Posted on 05/01/2005 12:44:00 PM PDT by expatguy
It's both bemusing and sad at times to watch how in recent years moral relativists and secular humanists have completely taken over not only our society, but our dictionaries as well and relentlessly used their nunchakus of "diversity" and "tolerance" to beat a moral and unsuspecting society into submission.
For the obvious reasons, standing up and facing our opponents head on is nothing more than an exercise in futilty at this point. We'll only get thunked again on the head with the nunchakus. Only by skillfully disarming our adversaries first can we prevail and fight to regain the dignity of our society. And so, on to tolerance.
There seems to be a misconception on our part that by being tolerant we are assuming a neutral posture towards another individual's behaviour or convictions where no one party imposes their beliefs or their concept of morality on the other one. The problem is, that being tolerant is not a position of neutrality but rather one of imposition. If you think about it, we need never tolerate someone that we agree with, but only someone that we disagree with. The onus therefore lies on us to stand down from our own convictions and accept those of our adversary. That doesn't seem very tolerant now does it?
One can never be tolerant of an individual's persona, only of their behaviour. We can however be both courteous and respectful of the individual and still feel free to disagree with them without fear of reprisal.
Im courteous and respectful towards homosexuals if by chance I happen to meet one but Im not ever tolerant of their behaviour and neither should I be implored of nor forced by society to be tolerant of homosexual behaviour. Neither should you.
It's time that we all stood up and said enough. Tolerance ends now.
Salvation begins where tolerance ends.
Yeah. You're geek chic', and ya won't tolerate greek!
I already bought the tequila. The 151 is in escrow.
"From what I read, it would appear that much of the United States is now become tolerant."
Hollywood and the news media would lead you to believe
that, but it ain't so. They are trying to ram it down our throats as "normal", but outside big cities, the promo is a dud.
Woot! I can't wait - make sure to let me know before you depart - I have a small shopping list if you don't mind ;-)
If you need some backup here in the states regarding the Velveeta Caper, let me know.
Tolerence is on thing.
Approval is another.
"Tolerance" is for the most part nothing more than tacit approval.
Homosexuals were clever in never really asking for "Respect" or "Courtesy" - but "tolerance" instead.
"There" meaning Mass.? Not being in politics, my experience could be different, but mostly it seems to be a take or leave it thing. On the other hand, people here don't generally care to argue much of anything, either, they just vote.
In other words, it can be considered a hate crime.
Yeah, but what are the odds of it happening in the first place? And, if you did fight a homosexual over another issue, what are the odds that that evidence wouldn't be admissable in court? In other words, unless you are planning to beat up homos, what's the problem?
You seem to have a lot of faith in the court.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.