The Limits Of Tolerance

If you know anything about me, you know that I am intolerant. I wear that as a badge of honor and see it as the ultimate in human intelligence, intellect and education. "Roper, are you out of your mind?" I can hear you saying. No, I'm not, and if you read on you will discover what I mean.

Tolerance, as foisted on the denizens of western civilization is an outgrowth of the '60s and '70s growth of "self esteemism" and psychobabble such as "I'm O.K., You're OK." Having participated in some of that dreck, I know whereof I speak, but it didn't take me long to figure out that "When everything is tolerated, then nothing is sacred and evil is unrestrained."

Tolerance: tol•er•ance pronunciation – tol-er-ens:

The capacity for or the practice of recognizing and respecting the beliefs or practices of others."

Recognizing and respecting the beliefs or practices of others - nothing is sacred and evil is unrestrained. Yes, these two concepts are greatly connected and should be, I repeat, should be a strong hint to the rational individual that tolerance is not the way to practice human relationships. Yet, there is room for tolerance, and that too should be obvious to the rational among us. For example, I am more than willing to tolerate the religious beliefs of others when those other's beliefs also tolerate the religious beliefs of others. As a Christian, I tolerate the beliefs of Hinduists, Confucionists, animists, Jewish folk etc. I'm intolerant to a large degree, though I accept their freedom to worship as they choose, of those who believe that their faith is the only "allowable" faith. I do not believe, for example, that as a Methodist, all Baptists are doomed to hellfire and brimstone. Nor do I accept that only the Roman Catholic faith is the only way to heaven. Nor do I accept that Mohammad is the ONLY prophet of Allah or even that Islam is the "one true faith."

I also don't accept any religion that says human sacrifice is acceptable, or that infanticide is "good" or that making burnt offerings to a statue is the same as any other faith. I do not believe that a faith has the obligation to convert everyone else on the pain of death or the imposition of dihimmitude. I do not accept any belief or custom that demands female circumcision so that the female cannot enjoy the act of sex.

I am not willing to tolerate the existence of a cult of murderers who kill in the name of Allah, or Baal, or any other belief system and this is because I am judgmental. Oh yes, I also believe that there is also nothing wrong with being judgmental.

Yesterday, I got up, got dressed in a pull-over shirt and a pair of slacks. I could have decided on a Hawaiian shirt and a pair of shorts, but I judged that what I chose was better than other choices I had, including the remote possibility of going nude for the day.

We make judgments all the time, in fact, it is our nature. There is a large body of folk for example, who believe that we are 100% the result of our experiences, that we are naught but a blank slate at birth and who we are at 20 or 30 or even 97 are the accumulation of all of our experiences. That indeed, our experiences "determine" who we are. This leaves out the ability to make judgments and ultimately moral arguments.

But, I digress, the topic is tolerance. Being intolerant of something can be good or bad depending on its degree, but absolute tolerance of the beliefs and practices of others is the so called road to hell paved with good intentions. Recently, one Islamist by the name of Omar Zaheer has had charges against him for holding a banner calling for a terrorist attack on England in the recent "Mohammad Cartoon" kerfuffle because they couldn't positively identify him as the one holding the banner. The banner in question reportedly said "UK you must pray. 7/7 on its way. UK you must pay. Bin Laden is on his way." Now, I have no idea if he held that banner or not, but I do know for a fact that someone held that banner up because I saw the photographs. Other photographs said things like "behead those who mock Mohammad," and "execute the enemies of Mohammad" or words to that effect. The London police didn't wade in and arrest those folk because either they were being "tolerant" or because they didn't have enough men there (and why they didn't is another question of course). The fact of the matter is more than likely, England has become too “tolerant� of those who would violently overthrow the government of England, or attempt to do so through acts of terrorism. We see this in other members of the European community as well. The Danish Cheese manufacturer Arla has acquiesced to the islamofascists and made “reparations� for the temerity of the Danes to post the Mohammad Cartoons. Of course, the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten, posted the cartoons, not the cheese folk, but if you are demanding reparations for being “offended� who cares?

Recently, my very good friend Mustang posted on his blog Social Sense an article regarding the Muslim Student Association at Michigan State University. In this particular kerfuffle, the MSA was protesting the oh-so-very-famous Mohammad cartoons (do you get the idea that perhaps if these idiots “turned the other cheek� that the cartoons would never have become so famous and recognized world wide?). As a result, one I. S. Wichman, Professor of Mechanical Engineering at MSU wrote the following:

"Dear Moslem Association:

As a professor of Mechanical Engineering here at MSU I intend to protest your protest.

I am offended not by cartoons, but by more mundane things like beheadings of civilians, cowardly attacks on public buildings, suicide murders, murders of Catholic priests (the latest in Turkey!), burnings of Christian churches, the continued persecution of Coptic Christians in Egypt, the imposition of Sharia law on non-Muslims, the rapes of Scandinavian girls and women (called "whores" in your culture), the murder of film directors in Holland, and the rioting and looting in Paris France.

This is what offends me, a soft-spoken person and academic, and many, many, many of my colleagues. I counsel your dissatisfied, aggressive, brutal, and uncivilized slave-trading Moslems to be very aware of this as you proceed with your infantile "protests."

If you do not like the values of the West – see the 1st Amendment – you are free to leave. I hope for God's sake that most of you choose that option. Please return to your ancestral homelands and build them up yourselves instead of troubling Americans.

Cordially,
I. S. Wichman,
Professor of Mechanical Engineering"

Wow Professor, how dare you be so damned judgmental? How dare you be so intolerant? Heh! Actually, I think that except for the last sentence (perhaps and only because many of those intolerant Moslems may be native born Americans) the good Professor is right on target. Isn’t it oh-so-very interesting that the islamo-fascists and others of their ilk demand that we tolerate them, but they in turn are intolerant of other faiths, other forms of government/law and would substitute the imposition of Sharia law on all of us. Strict Muslims are intolerant of other faiths, gays, women etc. Yet, they say they accept people of other faiths if and only if they are properly dihimmis, women have few if any rights and certainly cannot go around dressed casually with their belly buttons exposed or drive a car in Saudi Arabia. In fact, in Saudi Arabia not too long ago, the morality police forced female children back into a burning school where many died because the young ladies were not “properly and modestly dressed.� Of course, fleeing fire in the middle of the night when you were sleeping peacefully tends to not allow someone to get all decked out according to Sharia law. Since I’m on the subject of Saudi Arabia, will someone tell me how tolerant they (the Saudi's that is) are regarding the practice and proselytizing of “other faiths?� Not very you say? It can get you the death penalty you say? Why am I not surprised?

This brings us back to tolerance again. Why, oh why does anyone think that they have a right not to be “offended?� If you are offensive to me, I have a right to no longer be willing to associate with you, but I do not have a right to burn down your house, threaten to kill you or riot and cause death and destruction because I am offended. In fact, those demanding tolerance are often the most intolerant of all. Don’t believe me? Then go look at some of the comments on the Daily Kos or Democratic Underground. I know, I know you can find intolerant comments on some right leaning blogs too, but that just underscores my point.

In fact, I’m becoming increasingly intolerant of those who demand that I be more tolerant. That makes me judgmental too. I plead guilty your honor.

I don’t tolerate excessive cursing on this blog, as at least one commenter has discovered, but I’m willing to tolerate some antics but not others. That is a judgment and it is entirely my call. You get to call the shots on your blog and what you are willing to tolerate. But no one, absolutely no one gets to tell me what I’m required to tolerate. So if someone says I’m intolerant, I smile and say:

Thanks!

Posted by GM Roper at June 19, 2006 06:26 AM | TrackBack