Argue against "If you won't tolerate my intolerance, you're a hypocrite."

[Inner_Stickler]

@Miller

Huh?

The Benham brothers getting their HGTV show cancelled due to unabashed homophobia, probably.

[Happy_Fun_Ball]

@Velocity

The argument often isn’t that “You’re intolerant of my intolerance”, but, rather. that “You’re guilty of intolerance, too, but a different kind.”
For instance, some of the most racist people I’ve ever known have been liberals,

Do tell.

[Trinopus]

@Velocity

. . . For instance, some of the most racist people I’ve ever known have been liberals,

Tricky, given that racism is contrary to liberal beliefs.

Check the thread on “Is ISIL Islamic?”

Maybe the people you’re thinking of were liberal in other regards, or thought themselves to be liberals. Or, it’s just possible, you’re using the word “racist” to include people who support, say, affirmative action in employment and educational opportunity, in which case you will be debated.

[Velocity]

One thing many people with such an attitude fail to understand is that they come across to listeners as just as hateful and negative as the people they criticize, regardless of the validity, logic, rationality or reason of their arguments.

To paraphrase someone, they may say, for instance: “I hate how intolerant people are so hateful. They’re so negative. They’re a cancer on society. They’re so homophobic. Intolerant people hold back progress. They’re so uneducated. They’re so stubborn. I hate them. They’re stuck in the 1800s. I hate intolerant people with every fiber of my being. Intolerant people are hateful. Intolerant people are the scum of the earth. They’re so blind. I hate being around them. I want nothing to do with them. We would be so much better off as a society without them.”

What such a person thinks they just said: “I just articulated my rational, factual, educated and reasonable views about how intolerance is bad for society, how intolerant people hinder progress, and how we would be better off without intolerance or intolerant people, and how we can move forward with enlightened progress for a better society.”

What a listener actually hears: “This person is negative, negative, negative, negative, negative, negative, negative, negative, negative, negative, hostile, hostile, hostile, hostile, hostile, hostile hostile, hostile, hostile, hostile, hostile, hostile.”

[Cheesesteak]

@astorian

Twenty years ago, it was gays who were saying “We just want to be left alone.” Today, it’s Christians who are increasingly saying “We just want to be left alone.”

If you want to be left alone, don’t open a business where you invite random members of the public to come in and buy stuff. If you open your business to the general public, you lose (some of) your right to pick and choose who you do business with.

That ‘some of’ represents protected classes of people. Groups of people historically subjected to specific and vigorous discrimination by businesses ostensibly open to the general public.

[kaylasdad99]

@Velocity

One thing many people with such an attitude fail to understand is that they come across to listeners as just as hateful and negative as the people they criticize, regardless of the validity, logic, rationality or reason of their arguments.

To paraphrase someone, they may say, for instance: “I hate how intolerant people are so hateful. They’re so negative. They’re a cancer on society. They’re so homophobic. Intolerant people hold back progress. They’re so uneducated. They’re so stubborn. I hate them. They’re stuck in the 1800s. I hate intolerant people with every fiber of my being. Intolerant people are hateful. Intolerant people are the scum of the earth. They’re so blind. I hate being around them. I want nothing to do with them. We would be so much better off as a society without them.”

What such a person thinks they just said: “I just articulated my rational, factual, educated and reasonable views about how intolerance is bad for society, how intolerant people hinder progress, and how we would be better off without intolerance or intolerant people, and how we can move forward with enlightened progress for a better society.”

What a listener actually hears: “This person is negative, negative, negative, negative, negative, negative, negative, negative, negative, negative, hostile, hostile, hostile, hostile, hostile, hostile hostile, hostile, hostile, hostile, hostile, hostile.”

Bruce Tinsley? Is that you?

[Little_Nemo]

I posted this before but I’ll say it again for the zombie readers.

Here’s the rule. It’s simple.

You have to tolerate people who are okay, even if you don’t like them. You do not have to tolerate people who are wrong.

People who are okay and who you must tolerate:

1. People who are a different race than yours.
2. People who are a different religion than yours.
3. People who are a different ethnicity than yours.
4. People who are a different gender than yours.
5. People who are a different sexual orientation than yours.

People who are wrong and who you do not have to tolerate:

1. Criminals
2. Terrorists
3. Dictators
4. Pedophiles
5. Bigots