Tolerance and acceptance are not the same thing.
Advertisements
Filed under: Misc | Tagged: Thought of the day, Tolerance |
Author
Recent Comments
Michael on Andreas Moritz is a clever sna… jo on Andreas Moritz is a clever sna… Michael on Thought of the day vjack on Thought of the day Michael on Ol’ scummy Andreas … dreaminginamerica on Ol’ scummy Andreas … Nick Roberts on Don’t do business with B… Hank Hill on Should I face my plates in or… Stephen Moreton on Science moves on bodies of… Michael on Science moves on bodies of…
They’re not, and I can’t take anyone seriously who demonstrates they don’t know the difference.
I was in a dicsussion with someone yesterday (I can reveal more details privately, if you’d like) who said that it was the intention of someone which decided whether or not an action was intolerant. For example, if I make it a point to rid a person of a particular idea – to fully change their mind – then I am being intolerant of whatever idea it is they have in the first place. To me that says that most arguments/debates are acts of intolerance since the point of them is to change minds. The response I got was that that is not the point of most arguments/debates.
I think this persons conclusions outran the situation.
To me, it’s like having a gay child. Still loving them and inviting them home for Christmas while believing in your heart that what they’re doing is a sin is tolerance. Thinking of their sexual orientation as a morally-neutral trait is acceptance.
He would respond (I think) that if the parent conveyed to the child that being gay is wrong and that he (the child) should not be gay because of X, Y, and Z, then that is intolerance.
I think intolerance has a hard time coming up in a conversation, because they typically will not speak with those they disprove of and are unwilling to tolerate.