Subject:
|
Re: Sex Scandal: U.S. President had sex with Intern!
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Wed, 21 May 2003 21:08:39 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
367 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Costello writes:
> So I guess this whole discussion comes down to how you define tolerance. If
> you believe like I do that tolerance is treating everyone equally despite
> differences in race, ideology, lifestyle, etc, then yes I have no problem
> with tolerance. However if you believe that in order for someone to
> be “tolerant” they must whole heartedly accept the practices of another group
> as normal, good and/or healthy, then I guess you will have to paint me
> intolerant.
I think that I'd favor a combination of your two definitions, but I must
admit that my own definition is hardly ironclad. I'd offer something like this:
Tolerance is, at the very least, the acceptance of others without
pre-emptively judging them better or worse than oneself (i.e., without
summarily dismissing them due to lifestyle, habits, appearance, beliefs,
etc.). This includes judgment of objective "rightness" or "wrongness" of
others' behavior, as long as that behavior does not compromise the rights of
others.
I reserve the right to modify and sharpen that definition.
> > It may be that your friend has previously concealed his
> > homosexuality and is "confessing" his guilt about this concealment.
> > However, I don't get that impression from your post. If that's what you're
> > trying to convey, you should restate your point more clearly.
>
> I am sorry if I was unclear, but that is exactly what I meant. My “inner
> circle” of friends have been together over ten years, and in all that time
> he hid his sexuality. The confession/transgression was more that he had lied
> to us, his closest friends for all those years, and didn't trust that we
> would be understanding.
But do you realize why he felt that way? From what you've said here, it's
clear that you have strongly-held beliefs about right and wrong, and among
those beliefs is the view that living with one's girlfriend is "wrong." If
you view such a mainstream and commonplace practice as wrong, then how could
your friend have expected anything but negative judgment in the wake of his
revelation of homosexuality (which is also mainstream and commonplace but
which still carries an anachronistic stigma).
> > Especially interesting is the fact that the friend whom you assert to be part of your
> > "inner-circle" expected a sharply intolerant response from you. It may be
> > that others perceive you (and your "tolerance") in a manner quite different
> > from what you might prefer to convey.
>
> This last statement has me thinking, perhaps I too am a victim of some level
> of intolerance and bigotry.
I expect that you're correct. Mormons, in my experience, are singled-out
for ridicule more often than mainstream Christians, but this is due in part
to the (likely erroneous) perception that Mormons are more apt to engage in
evangelizing than the average member of the Christian flock.
To an outsider, such as myself, no religion is in principal more deserving
of ridcule than any other, unless that religion seeks to force its agenda
upon others or curtail the rights of others. In that case, the gloves are off!
> Since publicly “coming out of the closet” about my being a Mormon here on
> OTD, I have been the victim of several assumptions and the occasional pot
> shot.
This is a somewhat charged forum, so attitudes here can be a little more
extreme than in reality, but your point is well made. For comparison, try
outing yourself as an atheist the next time you're in mixed, unfamiliar
company. The very best you can hope for is that people will think you're
really a Christian and just don't know/admit it!
> I am not offended; my skin is pretty thick, but you have to admit,
> bigotry against someone based on religion is just as bad as bigotry based on
> bed room practices.
Yes and no. If someone responds negatively to you as a result of a
conscious choice you've made, then that's entirely different from responding
negatively to someone as a result of that person's fundamental biological
makeup.
And it's not just a matter of "hate the sin, love the sinner," either.
It's no good to say that one tolerates homosexuals but condemns
homosexuality; that's mere equivocation a la Rick Santorum and basically
equivalent to saying "I love brunettes, but I hate when they have brown hair."
Dave!
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
37 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
