Jesus killed Mohammed:

[Calabrio]

widely respected or not, not all feel that way.

So he's not allowed his opinion?

you must admit though, that these stories aren't created. imagine the outrage if it was reversed? what if the military was forced to be totally secular?

But the military isn't "forced to be totally" religious.
Nor does it force anyone to practice any one religion.

How intolerant can the military be when everyone was afraid to call a terrorist out despite his anti-American rants? I'm speaking of Nidal Hasan, the Ft. Hood Shooter.

I don't think the stories are fake, I think they are overblown.
I think Weinstein is on his own little "crusade."
Sharlet as well.

 

[hrmwrm]

So he's not allowed his opinion?

sure. but are you saying he should be allowed to enforce his opinion?

Nor does it force anyone to practice any one religion.

no, but it does make it clear which is preferred.

I don't think the stories are fake, I think they are overblown.

and i think the same of the ground zero mosque.
it's only about perspective.

 

[Calabrio]

sure. but are you saying he should be allowed to enforce his opinion?

Speaking of the snippet you highlighted, where was the opinion forced?
By writing a book? By writing a flattering opinion on the book cover?
Or by saying that he wants to crush the heads, bellys, and kneecaps of those people with bat?

 

[hrmwrm]

Speaking of the snippet you highlighted, where was the opinion forced?

not forced, but enforced, in that his view should be the only view.
it's fine for those who want it, but shouldn't be imposed on those who don't.

and it sounds like there are quite a few if they had their way, that is exactly what would happen.
why is it that those that aren't of a certain thinking expected to hide it or face consequences? sounds like religious preference(or lack of) is dadt. (unless yours is of the accepted type)

 

[Calabrio]

not forced, but enforced, in that his view should be the only view.
it's fine for those who want it, but shouldn't be imposed on those who don't.

In that story, the intolerance is coming from Weinstein.
He wants to prevent people from expressing any kind of spirituality, even in their public life. And he seeks to intimidate all who disagree.
He's even attacked Petraeus for simply supporting a book.

There's no enforcement int he example.
Only intimidation from Weinstein.

 

[hrmwrm]

It was Vietnam which really turned the tide,” writes Anne C. Loveland, author of the only book-length study of the evangelical wave within the armed forces, American Evangelicals and the U.S. Military, 1942–1993. Until the Vietnam War, it was the traditionally moderate mainline Protestant denominations (Methodists, Presbyterians, Episcopalians), together with the Catholic Church, that dominated the religious life of the military. But as leading clergymen in these denominations spoke out against the war, evangelicals who saw the struggle in Vietnam as God’s work rushed in. In 1967, the Assemblies of God, the biggest Pentecostal denomination in the world, formally dropped its long-standing commitment to pacifism, embracing worldly war as a counterpart to spiritual struggle. Other fundamentalists took from Vietnam the lessons of guerrilla combat and applied them to the spiritual fight through a tactic they called infiltration, filling the ranks of secular institutions with undercover missionaries.

“Evangelicals looked at the military and said, ‘This is a mission field,’” explains Captain MeLinda Morton, a Lutheran pastor and former missile-launch commander who until 2005 was a staff chaplain at the Air Force Academy and has since studied and written about the chaplaincy. “They wanted to send their missionaries to the military, and for the military itself to become missionaries to the world.”

i am talking of the whole story, not just my highlighted part.
the small highlighted part was just to give you an idea of why i posted it in lesser words than the whole story.
otherwise there is lots being dismissed.
it's not intolerance so much as a complete takeover.