There's too much baloney flying around, large slices of baloney that often hit you in the face. Recently the baloney slices involve pronouncements about tolerance and diversity. Let me get to the point to make certain the point is understood. It's about the CEO of Firefox who recently resigned, shortly after his appointment, the resignation apparently due to the outrage of many people because of his opposition to gay marriage evidenced by a political contribution of money that he made in the past.
Gay conservative writer Andrew Sullivan opposes the outrage and the resignation, saying the outrage disgusts him "as it should disgust anyone interested in a tolerant and diverse society." And gay columnist Frank Bruni in a long piece in the New York Times tells us that "Sullivan is right to raise concerns about the public flogging."
Now that's a large slice of baloney thrown by Sullivan and Bruni at the face of reason. In the real world it makes no sense to tolerate people who work politically or with militancy to generate a society that is not tolerant. You cannot tolerate the actions of people who want to kill you and you cannot tolerate the actions of people who want to change your tolerant and diverse society into a society that is not tolerant and diverse.
The key word is "actions" -- the actions of people. It's one thing for someone to hold intolerant views and not act upon those views in a political or militant manner. Those people can be tolerated because they are not dangerous to a tolerant society. But people who are politically active or militant with an agenda of intolerance are not to be tolerated. They are either to be persuaded to change their views or invited to join some other society.
Mr. Brendan Eich, the former CEO of Firefox, made a contribution of money to a political cause and at that moment he became politically active in a movement to promote intolerance. That action cannot be tolerated by a tolerant society. The tolerance of a tolerant society can never extend to those who wish to destroy that society. Any more than for the sake of "tolerance" you can tolerate the actions of someone who wants to kill you.
There's baloney and there's baloney. The trouble with media baloney is that it has no nutritive value.
Gay conservative writer Andrew Sullivan opposes the outrage and the resignation, saying the outrage disgusts him "as it should disgust anyone interested in a tolerant and diverse society." And gay columnist Frank Bruni in a long piece in the New York Times tells us that "Sullivan is right to raise concerns about the public flogging."
Now that's a large slice of baloney thrown by Sullivan and Bruni at the face of reason. In the real world it makes no sense to tolerate people who work politically or with militancy to generate a society that is not tolerant. You cannot tolerate the actions of people who want to kill you and you cannot tolerate the actions of people who want to change your tolerant and diverse society into a society that is not tolerant and diverse.
The key word is "actions" -- the actions of people. It's one thing for someone to hold intolerant views and not act upon those views in a political or militant manner. Those people can be tolerated because they are not dangerous to a tolerant society. But people who are politically active or militant with an agenda of intolerance are not to be tolerated. They are either to be persuaded to change their views or invited to join some other society.
Mr. Brendan Eich, the former CEO of Firefox, made a contribution of money to a political cause and at that moment he became politically active in a movement to promote intolerance. That action cannot be tolerated by a tolerant society. The tolerance of a tolerant society can never extend to those who wish to destroy that society. Any more than for the sake of "tolerance" you can tolerate the actions of someone who wants to kill you.
There's baloney and there's baloney. The trouble with media baloney is that it has no nutritive value.