Posted on 04/16/2008 2:13:47 PM PDT by LJayne
Tolerance is the credo of the age, the great rallying call of modern liberalism. Tolerate and be tolerated, they say. Tolerate to all alike.
But what are the limits of tolerance? To tolerate is to accept things that are strange or unpleasant to you. You tolerate things that are different from you in nature and expectation. Without a reasonable amount of tolerance, no society would be able to function for long. But at the same time the flip side of tolerance is that to tolerate a behavior is to perpetuate it.
(Excerpt) Read more at sultanknish.blogspot.com ...
“Tolerance cannot afford to have anything to do with the fallacy that evil may convert itself into good.” - Freya Stark. Well said! A stable society, like a stable individual, is the product of an equilibrium in which a tendency to crime and violence is held firmly in check by a more dominant force. Weaken or remove that force and evil will reign. Liberalism and their “tolerance” was, is, and always will remove that force.
True. Tolerance of crime had led to more crime. Tolerance of unwed mothers has led to an explosion of unwed mothers, which will lead to more crime.
Tolerate a little bad stuff, and you’ll get it bigger and better (or worse, depending on the point of view.)
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.