You make assumptions about me and what I mean which do not contribute to even the tolerance #1 which you cite above.
When I used the word tolerance(and note the object of said tolernace, stupid things), you should have known that I was using it in the sense of#1.
Please in your # 3, distinquish about rights versus power. No one has the right to do wrong. They only have the power to do so.
However, in a pluralistic society, which you and I should both support or we could not be having this argument, we must allow (tolerate)people to choose wrong in many situations. Caveat, there are some wrongs which we cannot tolerate, murder, fraud and so on.
Without going into multiple examples, that is what I was talking about when I used the word
Why do I have to "make assumptions" when in post #54 to Cyber Liberty, you said: "These idiots want to STOP the Mormon’s free exercise rights."
#1...Even if you are talking about Jews objecting to Lds baptisms of holocaust victims, you haven't bothered with this statement to define how they want to "stop" Mormons from this...(for example, 'tis a big difference in encouraging someone to honor their promises vs. calling for government to censor a religion...I'm not saying you're accusing the Jews of doing the latter...but what did you mean by "stop?")
If somebody either...
...encourages me to stop something I do as a Christian -- either to engage in self-restraint or to simply point to a promise I made 15 years ago to stop that practice...
...then there's NO infringement of religious rights there!
C'mon, Amihow...we get enough nutty comments from others without your insinuation here borderlining those other comments we get!
However, in a pluralistic society, which you and I should both support or we could not be having this argument, we must allow (tolerate)people to choose wrong in many situations.
Since I'm not advocating for anyone to take away the right for Mormons to conduct proxy baptisms for the dead, it's obvious that our exchange really boils down to one primary issue:
Should the Mormons baptize dead people free of public commentary from non-Mormons (your position, perhaps?); or is such commentary to be tolerated, after all?
You're not intolerant of religious commentary from non-Mormons about the religious practices of Mormons, are you?
And if you say, "No, I'm not"...
...then please explain what your purposes of posts #55 & #54 were to begin with?
How is post #55 suppose to get me to reconsider anything I've said in post #15 to you? (Post #55 was your response to what I said in post #15)
If your emphasis is that we should simply "tolerate" people to do wrong religiously...
...and if you thought any of my earlier religious posts were off-kilter in any degree (like post #15)...
...why didn't your "tolerance" impulse kick in? Why didn't you simply "tolerate" what I said religiously in post #15 minus your commentary or critique?
The fact is you didn't ignore post #15.
The fact is you wanted me to reconsider something I said there (otherwise, why bother commenting since your comment wasn't an "amen" type of comment?)
And all that leads to the conclusion that you weren't 100% "tolerant" of what I said in post #15. Why not? If what I said religiously in post #15 wasn't something you 100% agreed with, with the way you define "tolerance," you should have just ignored me. Right?
You didn't.
Which means you don't even practice what you preach.
(Oh, and all of this also applies to your lack of perceived religious tolerance of Jews who have objected to Mormons re: this practice...If you truly tolerated their religious convictions on this matter, you would ignore what they say via your so-called def of "tolerance"...your comment in post #54 ... calling either them -- or posters here as "idiots" ... shows you lack both class as well as the very "tolerance" you preach that others should embrace! How hypocritical & two-faced of you!)
Suggestion: Start applying your own standards of "tolerance" to your own commentary about the expressed religious convictions of others on this thread!