You guys do your God proud. I'm sure that such a Being would love nothing better than having a bunch of intolerant, vindictive, childish arseholes as company for all eternity.
Tolerance can only be a virtue if there is a non-relative standard for distinguishing the tolerable between the intolerable. To illustrate the point: we don't say someone is "tolerant" (virtuous) because they accord others the right to prefer chocolate over vanilla ice cream since there is no rational basis for saying the preference for chocolate ice cream is superior to the preference for vanilla. Since you claim your dialectal opponents are "intolerant, vindictive, childish, arseholes" please educate us on the non-relative moral standard that justifies your claimed moral absolutes (your name-calling)?
Yeah, for sure, it's all the fault of the 'opposition,' you lot are the pure innocent lambs of God being oppressed and abused by the evil atheists. You play the tragic victim card way too much. Look in the mirror.
This is hysterical! Re-read what you just wrote. You're the one casting your opponents in the role of victim! Moreover, your deflection is a refusal to answer my question---an admission that you can't and thus an admission that your name-calling is nothing more than rank bigotry. You are exactly like "the Cretin who said that all Cretins are liars"! One more time: please tell us the non-relative ground by which the views of your opponents are objectively intolerant and your's objectively virtuous?
Re-read what you just wrote. You're the one casting your opponents in the role of victim! Moreover, your deflection is a refusal to answer my question---an admission that you can't and thus an admission that your name-calling is nothing more than rank bigotry. You are exactly like "the Cretin who said that all Cretins are liars"! One more time: please tell us the non-relative ground by which the views of your opponents are objectively intolerant and your's objectively virtuous?