Thank you. I think you said it better than I did.
Intolerance is usually based on a structure of rules that are used to object to certain behavior. A statute against murder is a legal way of saying that society objects to murder. The problem is that human beings do not fit comfortably into a fixed set of rules governing behavior or thought. Plus the rules can't be too simplistic because then they can't be applied fairly. We do not have a law against simply killing for example. We do have laws against murder, manslaughter, involuntary manslaughter etc. etc.
Intolerance is one person telling another to do things my way.
Tolerance is one person telling another to do things their own way.
I like that concept!!!
In my opinion...Hammurabi (Code of Hammurabi) was a real nudge!
Good explanation. I would add that rules should include consequences. As it doesn't mean that you can't do something but that you should first consider the consequences of an action. Includes the natural consequence or an imposed consequence.
Rules are all about consequences. Somewhere lost in time, somebody came up with the idea of a rule. "Don't touch my stuff" for example is such a rule. When it became "Do not touch other people's stuff" is was then a law.
Neither is real in and of itself but we live by our rules and our laws. Consequences are what make us respect when somebody else says "Don't touch". The rule or law has no other meaning except to regulate behavior through consequences.
Intolerance is nothing more than a mental attitude pretending to have validity for others.
Tolerance is a basic precept of radical faith. Fascists are intolerant.
Intolerance is not always a bad thing. I'm sure fascists are at times intolerant of each other. It has to be larger than that. Like Hitler, who was Catholic and not restrained by his religion but never the less reached an intolerable level. Please don't take that personally, it is just an example of radical run amok.
I had to look that up. Ok, I just got the notice to expand this to other people as evidently we are dominating the conversation here. As a side not that is not my intention.
Hitler may have been born a catholic but he did not believe in any religion. Why is it that people have such a hard time with un-defining someone else according to some label? How many people do you know who were born into a religious tradition but later became atheists? That was Hitler. He wasn't a catholic!
Your comment suggests that you don't believe that anyone can be an atheist unless their parents were atheists?
Here's a question for you. Can a person believe in God but not have a religion?
Ok. I disagree and I think it is an important example but so are a lot of other things.
I believe that the belief in god is the belief of a higher level of being. I believe in karma, sort of the big picture of how we interact within our belief system. I was born with religious freedom so I don't think the way you do. Doesn't mean we can't learn from each other.
You disagree that Hitler wasn't a catholic? What do you disagree about?
I was born into the catholic faith but an unrecognizable Americanized version however. Lol Most men never went to church except on Christmas, most mothers didn't either but they went to church on Easter as well as Christmas too! Lol. Obviously, this was a big city faith which followed its own local rules. One rule was that kids went to catholic schools lol. I hold to a multi-faith tradition where all faiths and none are welcome in the support of social justice. I was taught by people who had a radical faith, who had spent years in Central and South America which was always risky to life and limb. I am talking a progressive social justice, liberation theology faith when I say radical faith. I know of no other way of faith but that. Jesus had a radical faith. I hope you can understand my meaning.
I don't mean his ideology was Catholic if that is your question. You can look it up if you are interested. More than I want to get into here.
I agree, social justice affects everyone and takes everyone. I think I get your meaning even if we approach it differently. I do appreciate your neutrality and tolerance. that is a compliment.
Also please acknowledge the religions of the indigenous peoples of El Salvador. The Spanish language, the Roman Catholic (and other Christian) faith, and even the name of the "country" are imported and imposed on them.
I appreciate your effort, but you're conflating two of Jesus' radical sayings and perpetuating a misinterpretation of the "other cheek" sayings. They were not about being a doormat, but about avenging your own humanity without doing violence to the other. See Walter Wink's The Powers That Be trilogy.
Part of what was/is so radical about Liberation Theology is that neither is it just about nonviolence, but about that very liberation. I'm afraid Prof. Nevins didn't show much understanding of the actual theological basis.
One cannot speak of "organized religion" with a single phrase any more than one can speak of "secularism" with that one word. It is never going to be a simple case to make, let alone on which to rest.
Nice little bumper sticker, but I think tolerance is actually listening to how another person does or wants to do things and giving their ideas consideration. Tolerance is not incapable of pointing out what's unworkable or unjust in the other's way. I need not tolerate racism, for example, but neither must I simply tell racists to do things my way.
Note, too, that the differences among the crimes of killing are mostly in the prescribed sentences for those convicted of committing them. When one pleads to manslaughter to get out of a murder charge, one is not changing the nature of the act of killing.
No, Hitler was no radical Catholic; you've misunderstood the word "radical." It means drawing down to the roots of an ideology or faith. If you go to the roots of any form of Christianity, you find the teachings of Jesus of Nazareth and the Jewish tradition he hoped to reform, to turn back to its roots, when someone recorded, in God's voice, the admonition that people are blessed to be a blessing to others.
Thank you for that explanation and bringing a little more clarity to the conversation.
Please stop posting to me. I have asked you this before.