Is tolerance intolerant?

[tackattack]

A couple of thoughts I had and wanted opinions on.

Are you really tolerant in your beliefs? Is tolerance something to strive for? Should we strive to be more tolerant as a society? Is it even worth it?

Pluralization ought to be the case and it is beneficial. I don't agree with pluralization extrapolated to relativism though.


https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/10/0...51839.html

Even instrumental carols have been banned in some schools. Are people so weak in their beliefs that they can't accommodate someone else's belief?
I've told a muslim I hope your Ramadan goes well. I'd have no problem telling a Wiccan that I hope their Yule festival is well. It doesn't mean I support those beliefs.

I just don't know when "being tolerant" or "politically correct" became so much about what we don't want to see or believe or have, and less about respecting the sacredness of other people's beliefs?

I mean if we're truly an autonomous culture or striving for one, do we really respect the autonomy of the individual?

[Brian37]

A couple of thoughts I had and wanted opinions on.

Are you really tolerant in your beliefs? Is tolerance something to strive for? Should we strive to be more tolerant as a society? Is it even worth it?

Pluralization ought to be the case and it is beneficial. I don't agree with pluralization extrapolated to relativism though.


https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/10/0...51839.html

Even instrumental carols have been banned in some schools. Are people so weak in their beliefs that they can't accommodate someone else's belief?
I've told a muslim I hope your Ramadan goes well. I'd have no problem telling a Wiccan that I hope their Yule festival is well. It doesn't mean I support those beliefs.

I just don't know when "being tolerant" or "politically correct" became so much about what we don't want to see or believe or have, and less about respecting the sacredness of other people's beliefs?

I mean if we're truly an autonomous culture or striving for one, do we really respect the autonomy of the individual?

Loaded question.

All 7 billion of us are the same species, and we all deserve protection via government regardless if we hate each other's claims. But as former Muslim Ayaan Hirsi Ali once said, and I agree with, "Tolerance of intolerance is cowardice."

Yes, I will defend your  right to claim babies can be born without a second set of DNA and have super powers. But no, that does not mean the claim itself is credible. I still reserve the right to call a bad claim, a bad claim. 

I like to put it this way. I love my late mother, she was a lifetime Catholic and died a Catholic. But no, I don't agree that eating a magic wafer does anything but placate your emotions. I would also find it absurd if she had claimed every day, "The Chicago Cubs beat the Philadelphia Eagles in the NHL Stanley Cup." I will always love her, but sure, it would still irritate me to the point of wanting to correct her.

Point being, I STILL think most humans are good. I still value our species potential to do good and be good. I simply question where our species thinks that morality is coming from.

[Amarok]

A couple of thoughts I had and wanted opinions on.

Are you really tolerant in your beliefs? Is tolerance something to strive for? Should we strive to be more tolerant as a society? Is it even worth it?

Pluralization ought to be the case and it is beneficial. I don't agree with pluralization extrapolated to relativism though.


https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/10/0...51839.html

Even instrumental carols have been banned in some schools. Are people so weak in their beliefs that they can't accommodate someone else's belief?
I've told a muslim I hope your Ramadan goes well. I'd have no problem telling a Wiccan that I hope their Yule festival is well. It doesn't mean I support those beliefs.

I just don't know when "being tolerant" or "politically correct" became so much about what we don't want to see or believe or have, and less about respecting the sacredness of other people's beliefs?

I mean if we're truly an autonomous culture or striving for one, do we really respect the autonomy of the individual?

Here's a question . Why the heck should carols be in schools in the first place ?

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

Tolerance always struck me as somewhat condescending. For example, if I say I tolerate your religious beliefs, it almost sounds as if I'm treating you like a puppy that made a mess on the carpet. People deserve better.

As opposed to tolerant, I'm actually indifferent to a lot of things - religious belief, sexual orientation, ethnicity, gender identity, and so on.  This is because these things make no difference to me.  If Jim is a good person, he is so irrespective of where he's from or what he believes or who he sleeps with.  I'm much more concerned with what Jim does than what he is (a touchstone I like to use is if your dinner companion is nice to you but rude to the waiter, your companion is not a good person).

I see you used the phrase 'respecting the sacredness of other peoples' beliefs'.  No offense, but I don't respect your beliefs (and I certainly don't think they are sacred or sacrosanct) - I find them abysmally absurd.  But your right to hold those beliefs is beyond question.

Boru

[Brian37]

But schools are not indoctrination centers. If these same people want religious songs, even if only music, and no voice, played in public schools, then they have to let others do the same.

---

Tolerance always struck me as somewhat condescending. For example, if I say I tolerate your religious beliefs, it almost sounds as if I'm treating you like a puppy that made a mess on the carpet. People deserve better.

As opposed to tolerant, I'm actually indifferent to a lot of things - religious belief, sexual orientation, ethnicity, gender identity, and so on.  This is because these things make no difference to me.  If Jim is a good person, he is so irrespective of where he's from or what he believes or who he sleeps with.  I'm much more concerned with what Jim does than what he is (a touchstone I like to use is if your dinner companion is nice to you but rude to the waiter, your companion is not a good person).

I see you used the phrase 'respecting the sacredness of other peoples' beliefs'.  No offense, but I don't respect your beliefs (and I certainly don't think they are sacred or sacrosanct) - I find them abysmally absurd.  But your right to hold those beliefs is beyond question.

Boru

SO MUCH THIS........ ^^^^^^^

If Someone wants to believe invisible pink unicorns exist, legally they can, and even claim they exist. But others are also free to say, "bullshit" or "show me the money".

[tackattack]

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.

[Brian37]

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.

Not the point.

You are trying to create a double standard that is not there with AC/DC. The opposite is true. If a Muslim or Buddhist or Hindu want to display something religious in a public school Christians flip out. 

I don't see the point of treating any public school as an indoctrination center. If you want to live under a government that is run on religion where it's public schools mix the two, Saudi Arabia and Iran do that quite well. Schools are not Mosques, Synagogues, Churches or Buddhist or Hindu Temples. There are over 360,000 houses of worship in America of all sects and all religions outside public schools. There is no need to treat a public school as a holy place.

But, if Christians insist, then they cannot bitch, nor have the right to bitch if others do the same. I take the position that it is better for all involved to leave religion at the public school door, and have children and family do that on their own time.

[T0 Th3 M4X]

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.

Not the point.

You are trying to create a double standard that is not there with AC/DC. The opposite is true. If a Muslim or Buddhist or Hindu want to display something religious in a public school Christians flip out. 

I don't see the point of treating any public school as an indoctrination center. If you want to live under a government that is run on religion where it's public schools mix the two, Saudi Arabia and Iran do that quite well. Schools are not Mosques, Synagogues, Churches or Buddhist or Hindu Temples. There are over 360,000 houses of worship in America of all sects and all religions outside public schools. There is no need to treat a public school as a holy place.

But, if Christians insist, then they cannot bitch, nor have the right to bitch if others do the same. I take the position that it is better for all involved to leave religion at the public school door, and have children and family do that on their own time.

It happens all across the board. I remember when the atheists were mad because some kids were going to a local park to pray/worship during their lunch hour, and there were a bunch of protests by local seculrists upset that they were doing it during official school hours at a public location.  Of course at the end of it, the city told them to MYOB.  With the Muslims, it's common for them to defy school rules and even pray on their mats in the halls.  Often people are afraid of retaliation, and they let it slide.  Christians do it too.  Lots of banter about what is and what isn't appropriate.  Unfortunately kids get caught in the middle of all the quarreling.

[Amarok]

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?

How are those two things in anyway related ?

[Brian37]

Not the point.

You are trying to create a double standard that is not there with AC/DC. The opposite is true. If a Muslim or Buddhist or Hindu want to display something religious in a public school Christians flip out. 

I don't see the point of treating any public school as an indoctrination center. If you want to live under a government that is run on religion where it's public schools mix the two, Saudi Arabia and Iran do that quite well. Schools are not Mosques, Synagogues, Churches or Buddhist or Hindu Temples. There are over 360,000 houses of worship in America of all sects and all religions outside public schools. There is no need to treat a public school as a holy place.

But, if Christians insist, then they cannot bitch, nor have the right to bitch if others do the same. I take the position that it is better for all involved to leave religion at the public school door, and have children and family do that on their own time.

It happens all across the board. I remember when the atheists were mad because some kids were going to a local park to pray/worship during their lunch hour, and there were a bunch of protests by local seculrists upset that they were doing it during official school hours at a public location.  Of course at the end of it, the city told them to MYOB.  With the Muslims, it's common for them to defy school rules and even pray on their mats in the halls.  Often people are afraid of retaliation, and they let it slide.  Christians do it too.  Lots of banter about what is and what isn't appropriate.  Unfortunately kids get caught in the middle of all the quarreling.

Um no, it does not happen "across the board".

Even outside America, and it's laws, our species majorities do not like it when minorities question. 

Yes kids do get caught up into the middle of of it, which is why it is best left at the door. It is the duty of teachers to teach, not to indoctrinate.