Are you still grieving? You are not alone.

[pocaracas]

Intolerance should never be tolerated.

So... we should be intolerant towards intolerants?
I sense a Snowball effect...

[abaris]

Indeed let's not confuse reasonable  conservatism a flawed but respectable position with trumpism a the worst vices of a degenerating west and the worst vices of nationalism and corporatism run amok mixed with the horrors of American religious dominionism one can be disagreed with the other no such tolerance can be afforded

Let's not confuse the extreme right with conservatism - period. Trump ran on the extreme right ticket. Others in Europe do too. Other than that there's a broad range of conservatism. I was a conservative once. Right now I could imagine to vote for someone like Merkel. I could never vote for the likes of Trump or May in Britain. But even Trump and May are very distinct characters in what they stand for.

---

So... we should be intolerant towards intolerants?
I sense a Snowball effect...

In the sense of not embracing diversity - yes. In the sense of oppressing them or the right to speak their minds - no.

[Catholic_Lady]

Well, I've said my piece. That's how I feel about tolerance of thought and real diversity. It wasn't received well, of course. As I knew it wouldn't be.

But anyhow, this was Aroura's thread, and I don't want to ruin it by turning it into a debate thread when it was meant for support and advice.

And Aroura, the only advice I can give to you is to remember that as US president his power is very limited, and will most probably only serve for 4 years. As a nation, we will recover. In the mean time seek therapy if you need to, and surround yourself with like minded friends who can listen to you, cry with you, and support you. <3

[Magilla]

Amidst all these awful goings on, the mental image of Hillary exploding as the results came in is what keeps me going.

Reminds me of a 'thing' my Dad used to say: 'If you were up to your neck in tank full of shit, and someone threw a brick at your head, would you duck, or let it hit you?'

[Catholic_Lady]

As a Catholic in an atheist forum, I practice this type of tolerance of thought all the time with all of you. I'm not perfect and I screw up all the time. But I do try.

No, you don't.

You're not on the receiving end of people calling you subhuman for your believes. And if someone does, you will observe that many rush to your aid. Me among them. That's on the same line. If someone degrades someone just for who they are, they need to be called out. That's the same on the individual level as it is on the broad brush level.

Intolerance should never be tolerated.

I wasn't referring to my treatment. 

I was referring to the fact that I try not to judge you guys or think the worse of yall's motives for the very different opinions and values you hold. 

For example, I would never say you guys support "baby killing" for being pro choice. I understand that you guys don't see it as baby killing and that to you, it isn't about that at all... it's about taking care of the women who are in tough situations. I don't agree for a second, and I'll voice my disagreement in discussion. But I can understand that you see it differently and that you aren't bad ppl for it.

I use the same type of thinking to refrain from calling Trump voters "racism supporters." 

That's what I meant.

[pocaracas]

So... we should be intolerant towards intolerants?
I sense a Snowball effect...

In the sense of not embracing diversity - yes. In the sense of oppressing them or the right to speak their minds - no.

What is this? Limiting intolerance?

I think people need proper education. And this is a multi-generational issue... not something that can be settled in 4 years... so it doesn't get addressed properly.
One example: Portugal!
Here, I've never heard of "home schooling". It's a completely foreign concept, to me.
There's a standard curriculum imposed by the Education Ministry. All private schools must adhere to it. They're free to then add whatever they want, but that curriculum is the minimum that must be followed.... and many schools struggle to just follow it... they won't even think about adding more stuff.
At certain key years (I think it's 6th, 9th and 12th) there are country-wide exams. All equal, all devised by the Ministry. And those test not only the kids, but also the schools.

Keep everyone in line, teach everyone the official story. Teach everyone!
It will take years and years and decades.... but it's the only way to move forward. Not just In Africa or India or some of those less fortunate countries, but also at home...
Educated people are not so easily led by demagogues... are more likely to be aware of all sides of any subject and are more likely to make an informed decision when the time comes.

Educate!
Aroura, I know you are doing a great job with your daughter. Keep it up!

[abaris]

I use the same type of thinking to refrain from calling Trump voters "racism supporters." 

His supporters maybe. Though I find it hard to believe that someone having heard him and not agreeing with his main message not being in line with what he said. He on the other hand doesn't deserve the benefit of the doubt. There's only the choice between being a liar to appeal to the most primitive instincts to gain politically or that he is indeed a racist.

And yes, his main message was appealing to resentments.

[SteelCurtain]

Many people wouldn't put those things that way because that's not how they view them at all. If you stop and talk to some of these people, you may find that to them: 

1. ...it isn't about "gays not having rights." It's about keeping the definition of the word "marriage" to mean not just 2 people, but 1 man and 1 woman.

But this is denying people rights based on personal beliefs. I get that they believe that, and I can agree to disagree with them on that point. But putting your personal religious beliefs into law at the cost of equality and the rights of others, is, to me, not tolerable.

2. ...it isn't about "police killing black ppl without consequence." It's about them believing that more often than not, it's done in a case of legitimate self defense. 

But the problem lies when it's clearly not self defense. The problem lies in the idea that the conviction rate for police murder is near zero. The problem lies when we find police lethal force acceptable in all situations, and any questions raised in opposition are met with accusations of anti-police mentality.

3. ...it isn't about "poor people or women being deprived of reproductive choices." It's about believing that all people, no matter how small, have an inherent right to life above any other right. 

I can get with you here. I wasn't necessarily just talking about abortion. I was also talking about the defunding of Planned Parenthood and the insistence on teaching abstinence only in schools in the south.

4. ...it isn't about "deporting 11 million people." It's about regulating our boarders and following the law. 

I get that point. And I have no problem with properly regulating our borders as we can, and following the law. I am not against deporting illegal immigrants. This is another one of those false dichotomies. I am talking about the rhetoric of spending billions of dollars on a wall and a gestapo to go around rounding up illegal immigrants.

5. ...is isn't about "supporting white nationalism." It's about voting for whom they genuinely believed was the lesser of 2 evils, Trump. 

I understand that. But in order to do that, you had to weigh white nationalist tweets, statements, and policy proposals from the candidate himself and decide that white nationalism was is some proportion tolerable.

But I'd like to think I'm able to understand that people think differently from myself. And just because someone voted for Trump, doesn't mean they are supporting white nationalism, for example. That's tolerance. 

And if Trump voters want to discuss it, I'll voice my opinion and disagreement for their candidate of choice. But I'm not going to bash them, or think the absolute worse of their motives, or stop being their friend. It's about giving people the benefit of the doubt and understanding that they may not be seeing things in the same way you're seeing them. And that doesn't make them bad people. 

I would not stop being their friend or think the worst of them. My entire family except my little brother voted for Trump. I don't bash them, I think we see that more here because of the nature of this website. If they want to have a conversation, I will tell them how I think. Just like here.

As a Catholic in an atheist forum, I practice this type of tolerance of thought all the time with all of you. I'm not perfect and I screw up all the time. But I do try.

You do an incredible job of it.

[Amarok]

This is what the catch-22 is. If your (global you) thought or belief is that 1. gays shouldn't have the same rights, or that 2. police killing black people without consequence is tolerable, or that 3. women and poor people should be deprived of reproductive choice, or that 4. we should round up and deport 11 million people, or that 5. white nationalism is a position worth legitimizing and supporting, then your opinion is deleterious to a free and open society.

I will support anyone's right to have those opinions, but I will be vocal in my dissent and my attempts to delegitimize those opinions. If that makes me intolerant, so be it. I am, by the same token, intolerant of attempts to evangelize any beliefs in schools or science denial.

My bold. 

Here's the thing though. 

Many people wouldn't put those things that way because that's not how they view them at all. If you stop and talk to some of these people, you may find that to them: 

1. ...it isn't about "gays not having rights." It's about keeping the definition of the word "marriage" to mean not just 2 people, but 1 man and 1 woman.

2. ...it isn't about "police killing black ppl without consequence." It's about them believing that more often than not, it's done in a case of legitimate self defense. 

3. ...it isn't about "poor people or women being deprived of reproductive choices." It's about believing that all people, no matter how small, have an inherent right to life above any other right. 

4. ...it isn't about "deporting 11 million people." It's about regulating our boarders and following the law. 

5. ...is isn't about "supporting white nationalism." It's about voting for whom they genuinely believed was the lesser of 2 evils, Trump. 

Now, before I get accused of falling into all 5 of those categories just because I'm seeing things through their point of view, let me say the only one that would apply to me is #3. Maybe #2 in certain cases.

But I'd like to think I'm able to understand that people think differently from myself. And just because someone voted for Trump, doesn't mean they are supporting white nationalism, for example. That's tolerance. 

And if Trump voters want to discuss it, I'll voice my opinion and disagreement for their candidate of choice. But I'm not going to bash them, or think the absolute worse of their motives, or stop being their friend. It's about giving people the benefit of the doubt and understanding that they may not be seeing things in the same way you're seeing them. And that doesn't make them bad people. 

As a Catholic in an atheist forum, I practice this type of tolerance of thought all the time with all of you. I'm not perfect and I screw up all the time. But I do try.

irrevivant they sided with trump knowing who he was and what he stood for and who supported him and what they stood for so whatever mental acrobatics they preform to justify there folly the result is the same they have fucked over minorities and gays and woman with absurd  and idiotic positions and there own selfish  wants a betrayal that cannot be forgiven and won't be forgotten

[Thumpalumpacus]

I got over his election within a couple of days. If it's out of my control I can't worry about it and stay balanced.