Is intolerance of intolerance intolerance?

What do you think?

No.

Come again?

No, it's not.

"Intolerance of intolerance" is just a smokescreen for intolerant hypocrisy. It's an excuse for people to be intolerant by calling the other guy intolerant. It's just a "my rules don't apply to me" scenario. And honestly, it only gives credence to the "intolerant" people you don't feel are tolerating you. With the way "intolerance" is overused in the first place, the issue becomes totally meaningless. "I don't like what you say, so that means it's intolerant and I don't have to tolerate it." It's schoolyard semantics and no amount of wordy finagling gets around it. Intolerance is intolerance, and if you don't like that, then choose better terms. The entire "war on intolerance" has become one big laugh that totally betrays the original intent.

It depends. Are we talking speech? or actions?

The KKK had a rally in a midwestern jewish community. The community did not want them there, and refused the permits, however---the supreme court ruled that free speech and freedom to assemble gave them the right to congregate. MOST people find the KKK despicable and disagree with anything they have to say, but both sides have a constitutional right to feel the way they do, and gather. That is something that must be tolerated.

Now their ACTIONS should not be tolerated if committing crimes against other.


It funny when you think about this topic because I often wonder who gets to decide which side is right and should not be tolerated.

If a people were being pushed out of their land by another people, their homes and farms being destroyed, their children growing up in the rubble of war, we as a people would not tolerate the situation---especially when the memories of the holocaust are so fresh in the mind. however, when that people turns out to be palestinian arabs, and the oppressor is zionist israel---suddenly we refuse to tolerate the oppressed. Go figure!

I know im gonna get hell for this, but so be it.

Not at all.