The word bigot is thrown around a lot by liberals, especially to anti-gay opinions, but I'm wondering if it is a bit misused by now.
Bigotry is, properly, the intolerance of
ideas, not people. We misuse the word "bigotry" to mean hatred or intolerance of Afro-Americans, Latinos, etc., but that is not bigotry, that is
racism. We misuse the word "bigotry" to mean hatred or intolerance of gay people, but that is not bigotry, that is
homophobia. (Yes I agree that this word was not well thought-out, but it's the one in use.)
Hatred or intolerance of Christianity, Islam, or any religion is bigotry. Hatred or intolerance of Christians, Muslims or members of any religion is simply
religious discrimination.
Isn't an atheist who believes there is no need for organized religion a bigot?
No. Anyone (atheist or not) who is
intolerant of organized religion is a bigot. To believe there is no need for it is not quite the same as being intolerant, although I agree that many people probably fall into both categories.
Isn't someone who calls another person a bigot, themselves a bigot because they are intolerant of a different opinion?
Calling someone a bigot is merely expressing an opinion that this person is intolerant of one or more ideas. It may be a perfectly accurate description. It doesn't make a bigot out of the person who observes this intolerance and comments on it.
We all tolerate bigots on a daily basis, don't we?
And you will conclude that, in essence, you are correct, unless you are old French in which case a bigot is someone from Normandy.
This word arose in a previous era, and was applied, more precisely, to the
Normans rather than the population of Normandy. At that time England was under Norman occupation, leading to the strange (but not quite unique) phenomenon of the occupiers being assimilated by the occupied people. The Anglo-Saxons never overthrew the Normans; there was no discontinuity in English government. Yet the Normans stopped speaking Norman French and adopted English, married Anglo-Saxons, and merged into the English population. There are still millions of Englishmen and women with French surnames, who consider themselves as English as the Queen, and deservedly so.
The French back in the old country regarded the Normans in England as a different, but related, people. They coined their own words to describe them, and one was "bigot." The origin is unknown, but one suggestion is that it came from the common English epithet "by god," which the more devout French regarded as blasphemy.
The same thing happened in China. The Mongols conquered the country and ruled it. But in the process they adopted Chinese as their language, took Chinese spouses, and eventually assimilated
without ever being overthrown. It's been pointed out that the Chinese did the same thing to the Communists, whose political system was gently merged with Confucianism (respect your elders and let them own all the capital) and the Dao (stop complaining and make the most of what you've got), to become one that is more palatable to the Chinese--and astoundingly more successful.
It's a bit more than that. It involves condemnation, contempt, hatred etc directed towards someone based solely on their race, religion, income, gender, sexual orientation etc.
No, you've got it altogether backwards. Bigotry is directed at
ideas, not people.
Someone who dislikes terrorism is not a bigot. Someone who dislikes all Arabs (because they're all terrorists) is a bigot.
No no no. Someone who is intolerant of the philosophy of
terrorism is a bigot, and in this case we see that bigotry is not automatically a bad thing! Someone who is intolerant of
Muslims (our biggest fear of Islamic terrorism is from Afghanistan, Iran and nuclear-armed Pakistan, whose people are
not Arabs) is a racist, not a bigot. (We've already coined the word "religionist" to mean something else so we have to settle for "racism" when talking about hatred of religious people.)
Someone who dislikes creationism is not a bigot. Someone who dislikes all Christians (because they're all creationists) is a bigot.
Again, wrong. Creationism is an idea so intolerance of it is bigotry. And again we've certainly rehabilitated the word and cleansed it of its negative connotations. Nothing wrong with being intolerant of creationism! Someone who is intolerant of all Christians because he assumes they're all creationists is merely an idiot.
Someone who dislikes gender reassignment surgery is not a bigot.
That's not an idea, that's a surgical procedure. So the word bigotry doesn't apply at all.
Someone who dislikes transsexuals just because they're transsexuals is a bigot.
No, that's something akin to homophobia although I don't think we've come up with a word for it yet.
Someone who dislikes the policies of the US government is not a bigot.
He has to be intolerant of them, not merely dislike them. Many of us Americans dislike these policies, but we don't treat Congressmen the way some of us treat Afro-Americans, Muslims or LGBT people.
Someone who dislikes all Americans is a bigot.
Nope. Perhaps the word racism applies, although one of the defining characteristics of America is the Melting Pot, so we are actually "raceless."
