Progressives have a significant history of intolerance

To begin, we must determine what makes someone a progressive. It should be noted that just because someone was a politician during the progressive era (1990s-1920s [1]) does not make them a progressive. A progressive can be determined by looking at a person's beliefs and actions. Progressivism itself is a philosophy that is rooted in opposition to injustice and inequality [2]. Because of this, the ideas of progressivism are at odds with intolerant behavior. That is not to say that progressives cannot be intolerant, but it does mean that it is not likely that a person with an opposition to inequality will have a significant amount of intolerant actions. Several of the presidents mentioned in my opponent's argument are certainly not progressives. Additionally, just looking at the presidents who were progressive cannot give us a complete view of progressives as a whole. REFUTATIONSC1: The Progressive Founding FathersMy opponent writes: "As we all know the progressive founding fathers are Teddy Roosevelt and later Woodrow Wilson. " While these two men were leaders of the progressive movement, my opponent presents no evidence to suggest that these men were the "founding fathers" of the progressive movement. Teddy Roosevelt (T. R. )Pro continues by saying that T. R. endorsed a book. Again, no evidence is presented that T. R. ever made such an endorsement. While it is true that Hitler said "This is my Bible," it should also be pointed out that my opponent's source says that Hitler was also very fond of such things as Don Quixote, and William Shakespeare's plays [3]. Beyond the fact that this claims is unevidenced, endorsing one controversial book is not a sign of significant intolerance. In order to prove that T. R. was significantly intolerant, he must present more evidence. We can conclude from the first arguments presented by my opponent that T. R. did not have a significant history of intolerance, if that is the only intolerant action taken. Woodrow Wilson My opponent makes yet another unevidenced claim: "some call him the most intolerant president in American history and they are right, he practically created a fascist state in America. "I do concede that Wilson did have some racist tendencies, but that does not mean that he created a "fascist state in America. " The next point brought up by my opponent is the Sedition Act of 1918. First, it should be noted that although Wilson did sign the act, it was first a product of Congress. Also, the act should be viewed in proper light: This was during WWI and it was feared that the American war effort could be undermined. I am not condoning the Act, but I am trying to put in a little bit of context. I would also like to say that not all progressives agree with the act, in fact T. R. voiced opposition to it [4], so to say that most progressives approved of the measure would be a claim without a foundation. I understand that is not my opponent's argument, I am merely pointing out that the actions of one president are not representative of a whole group of people. Additionally, if we are to look at the intolerance of a person, we must also take into account their tolerant actions. Although writing negatively about immigrants, later, Wilson tried to get immigrants to integrate into the American way of life. Wilson also appointed the first Jewish justice to the Supreme Court [5]. We can conclude based on review of my opponent's first arguments that although Wilson had some intolerant tendencies, he alone cannot represent the entire Progressive movement. We can also conclude that my opponent's claim that Wilson created an American fascist state is entirely unfounded. William H. TaftIt should be noted that William Taft is also considered one the progressive presidents [6]. My opponent has completely skipped Taft, so unless evidence is presented to the contrary, we can conclude that Taft was a tolerant man. C2: Second Generation ProgressivesYet more unfounded claims. My opponent claims that both Hoover and FDR were progressives, but he provides no reason to believe either of these men were progressives. Herbert HooverClaiming that Hoover was a progressive is absolutely ridiculous and false. My opponent's own source source describes Hoover as a conservative [7]. The definition of progressivism I presented in R1 stated that progressivism is in opposition to conservatism. Hoover was certainly not a progressive, so I do not need to talk about Hoover's actions because they are irrelevant. FDROnce again, no evidence is presented to warrant the claim that FDR was a progressive, so I do not need to address his actions. C3: Modern Day ProgressivesOnce more we find that my opponent has claimed two more presidents have been progressives without any evidence to back this up. George H. W. BushThis president was certainly a right-wing centrist, if not a true conservative. Remember, my opponent described a progressive as someone to the left of democrats in the United States. H. W. is not a progressive, therefore, he is irrelevant. Barack ObamaNo evidence is presented to suggest that Obama is a progressive. Nevertheless, I will comment on my opponent's claim that "Obama has lead an attack on religion. He is intolerant of people of faith. " This claim is false, because Obama himself a person of faith. Beyond this, the provision in the A. C. A. to which my opponent is referring, does not require religious institutions to give women birth control. What it does is described in my opponent's source: "As of Aug. 1, new or renewing health insurance plans are required to provide birth control to women at no out-of-pocket cost. Houses of worship are exempt and religious nonprofits get a one-year reprieve, as well as the option to pass the cost to the insurance company" [8]. All health insurance plans are required to make sure women get the proper contraceptive measures. That is all it does. This is not intolerance. CONCLUSIONAs I have mentioned several times, one presidents opinions do not represent an entire group of people. Additionally, the ideas of progressivism are at odds with intolerance, so it is unlikely for a progressive to be significantly intolerant. My opponent claims that 83% of progressive presidents are intolerant, but taking into consideration the fact that most of the presidents he referenced as progressives were not shown by any evidence to be as such, he cannot really make this claim. As thing stand now:T. R. - a progressive without a significant history of intolerance. Wilson- a progressive with some history of intolerance. Taft- a progressive that was not described as intolerant. Hoover- definitely not a progressive. FDR- no evidence to suggest that he was a progressive was presented. H. W. Bush- not a progressive. Obama- no evidence that he is a progressive, but even if he is, I have refuted the ACA point. Most progressives- no evidence to suggest that they are intolerant. As can probably be seen, unless it can be shown that there is something in the progressive ideology that makes progressives intolerant, there is not a way for my opponent to prove that most progressives are significantly intolerant. The resolution is negated. Sources:[1]- . http://en.wikipedia.org...[2]- . http://www.americanprogress.org...[3]- . http://www.thedailybeast.com...[4]- . http://en.wikipedia.org...[5]- . http://en.wikipedia.org...[6]- . http://www.apstudynotes.org...[7]- . http://www.dailykos.com...[8]- . http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com...