One issue that has cropped up recently in mainstream society and also in furry circles is the plaintive cry for tolerance from an intolerant oppressor.
Sorry, but no.
One one hand if some group has unpopular views (like say Mormons wanting polygamous marriage in a country whose legal system does not support it) but that group isn't persecuting others, then sure they can claim for some tolerance.
But on the other hand we have groups like the alt-right and the furry raiders who openly call for intolerance of others groups, yet have the nerve when criticized to demand tolerance for themselves. That's just not how things work.
Which brings up a second point that disagreeing with someone is not intolerance (or persecution, etc). It is actually the other side of the coin of free speech. People are allowed to say what they want (as long as it's not a crime such as blackmail, death threats, etc) and other people are free to not agree, even to freely speak that disagreement (as long as it is not in the form of a death threat, etc).
And none of this is intolerance, or persecution, or any of that. Not agreeing with intolerant bigots is not intolerance. Intolerance is in a whole higher category than that. When we are talking about groups like the alt-right who want to revoke the voting rights of people whose existence they don't tolerate, or furry raiders threatening to harm other convention goers, that's not the same thing as saying "hey, woah, that's not okay".
| Viewed: |
9 times |
| Added: |
6 years, 12 months ago
21 Apr 2017 22:22 CEST
|
|
|
