toldailytopic: Tolerance and diversity, where and how should we draw the line? (what

[Prolifeguyswife]

- Adultery
- Incest
- Polygamy
- Homosexuality
- Thievery
- Pedophilia
- Rape
- Murder
- Transgenders/transexuals

Transgenders/transexuals fall under the banner of mental illness or homosexuality.

All of the above should not be tolerated in any form. We should have a criminal justice system that recognizes all of those as immoral and illegal.

 

[Calypso]

Diversity doesn't work in a country like America because this is a "melting pot" of race, religion, creed, culture, etc.

Everyone who lives here should learn the language and practice the culture.

If they're not willing to do that, they can go back to where they came from.

Yes . . .

I "completely" agree!!

 

[Nathon Detroit]

Here's one for ya.... (especially you womens rights advocates)

Should we be tolerant of people who advocate violence against women?

 

[PlastikBuddha]

We should strive for tolerance (not necessarily approval) in all things, knowing keenly our own imperfection and limitations. Only when violation and clear and obvious harm (potential or actual) is involved do we have the obligation to go beyond disapproval or censure.

 

[fool]

Tolerate or not....?

- Adultery NO
- Incest No
- Polygamy Yes
- Homosexuality Yes
- Thievery No
- Pedophilia No
- Rape No
- Murder No
- Transgenders/transexuals Yes

Where is the line and how do you draw it?

 

[Nathon Detroit]

We should strive for tolerance (not necessarily approval) in all things

"all things"???

All things??? Really???

Are you sure you don't want to revise that just a bit?

 

[Rusha]

Here's one for ya.... (especially you womens rights advocates)

Should we be tolerant of people who advocate violence against women?

Under free speech, yes. If they carry it out, no. However, I do not believe we should tolerate actual violence against anyone.

FTR, I have absolutely no respect for someone who advocates a woman's right against violence but thinks it is okay for women to participate in violence towards men.

 

[quip]

Tolerance, in the true sense of the word, is not something to regard as positive.

Why's that?

Explain what you mean by "true sense of the word"?

Do you regard divisiveness as positive?

 

[Nathon Detroit]

Under free speech, yes. If they carry it out, no. However, I do not believe we should tolerate actual violence against anyone.

FTR, I have absolutely no respect for someone who advocates a woman's right against violence but thinks it is okay for women to participate in violence towards men.

So you believe it should be legal to insight violence against other humans?

Does that mean a person should have the right to attempt to talk another person into murdering their spouse?

 

[DocJohnson]

Why's that?

Do you regard divisiveness as positive?

What does one have to do with the other?

 

[quip]

What does one have to do with the other?

Intolerance lends itself to a divisive mind-set...just seeing where you stand on the issue.

Now answer my questions.

 

[Rusha]

So you believe it should be legal to insight violence against other humans?

No ... I was speaking literally as in doing the actual act.

Does that mean a person should have the right to attempt to talk another person into murdering their spouse?

No I don't. That would make a person a conspirator in the crime. However, I sometimes think people take some comments to the extreme.

Example: Someone being irate because his wife burnt the bacon stating out loud "Sometimes I just want to slap the stupid out of her" is completely different than stating "I think you should kill my wife".

 

[DocJohnson]

Intolerance lends itself to a divisive mind-set...just seeing where you stand on the issue.

No, it does not.

Now answer my questions.

tol⋅er⋅ate [verb] - to allow the existence, presence, practice, or act of without prohibition or hindrance; permit; support; to endure without repugnance; put up with.

This means you have to be able to tolerate anything and everything under the sun. I, for one, cannot and will not do that.

 

[quip]

No, it does not.

ummmm...yes it does. Have you seen the news lately?

tol⋅er⋅ate [verb] - to allow the existence, presence, practice, or act of without prohibition or hindrance; permit; support; to endure without repugnance; put up with.

di⋅vi⋅sive [adjective] - forming or expressing division or distribution; creating dissension or discord.

These two terms have absolutely nothing to do with one another.

errr..okay? :idunno:

So, tell me why tolerance is not to be viewed as positive?

 

[Nathon Detroit]

No I don't. That would make a person a conspirator in the crime. However, I sometimes think people take some comments to the extreme.

So, if a rap song states, "take your ho and throw her to the ground." (or something similar)

Should that be tolerated?

Lets assume further that somebody actually does throws their girlfriend to the ground and later credits the song for their inspiration. Does that effect how you would feel about any of this?

 

[PlastikBuddha]

"all things"???

All things??? Really???

Are you sure you don't want to revise that just a bit?

I qualified it immediately: "...knowing keenly our own imperfection and limitations. Only when violation and clear and obvious harm (potential or actual) is involved do we have the obligation to go beyond disapproval or censure."

 

[DocJohnson]

ummmm...yes it does. Have you seen the news lately?

You're confused.

Do you tolerate those who rape, murder, steal, lie, cheat, etc.?

I sure don't.

The Law doesn't either.

 

[quip]

So, if a rap song states, "take your ho and throw her to the ground." (or something similar)

Should that be tolerated?

Lets assume further that somebody actually does throws their girlfriend to the ground and later credits the song for their inspiration. Does that effect how you would feel about any of this?

Are you implying that if one tolerates the former, by default, one tolerates the latter?

 

[bybee]

America

America

The TheologyOnline.com TOPIC OF THE DAY for November 6th, 2009 09:32 AM

toldailytopic: Tolerance and diversity, where and how should we draw the line? (what types of things shouldn't be tolerated, etc.)

Take the topic above and run with it! Slice it, dice it, give us your general thoughts about it. Everyday there will be a new TOL Topic of the Day.
If you want to make suggestions for the Topic of the Day send a Tweet to @toldailytopic or @theologyonline or send it to us via Facebook.

In a counry such as America the melting pot of many nations, toleration of culteral diversity, up to a point, is necessary. The law of the land must be obeyed by all citizens and would be citizens. In public spaces the law must be enforced. And even in our homes certain laws must be obeyed. Multiple spouses is against our law. The keeping of slaves is against our law. Violent abuse of another citizen is against our law and so on. This is a mine-field if one goes too far in either direction. bybee

 

[quip]

You're confused.

Do you tolerate those who rape, murder, steal, lie, cheat, etc.?

I sure don't.

The Law doesn't either.

You're tossing red herrings.

I stated intolerance lends itself to divisive thinking.

Since you believe that tolerance is not a positive...do you consider intolerance a positive?