Stefan Molyneux an absolute bigot

[Defendant]

I would like to say, for the record, I have been vehemently opposed to this bloviated fuckwit since 2006. 

[Looking from outside]

Lots of numbers and statistics, lots of hot air. What I find disturbing is the incredibly  supposedly low number of gays in actuality. I suspect that someone is trying to erase a part of the population. Interestingly, when I googled for those numbers a lot of "religiously based" websites popped up all supporting 1% or less of gays in the population. Sorry but I don't buy it.

Maybe he's honest about his new found "acceptance" of gays but all I see is a Falwell moment.

[analogkid]

The bald bastuhd. Why I oughta...

[Looking from outside]

Just heard him on sunday's show podcast. Tapdancing is all I heard. His apologies are refused.

[Dalebert]

Just heard him on sunday's show podcast. Tapdancing is all I heard. His apologies are refused.

Did they bring this subject up? Ugh, do I need to listen to this?

[alaric89]

Just heard him on sunday's show podcast. Tapdancing is all I heard. His apologies are refused.

I read your post then listened to the podcast, expecting NOT a retraction, a update and a straight up apology, with a promise to add a disclaimer to the podcast everybody is bitching about. It is not possible to make you happy. I assume anyone else wanting to be in a special group that no one gets to talk about can never be happy either. Talking to people who look for something to make them feel oppressed is a waste of time.

[cellularphonecase]

Not a listener to Stefan Molyneux, I've heard him a few times in the past, but this thread caused me to make an account after listening to the "bigoted" commentary. I just gotta say, with regard to some of the posters in this thread, WOW! Talk about an over-reaction...

Homosexuality, and it's part in the human condition, is little understood, and frankly the entire discussion has been reduced to "if you don't think it is entirely a genetic condition, then you are a bigoted homo-phobe who is probably still in the closet". Talk about argument from intimidation. It is disgusting to see, and honestly disappointing to me that it is coming from the "liberty community". This is the same kind of crap that has made objective discussion about things like Global Warming literally impossible. Whatever happened to the marketplace of ideas?

The man isn't advocating anything, he is merely commenting on his personal observations; even if they are limited and obviously skewed. At no point does he denigrate the LGBT community, nor does he advocate anything that would harm the freedoms or safety of people within the LGBT community. Sorry, but I don't see anything wrong with human beings working to better understand a particular sexual orientation and the roots for such behavior. I mean, you could engage him in conversation to either discuss further, or provide contrary evidence to his experiences. No contrary position is even taken, merely ad-hominem attacks designed to silence speech which is not in line with an individual's opinion. Sadly, these days, it is all too common, just severely disturbing nonetheless.

[Defendant]

Not a listener to Stefan Molyneux, I've heard him a few times in the past, but this thread caused me to make an account after listening to the "bigoted" commentary. I just gotta say, with regard to some of the posters in this thread, WOW! Talk about an over-reaction...

Homosexuality, and it's part in the human condition, is little understood, and frankly the entire discussion has been reduced to "if you don't think it is entirely a genetic condition, then you are a bigoted homo-phobe who is probably still in the closet". Talk about argument from intimidation. It is disgusting to see, and honestly disappointing to me that it is coming from the "liberty community". This is the same kind of crap that has made objective discussion about things like Global Warming literally impossible. Whatever happened to the marketplace of ideas?

The man isn't advocating anything, he is merely commenting on his personal observations; even if they are limited and obviously skewed. At no point does he denigrate the LGBT community, nor does he advocate anything that would harm the freedoms or safety of people within the LGBT community. Sorry, but I don't see anything wrong with human beings working to better understand a particular sexual orientation and the roots for such behavior. I mean, you could engage him in conversation to either discuss further, or provide contrary evidence to his experiences. No contrary position is even taken, merely ad-hominem attacks designed to silence speech which is not in line with an individual's opinion. Sadly, these days, it is all too common, just severely disturbing nonetheless.

LOUIS C.K. - FAGGOT - CHEWED UP

[Dalebert]

Not a listener to Stefan Molyneux, I've heard him a few times in the past, but this thread caused me to make an account after listening to the "bigoted" commentary. I just gotta say, with regard to some of the posters in this thread, WOW! Talk about an over-reaction...

Homosexuality, and it's part in the human condition, is little understood, and frankly the entire discussion has been reduced to "if you don't think it is entirely a genetic condition, then you are a bigoted homo-phobe who is probably still in the closet". Talk about argument from intimidation. It is disgusting to see, and honestly disappointing to me that it is coming from the "liberty community". This is the same kind of crap that has made objective discussion about things like Global Warming literally impossible. Whatever happened to the marketplace of ideas?

The man isn't advocating anything, he is merely commenting on his personal observations; even if they are limited and obviously skewed. At no point does he denigrate the LGBT community, nor does he advocate anything that would harm the freedoms or safety of people within the LGBT community. Sorry, but I don't see anything wrong with human beings working to better understand a particular sexual orientation and the roots for such behavior. I mean, you could engage him in conversation to either discuss further, or provide contrary evidence to his experiences. No contrary position is even taken, merely ad-hominem attacks designed to silence speech which is not in line with an individual's opinion. Sadly, these days, it is all too common, just severely disturbing nonetheless.

I can't speak for anyone else. I don't believe I ever called him a bigot though please quote me if I'm mistaken. What I said was his "display of ignorance" was "disturbing". I think I had higher standards for him in particular. I thought it more rational to take a few minutes to Google a subject and get some readily available data rather than speak in ignorance as he did on anecdotal experiences that were really negative.

[Diogenes The Cynic]

Dale, would comfort play into this?

I mean, I am ok with talking to another Jewish person about the origins of Jewish stereotypes, but I would just have no interest in having that same conversation with a non-Jew. It would be a bit grating to parse yourself apart like a lab specimen for someone else to see. I can totally understand that.

I would imagine that its equally difficult to talk to a black person about the relatively high crime levels in their communities. They might be more comfortable talking to another black person about it, but involving others could be seen as patronizing.

Dale, what thinks you?

[Dalebert]

Dale, what thinks you?

No.

[Defendant]

Dale, what thinks you?

No.

pacmandies.sound/