truth is stronger than love. Just throwing red paint on someone and saying they are red doesnt make them red. Your bigoted red accusations are painting people every day, but we should not recluse ourselves from calling them out for their brazen ignorant bigoted claims and lies.
It all depends on what you and your community believe in.
Let's put it this way, legal execution of a killer is not considered a bad thing, even though it is still a killing in reality.
If you believe racial prejudices have no place in 21st century, saying it clearly doesn't make you a bigot in pejorative sense.
To me, the idea of "fighting for equality" is an illusion, it is only about what part of society you want to be empowered.
If "fighting for equality" is what you are after, I'd advise that you should stop using labeling anyone with a pejorative terms, and give your opponent "I do not agree with your view on it" kind of response
If I use bigot as a noun, a label that denounces a persons views than yes I might be construed a bigot. Intolerant of anther's views. Another scenario may be if I use the adjective of the word and say this person has bigoted views. It does not denote bigotry on my part but an expression of how I see this persons opinion.
Bigotry is spreading like virus. Bigots needs to be told they are bigots. Its not intolerance, its truth. And by the polls here now 2 in every 3 person is a bigot and they know it.
Lets not forget, we have civil right movements only few decades back and still the bigots and racist are among us. Only hope is new generation with more liberal education
This is often a ploy by people with hatred to project away themselves by accusing others that which they are guilty of.
The racist white guy calling others racist for not tolerating his view of blacks or hispanics.
The religious fundie call gays and gay allies as bigots for getting fed up with religion running amok with the idea of "religious freedom".
People need to take stand against unfairness and be able to call out inequality where it exists.
In order to have a fully functioning, just society. People, particularly a minority, or group with limited representation, should have equal access to contribute to their community, while enjoying the protections and advantages of that society as equals.
However, to deny a bigot from expressing his opinion, as odious as it may be, is bigotry.
Bigotry is not a disagreement. It is a state of mind where a person feels their opinion is the only truth and feels others with different beliefs or opinions are beneath them. And they sometimes even think others are less than human if they do not believe or think the way the bigot does