Maine Group says "no tolerance for dissent"

Yes,  there is an obvious problem here,  a glaring one.  For democracy and its process.  

SMK: Excellent story! Intolerance exists on both sides of the political spectrum, however many won't admit it! This is happening all too often nowadays. If some ideologue doesn't like what you say, then they'll attack you personally--and in many cases viciously. When the fish stinks, it stinks from the head down!

Good point!!!

Yeah. I've been seeing a lot of that type of behavior around here lately. Once again, it's change the subject time. This guy has every right to say whatever he wants,and has. It is another issue entirely, to question if this guy should be counseling students under state license considering his opinon on the subject matter.

How is it "another issue entirely"?

"Dissent is patriotic". Didn't we just go through this over the Iraq War? The more the left changes, the more it stays the same.

French Revolution time. Reason is enthroned in the church. We rename the months. We recast all in reason. And, if we are Robespierre, we  used to be against the death penalty, but now we embrace it with vigor, and the angled blade works and works and works. We kill Lavoisier, the great chemist, loved by the people on his estate, just for being an aristocrat, and we kill Danton, a freer version of the Revolutionary Spirit, a rival to our power.

This is the Shadow of the Left. This is the part of them that they don't admit to, that created the Terror of the French Revolution, the Machiavellian attitude that Marxists, anarchists, and some other socialists have always had. From there, to the Russian Revolution, to the police state, and the gulags in Siberia, and to the starvation of the Kulaks, the Ukrainian small farmers, and finally onto the death of millions as described in The Black Book of Communism: it all followed.

For Jung, the Shadow is simply everything that is outside of consciousness, but the term is used most often to describe the un-overcome, irresponsible and legitimately objectionable aspect of a person. Ironically, unconscious and underestimated, this dissociated aspect becomes the source of an overestimation of the evil of a person's opponents and rivals.

The pot ends up calling the kettle not just black, but blacker than it actually is. Soc Psych 101.

So, if a counselor doesn't follow the party line, he loses his license. Take away his bread. No room for dissent. If we criticize Obama, we are racists. If we oppose gay marriage, even accepting civil unions, we are homophobes.

This issue comes up with Hate Crimes legislation as well. In Sweden where such legislation has a longer history, at some point, a preacher preaching against homosexuality comes to be considered a person "inciting violence", when, in fact, he is doing nothing of the kind.

And, the Swedes prosecuted him.

 dissent is no longer tolerated as democracy demands.  

With statements like this, they make fools of themselves and , in my opinion, delute their point of view.  Attacks on the systems of democracy marginalize their cause--if you can call it that.  And appearing in KKK dress is even furthering their invoking extremists tactics.  I cannot imagine a thinking person seeing the sign and having anything but digust for them and the images they have chosen. 

Smk,  The excerpt from the Wordpress blog is excellent.

Thanks very much!  

This is yet another ridiculous example of how confused the extreme right and anti-gay people are. You are defining freedom by stating that you should have the right to be intolerant and then accusing those that will not tolerate your intolerance of being intolerant and claiming that their intolerance justifies your intolerance, while ignoring the fact that your intolerance and bigotry is the center of the whole question in the first place. It is twisted pretzel logic no matter how you try to justify it. If this "Social Worker" is so intolerant of gay marriage that he feels compelled to stand up against the freedom of others, namely people in our LGBT community then he is certainly not equipped to be a social worker becuase he has no real understanding of key social issues like individual freedom and tolerance in the first place. Myself I certainly do not think he should be a high school guidance counselor as it is very likely he will only exacerbate the feelings of isolation that LGBT youth feel in their school and community, when he is called upon for guidance. It is beyond the pale that people that wish to repress and restrict the freedoms of others try to use freedom of speech and individual freedom as a defense of their intolerance and bigotry, especially considering it is individual freedom that they are working to prevent other Americans from attaining. These are the same twisted arguments and logic the southern states used to justify slavery, secession and to try to prevent the end of segregation in the 60's.Just a note I am not gay and I have a wife and 2 children becuase I believe that marriage is meant to be between one man and one woman... for me. Other may do as they wish and marry who they wish (as long as it is consensual (as defined by law). Other people and their marriage does not affect my marriage. My marriage will succeed or fail on my wife and I not on others.

How about an bit of  Don's letter to the editor?

Sex education is not the spearhead of the “homosexual marriage and behavior is equal to that of heterosexuality” message. It’s being done through the teachers who are forming clubs and organizing activities that purport to speak to harassment, but in fact are aggressively promoting an equality-of-behavior agenda with children in our schools. A club-approved poster, asking “When did you decide that you were straight?” has been placed, for the past two years, in our school hallway less than 50 feet from the main entrance. Try to read the words “When did you decide that you were straight” as might 13-year-old ninth-graders their first day of high school.

It sounds like he is complaining because one group wants the same rights as another group.

the problem is,  the gays are arguing for equality in a pluralist society;  the other camp is arguing for natural law as proposed by Aquinas in the 13th century.  The bed is not big enough to hold them both;  someone must get out.