Oops sorry. I mean from the former to the latter...
Jao, his minions and puppeteers have NOTHING to do with Tolerance.
Good question.
Too much navel gazing and the wish to get away with something are two root causes to get the discussion started.
My (unpopular) opinion can be summed up in four words:
We let women vote.
It begins with a rejection of right and wrong, of good and evil.
If there is no such thing as good and evil, then anything is acceptable.
We should never have accepted tolerance of homosexuality.
It didn't. What we are experiencing is an effort by the Marxists in our midst to convince us that "tolerance" is paramount.
This is part and parcel of their program to replace our society which is based on a balance of individual merit AND community with a system-based solely on community (i.e., collectivism with no room for individual merit).
A system based ONLY on community is no more possible than a system based only on individual merit.
A culture must have both, just as ancient tribes had great hunters and communities, with each supporting the other.
Not just tolerating. Also supporting, encouraging and subsidizing.
It was the hippies.
First it got rich. Then it became corrupt.
(How’s that for master of simplification?)
I don’t think we were ever a society based on self restraint. American colonization was about not wanting to follow “those” rules and going someplace where people could make their own rules. Including making enclaves of different rules. Generally in the beginning it was defined by religion, people wanted to make Catholic zones, and Protestant zones, etc etc. But the big thing was we wanted to make our own rules, and have others tolerate that here Group X sets the rules, and if they want different rules go somewhere else. Tolerance was always built into it. The whole structure was “find people who think like you and do your own thing”.
Seen here on FR: “Tolerance is the virtue of believing in nothing’’.
Homosexuality was legalized.