AbsolutePunk.net
   Username
Password
 
Share
12:38 PM on 11/18/12 
#1
Offline
User Info.
RyanPm40
Ryan
RyanPm40's Avatar
NH
Male - 22 Years Old
I recently read an interesting article. It is rather conservative, just as a warning.

http://townhall.com/columnists/chris... ce/page/full/

Anyways, I just think it brought up a lot of good points. How many times, nowadays, is the word "intolerance" thrown at a person in an intolerant manner?

Ronald Reagan had a great quote: “The frustrating thing is that those who are attacking religion claim they are doing it in the name of tolerance, freedom and open-mindedness. Question: Isn’t the real truth that they are intolerant of religion? They refuse to tolerate its importance in our lives.”

Another noteable quote from the article is: "This is what the practice of intolerance in the name of tolerance produces: a hatred and intolerance toward those who simply disagree with a liberal position. Whatever happened to true tolerance -- one where we agree to disagree with those who have an opposing view? True tolerance means coexisting with those whom you may disagree."

I feel like nowadays words like "intolerant" and "ignorant" are thrown around too easily. I believe that "intolerant" is usually thrown around in a hateful, insulting way to people, which is kind of ironic since the point of "tolerance" is for everyone to respect one another. Kind of contradictory . I just find the words rather overused and more often than not used in situations where it really isn't appropriate. Hate breeds hate, and shouting such accusatory remarks back and forth between political parties only further divides our already heavily divided US.

Now, I am not this author, and I'm not saying that liberals are the only ones guilty of using such words. I'm not saying that the words aren't used correctly at times, but I just get really uneasy around them being thrown around so easily nowadays by your more uninformed college/high-school age kind of people (And even a few politicians here and there)

Thoughts? Is the word "intolerant" thrown around a bit too easily nowadays?

(Let's have a serious discussion, people, and not just make a hate-fest for whatever political party you disagree with)

"Not long ago, the word 'tolerance' meant 'bearing or putting up with someone or something not especially liked'. However, now the word has been redefined to 'all values, all beliefs, all lifestyles, all truth claims are equal'. Denying this makes a person 'intolerant', and thus worthy of contempt."[1] (Also, whether your Christian or not, the article I took this quote for, linked by the [1], also raises some interesting points about what tolerance really is nowadays. Agree or disagree, I still find it interesting)
01:13 PM on 11/18/12 
#2
Offline
User Info.
RyanPm40
Ryan
RyanPm40's Avatar
NH
Male - 22 Years Old
The bias in that article was a little overwhelming

Oh yeah, I'm definitely not refuting that. I'm saying to look at it in a way where it isn't necessarily about liberals, but about anyone who uses the word "intolerant" regularly, regardless of their views. It's kind of interesting to think about how the definition has gotten warped over the years and I'd say it's fair to say that it is misused in a rather negative, contradictory way a lot nowadays. There were just a few quotes in there that really got me thinking a bit.
04:52 PM on 11/18/12 
#3
Offline
User Info.
RyanPm40
Ryan
RyanPm40's Avatar
NH
Male - 22 Years Old
If it's intolerant for me to believe in science and gay marriage then I'm ok with that.

The article doesn't say you are intolerant for believing those things. What makes you intolerant is to hate and be unable to tolerate someone who thinks differently. Whether or not you believe in evolution, for example, is your own business, but to try and belittle somebody's entire religion due to them believing in creationism is nothing but needless hate.
05:05 PM on 11/18/12 
#4
Offline
User Info.
RyanPm40
Ryan
RyanPm40's Avatar
NH
Male - 22 Years Old
What about when said creationist try to teach creationism in schools? Is it intolerant to not let them?

I personally think schools should teach all points of view to leave it up to the student to decide based on their own reasoning process, as long as both are called theories. A teacher shouldn't project his personal opinion to a student, they should just lay out the facts, which is why I think it's bullshit that some professor out there said he wouldn't recommend a student to med school if they don't believe in evolution. I think it's just as intolerant to not let someone teach/learn creationism as it is to not let someone teach/learn evolution. Either one is okay for someone to learn and believe in, to me (I personally believe in a mix of both). But, that's just me, and I get that others think otherwise.

However, either one is okay to believe in. That's where tolerance comes in. The intolerant thing would be to hate on that person for their view and to consider them less than you or less deserving of something (like med school, as mentioned in the above example) than you.
06:22 PM on 11/18/12 
#5
Offline
User Info.
RyanPm40
Ryan
RyanPm40's Avatar
NH
Male - 22 Years Old
There is a huge difference in the theory of creationism, which when tested should be discarded by any credible method, and evolution which about as solid of a theory as you can get. I would go as far as to say evolution is a fact at this point. There are many things to be taught at school, why waste time on something that in all likelihood is not true? Why not learn the theories behind creationism at home? Or maybe have an elective class that covers creationism in some way.
Also I can see a lot of issues arising with teaching creationism and people who believe it taking it personally when other students question it. It would be a nightmare for schools. Where evolution really shouldn't offend anyone and there's no reason to take it personal, its a reality of life. In short, evolution is a huge part of biology, its very scientific, and as such belongs in schools. Creationism could maybe fit in some philosophy class or something, but because of the personal nature of the subject for some students it should probably be left out altogether.

Oh yeah, I never said that it should be something taught in a science class. But, History classes teach about random religions all the time, including Christianity, and they teach it in a way where it doesn't imply that any single religion being taught is true (thus eliminating offending people), it is taught that these religions are beliefs. Why can't creationism be approached in a similar way? I fail to see how it's offensive to have a lecture saying, "This is what some people believe, but it hasn't been factually backed up," explain it, and then go on.

I really don't care that creationism isn't really taught in schools, considering there can't really ever be any factual evidence to back it up, but to just outright call it untrue and to imply that someone isn't intelligent for believing in it is where problems with tolerance begin to emerge. Like I said, I believe in the form of tolerance where people should just learn to live with others who believe differently and respect those views, rather than this new definition that implies that everything must be equal and we all must agree on the same views, if that makes any sense?



NEWS, MUSIC & MORE
Search News
Release Dates
Exclusives
Best New Music
Articles
CONNECT
Submit News
Forums
Contests
Mobile Version
AP.net Logos
HIDDEN TREASURES
AbsolutePunk Podcast
Free Music
Sports Forum
Technology Forum
Recommendations
INFORMATION
Advertising
Contact Us
Copyright Policy
Terms of Service
Privacy Policy
FOLLOW
Twitter | Facebook | RSS
AP.net Podcast on iTunes
UnderTheGun
Purevolume
Chorus.fm | @jason_tate