OK So banning AC/DC in schools isn't OK but instrumental music because it conjures religious thoughts and words in children's head is ok?
It's not meant to be a loaded question. I do agree that there's a connotation with the word tolerate. I should rephrase the sacred statement for clarity purposes, Boru. You gave a great list of sancrosanct beliefs that you care nothing about like religious belief, sexual orientation, ethnicity, gender identity. Things we politically call unalieanable rights. Things a society can agree on are poor discriminators to personhood.
I completely agree that you have the right to call bull shit on something you disagree with, especially if it's being forced upon you. My question is not whether it's ok to question that belief, but whether it should be tolerated. I think a lot of people, a lot of Christians I know for example, are operating in reaction mode out of fear. They believe to conflagrate tolerance of something with acceptance of something. Some Christians I know spend a lot of time judging who someone is by what they say or do. I suppose we all do this because our brains are classifying machines. The question then I guess is if you can separate and respect the person and not respect the belief? Can you agree to disagree and leave it at that or is society just a pendulum that is never at rest because everyone is judgy and having to prove someone wrong or themselves right? My thoughts are like a race. The runner who comes in first doesn't need to prove to everyone he's first, he just is. I've never seen a competition where the winner is trying to convince everyone else they won. Not that society is a competition, but dialogue can end up that way sometimes.
It's not meant to be a loaded question. I do agree that there's a connotation with the word tolerate. I should rephrase the sacred statement for clarity purposes, Boru. You gave a great list of sancrosanct beliefs that you care nothing about like religious belief, sexual orientation, ethnicity, gender identity. Things we politically call unalieanable rights. Things a society can agree on are poor discriminators to personhood.
I completely agree that you have the right to call bull shit on something you disagree with, especially if it's being forced upon you. My question is not whether it's ok to question that belief, but whether it should be tolerated. I think a lot of people, a lot of Christians I know for example, are operating in reaction mode out of fear. They believe to conflagrate tolerance of something with acceptance of something. Some Christians I know spend a lot of time judging who someone is by what they say or do. I suppose we all do this because our brains are classifying machines. The question then I guess is if you can separate and respect the person and not respect the belief? Can you agree to disagree and leave it at that or is society just a pendulum that is never at rest because everyone is judgy and having to prove someone wrong or themselves right? My thoughts are like a race. The runner who comes in first doesn't need to prove to everyone he's first, he just is. I've never seen a competition where the winner is trying to convince everyone else they won. Not that society is a competition, but dialogue can end up that way sometimes.
"There ought to be a term that would designate those who actually follow the teachings of Jesus, since the word 'Christian' has been largely divorced from those teachings, and so polluted by fundamentalists that it has come to connote their polar opposite: intolerance, vindictive hatred, and bigotry." -- Philip Stater, Huffington Post
always working on cleaning my windows- me regarding Johari
always working on cleaning my windows- me regarding Johari
