NationStates Jolt Archive

The intolerant flourish because we are so tolerant, they use it against us and make our world a living hell. And what do we do? Nothing. If we do something then lefties and PC jump at you calling you a nazi. And only reason they can is because its people like you who run things, not people who they defend.
I mean there are people PROTESTING "Let them rest in peace" law. Saying that while, yes, it protects families of dead soldiers from Phelps' idiots, it limits their right of assembly. And right of free speech.
But I have not seen them protesting against Phelps putting families of dead soldiers through living hell. Or when Phelps drove that poor gay woman out of two jobs before she had to flee the state. No one protested that. Why? Because intolerant Phelps would make THEIR life a living hell. So they protest when tolernat people try to defend themselves.

Or when countries like Saudi Arabia and Iran protest when France wont let muslim women wear face veil on official document pictures.
Aside from fact that anyone and his granma could be in the picture. Aside that it would be both legal and public safety risk. Aside common sense.
They protest religious freedoms. Seeking it for themselves. How are western people treated in Saudi? Well woman dressing as her culture alows it (in say a mini skirt) would be arrested. And if she was raped it would be her own fault. If you walked around with a Bible and people could see it, you would get arrested and your bible burned. Any bible found in Saudi gets burned. If Muslim man tries to convert to Christianity... he gets killed.
But no one attacks that. No one asks for equal religions from countries where Muslims rule. Why? Because its dangerous. So PC groups again attack France for being intolerant.

When a powerful Islamic cleric in Australia goes public and says that western women who get raped are to blame, and not men who rape them. Because you see they are not covered like Muslim women. because "its not fault of a dog if dog runs away with meat you left uncvered before its eyes" then there is NO outcry from Muslim community. And outcry from Australians dies off in a week and this guy is STILL preaching in largest Australian mosque. And young men are listening to him. When this happened Http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sydney_gang_rapes guys acctually defended themselves with "clash of cultures, we thought they wanted it because they were so lightly dressed" And then when someone says "I'm worried of letting my teenage daughter go near Lebanese" he is called racist.

How long do we have to tolerate intolerant, and those that would clearly not tolerate anything we do if they were in power. Why do we have to listen to "Its freedom of speech." or "freedom of religion" or "cultural diversity"?
Why is it wrong of me if I say that there should be a law against Fred Phelps and that he shouldn't be alowed to preach any religion. Why is it wrong of me if I say that I think no Muslim should be alowed to immigrate in my country unless he says he is against terrorism and extremism and is willing to integrate, and we can deport him if he dont?

You can:
1. Ignore what other people think and do what you want to do
2. Wait for a major catastrophe to prove you right

1) we are not in the place to tell nations to be tolerant nor is anyone in the place to tell a nation how it should do anything at all

2) being intolerant becomes a crime when people feel threatened by it (hence why you will be arrested for shouting racial slur in a public area)

3) comparing two of anything especially nations is completely ludicrous you do not hold a retarded child to the same expectations as a child genius

4) there was an outcry over the clerics preaching in fact he was forced to apologise the fact that you never bothered to see this undermines your whole argument

Thus I will put my view across and the view of most nations in the world: I don’t give a rats arse about what some intolerant dick thinks as long as he isn’t scaring or hurting people it doesn’t matter in the slightest he is open to my criticism but that is all

Now to put this into national level: I don’t give a rats arse what some nations does in its borders as long as it stays in its borders

2. Wait for a major catastrophe to prove you right

oh lets not do this whole argument again shall we

oh lets not do this whole argument again shall we
*shrugs* That's fine with me.

*shrugs* That's fine with me.

than all is good this thread is over and we will never have to debate this ever again, full stop not followed by any capitol letter >.

Stupid jolt! Double post...

Intolerance to discrimination is not the same as intolerance from blind ignorance.

Refusing top tolerate the actions of one that interfere with the well-being and liberty of another is not intolerance.

Intolerance is refusing to allow someone freedom.

Intolerance of lack of freedom is natural.

Intolerance of someone because they convert to another religion is ignorance.

Tolerating discrimination, sexism, racism or anything of that like, is the same as sanctioning them because you're not speaking out. Being intolerant of these things says you have principles because on the one hand, you're tolerant of other's beliefs, religion and culture, but not of that which deprives another of life, liberty and freedom.

To the OP...

we need paragraphs!

1) we are not in the place to tell nations to be tolerant nor is anyone in the place to tell a nation how it should do anything at all
How about genocide?

2) being intolerant becomes a crime when people feel threatened by it (hence why you will be arrested for shouting racial slur in a public area)
OK

3) comparing two of anything especially nations is completely ludicrous you do not hold a retarded child to the same expectations as a child genius
How are any nations "retarded"?

4) there was an outcry over the clerics preaching in fact he was forced to apologise the fact that you never bothered to see this undermines your whole argument
Yes

This thread is intolerable. :(

as a secular humanist I used to tolerate everyone.....I'm starting to rethink my beliefs....

The intolerant flourish because we are so tolerant, they use it against us and make our world a living hell. And what do we do? Nothing. If we do something then lefties and PC jump at you calling you a nazi. And only reason they can is because its people like you who run things, not people who they defend.
I mean there are people PROTESTING "Let them rest in peace" law. Saying that while, yes, it protects families of dead soldiers from Phelps' idiots, it limits their right of assembly. And right of free speech.
But I have not seen them protesting against Phelps putting families of dead soldiers through living hell. Or when Phelps drove that poor gay woman out of two jobs before she had to flee the state. No one protested that. Why? Because intolerant Phelps would make THEIR life a living hell. So they protest when tolernat people try to defend themselves.

If you haven't seen people protesting Fred Phelps's actions, you've been wearing blinders. Every time he shows up at a funeral, crowds of people gather to stand between him and the deceased's family and friends, to wave signs contradicting his hideous message, and to rev motorcycle engines whenever he speaks.

Or when countries like Saudi Arabia and Iran protest when France wont let muslim women wear face veil on official document pictures.
Aside from fact that anyone and his granma could be in the picture. Aside that it would be both legal and public safety risk. Aside common sense.
They protest religious freedoms. Seeking it for themselves. How are western people treated in Saudi? Well woman dressing as her culture alows it (in say a mini skirt) would be arrested. And if she was raped it would be her own fault. If you walked around with a Bible and people could see it, you would get arrested and your bible burned. Any bible found in Saudi gets burned. If Muslim man tries to convert to Christianity... he gets killed.
But no one attacks that. No one asks for equal religions from countries where Muslims rule. Why? Because its dangerous. So PC groups again attack France for being intolerant.

Where on earth do you come up with the idea that "no one" thinks religious tolerance would be a good idea for Middle Eastern countries as well? Lots of people feel and openly state that laws in fundamentalist countries are often insanely prohibitive, but the simple fact is that unless you live in a particular country, you have no direct ability to change anything about that country. Stating your opinion is really all you can do.

When a powerful Islamic cleric in Australia goes public and says that western women who get raped are to blame, and not men who rape them. Because you see they are not covered like Muslim women. because "its not fault of a dog if dog runs away with meat you left uncvered before its eyes" then there is NO outcry from Muslim community. And outcry from Australians dies off in a week and this guy is STILL preaching in largest Australian mosque. And young men are listening to him. When this happened Http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sydney_gang_rapes guys acctually defended themselves with "clash of cultures, we thought they wanted it because they were so lightly dressed" And then when someone says "I'm worried of letting my teenage daughter go near Lebanese" he is called racist.

Again, what rock are you living under? That idiot sparked tremendous outrage from Muslims around the world. And yes, someone who was worried about letting his daughter go near any Lebanese people would be racist. So what?

How long do we have to tolerate intolerant, and those that would clearly not tolerate anything we do if they were in power. Why do we have to listen to "Its freedom of speech." or "freedom of religion" or "cultural diversity"?
Why is it wrong of me if I say that there should be a law against Fred Phelps and that he shouldn't be alowed to preach any religion. Why is it wrong of me if I say that I think no Muslim should be alowed to immigrate in my country unless he says he is against terrorism and extremism and is willing to integrate, and we can deport him if he dont?

You're wrong because in this country, we believe in freedom of speech and freedom of religion. Those concepts are absolutely worthless when you change them into "freedom of speech provided you say only things I agree with" and "freedom of religion provided you believe in only things I approve of."

The 'liberal' really aren't any more tolerant, they just have a wider range of things they consider acceptable. When a 'liberal' says "You can believe whatever you want." They only mean that if you agree with the statement to begin with. If your beliefs are not compatable with that at the very least, a 'tolerant' person will often be just as aggressive and intolerant as someone they brand as intolerant of others actions and beliefs.

The intolerant flourish because we are so tolerant, they use it against us and make our world a living hell. And what do we do? Nothing. If we do something then lefties...
I stopped reading there.

Well, to be kinda pedantic, one cannot be tolerant without being intolerant. The two go hand in hand.

To state it simply, if there is something you tolerate, then there must, conversely, be something you do not tolerate.

Which admittedly doesn't help the debate much.

If we are not tolerant of the intolerant, then we too are intolerant.

They protest religious freedoms. Seeking it for themselves. How are western people treated in Saudi? Well woman dressing as her culture alows it (in say a mini skirt) would be arrested. And if she was raped it would be her own fault. If you walked around with a Bible and people could see it, you would get arrested and your bible burned. Any bible found in Saudi gets burned. If Muslim man tries to convert to Christianity... he gets killed.
But no one attacks that. No one asks for equal religions from countries where Muslims rule. Why? Because its dangerous. So PC groups again attack France for being intolerant.

When a powerful Islamic cleric in Australia goes public and says that western women who get raped are to blame, and not men who rape them. Because you see they are not covered like Muslim women. because "its not fault of a dog if dog runs away with meat you left uncvered before its eyes" then there is NO outcry from Muslim community. And outcry from Australians dies off in a week and this guy is STILL preaching in largest Australian mosque. And young men are listening to him. When this happened Http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sydney_gang_rapes guys acctually defended themselves with "clash of cultures, we thought they wanted it because they were so lightly dressed" And then when someone says "I'm worried of letting my teenage daughter go near Lebanese" he is called racist.

That is not true. There are so many womans rights groups against this. And Ginger Spice.

Now to put this into national level: I don’t give a rats arse what some nations does in its borders as long as it stays in its borders

Adolph Hitler, Josef Stalin, Mao Tse-Tung and Pol Pot thank you for your support.

The intolerant flourish because we are so tolerant, they use it against us and make our world a living hell. And what do we do? Nothing. If we do something then lefties and PC jump at you calling you a nazi. And only reason they can is because its people like you who run things, not people who they defend.
I mean there are people PROTESTING "Let them rest in peace" law. Saying that while, yes, it protects families of dead soldiers from Phelps' idiots, it limits their right of assembly. And right of free speech.
But I have not seen them protesting against Phelps putting families of dead soldiers through living hell. Or when Phelps drove that poor gay woman out of two jobs before she had to flee the state. No one protested that. Why? Because intolerant Phelps would make THEIR life a living hell. So they protest when tolernat people try to defend themselves.

Or when countries like Saudi Arabia and Iran protest when France wont let muslim women wear face veil on official document pictures.
Aside from fact that anyone and his granma could be in the picture. Aside that it would be both legal and public safety risk. Aside common sense.
They protest religious freedoms. Seeking it for themselves. How are western people treated in Saudi? Well woman dressing as her culture alows it (in say a mini skirt) would be arrested. And if she was raped it would be her own fault. If you walked around with a Bible and people could see it, you would get arrested and your bible burned. Any bible found in Saudi gets burned. If Muslim man tries to convert to Christianity... he gets killed.
But no one attacks that. No one asks for equal religions from countries where Muslims rule. Why? Because its dangerous. So PC groups again attack France for being intolerant.

When a powerful Islamic cleric in Australia goes public and says that western women who get raped are to blame, and not men who rape them. Because you see they are not covered like Muslim women. because "its not fault of a dog if dog runs away with meat you left uncvered before its eyes" then there is NO outcry from Muslim community. And outcry from Australians dies off in a week and this guy is STILL preaching in largest Australian mosque. And young men are listening to him. When this happened Http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sydney_gang_rapes guys acctually defended themselves with "clash of cultures, we thought they wanted it because they were so lightly dressed" And then when someone says "I'm worried of letting my teenage daughter go near Lebanese" he is called racist.

How long do we have to tolerate intolerant, and those that would clearly not tolerate anything we do if they were in power. Why do we have to listen to "Its freedom of speech." or "freedom of religion" or "cultural diversity"?
Why is it wrong of me if I say that there should be a law against Fred Phelps and that he shouldn't be alowed to preach any religion. Why is it wrong of me if I say that I think no Muslim should be alowed to immigrate in my country unless he says he is against terrorism and extremism and is willing to integrate, and we can deport him if he dont?

The answer is a true Christian is tolerant of others. A true Christian teaches by example. A true Christian doesn't live to criticize others but to be an example for others. A true Christian is humble, not seeking political or economic power. (the meek shall inherit the world) A true Christian is everything the "religious right" is not. Remember who Jesus criticized most? The Religious Right of his day. The people that had the political influence to demand a trial in the middle of the night during a holiday. The people who were intolerant of those with other beliefs. The people who were intolerant to those of other cultures. The people who thought they were the only ones that had the "truth". The people who thought their way was the only way and all others were wrong in their beliefs. The people who had their list of rules so strict that no one could accomplish them (although the "religious right" thought they were accomplishing them) but no one else was.

When Paul walked into Athens he did not made demands of the Greeks to change, he used their beliefs to explain the Christian way to them. This is how a Christian is to spread the knowledge of Christianity. Not through demands or intolerance of beliefs or actions of others, but through an understanding of the beliefs and actions of others.

I challenge you to find anywhere in the Bible where a Christian is to be intolerant or demanding or critical of the beliefs of other others.

If they're not breaking the law, they have every right to their opinions.

political correctness is slowly destroying the U.S.A.

why should anyone give a damn if someone pisses off a *democratic* gov't?

it is YOUR gov't after all.

if yer Pagan, some christislamojewish-centric fool starts invading your sanity by not leaving you alone, sue the motherfracker. case is thrown out, remind the lawcourts of the bit of "First Ammendment; ...freedom of religion", take it to federal supreme [tacooos!!!] if you have too.

gay? you have worker rights. civil rights.

left-handed? it sucks, but try under the guise of handicaped, so you can get stuff that will not kill/injure/debilitate a left-hander.
you already work with dangerous stuff made safe for right-handers.

stop bending over and taking it! you want to live this excuse of a life bowing down to idots like that? WHY?!?!?!...

ask yourself this...

"When do -I- get to be happy?"

as for other countries, donate to amnesty international, doctors without borders, nature company, just stop whining about how you can do nothing.

raise a fist and say no!, THAT, brings ears,
Late

I'd make a statement by saying 'fuck Fred Phelps'.

Thank you.

I don't raise a fist just incase Dubya thinks it's a wmd and invades my house. But there are times when we're over tolerant, the most depressing story of the week in the UK was of a criminal escaping justice by fleeing dressed in a full length burka and using his sisters passport.

oooh I had completely forgotten about this thread

How about genocide?

I really don't care so long as it doesn't spill over borders

How are any nations "retarded"?

you can't compare Saudi Arabia to France its not a fair comparison at all

Adolph Hitler, Josef Stalin, Mao Tse-Tung and Pol Pot thank you for your support.

yay! (apart from that Poland Invading Hitler and that Finland invading Stalin)

I think I just visited Fred Phelps WBC official website, either that or it was an amazing piece of satire. Do they really think the Swedish royal family are a bunch of incestous zoophiliacs? and that God hates American, Canada and Sweden? Not to mention the fan episode of South Park they did.

1) we are not in the place to tell nations to be tolerant nor is anyone in the place to tell a nation how it should do anything at all

2) being intolerant becomes a crime when people feel threatened by it (hence why you will be arrested for shouting racial slur in a public area)

3) comparing two of anything especially nations is completely ludicrous you do not hold a retarded child to the same expectations as a child genius

4) there was an outcry over the clerics preaching in fact he was forced to apologise the fact that you never bothered to see this undermines your whole argument

Thus I will put my view across and the view of most nations in the world: I don’t give a rats arse about what some intolerant dick thinks as long as he isn’t scaring or hurting people it doesn’t matter in the slightest he is open to my criticism but that is all

Now to put this into national level: I don’t give a rats arse what some nations does in its borders as long as it stays in its borders

1: So its ok if someone kills milions of mionrity people in their own country as long as its majority of their own country doing it?

2: Acctually no. I feel threatened when people burn my country's flag and shout that we should all be killed because we disagree with them. But aparently that goes under freedom of speech. They are not arrested.

3: I would also not let retard child decide fate of milions.

4: Yes there was an outcry. From australians. Responce from Muslims from australia came over 24 hours later. and first responce, over internet was generaly in support. See I acctually DID folow that up. Also I read his full "apology" which basicly states: "I'm sorry people were offended. I'm sorry I offended you. I don't really think I said anything wrong, you just misunderstood me.
People like you, who don't care what genocidal maniacs do untill its too late give people like Hitler chance to come to power and start wars.

If you haven't seen people protesting Fred Phelps's actions, you've been wearing blinders. Every time he shows up at a funeral, crowds of people gather to stand between him and the deceased's family and friends, to wave signs contradicting his hideous message, and to rev motorcycle engines whenever he speaks.



Where on earth do you come up with the idea that "no one" thinks religious tolerance would be a good idea for Middle Eastern countries as well? Lots of people feel and openly state that laws in fundamentalist countries are often insanely prohibitive, but the simple fact is that unless you live in a particular country, you have no direct ability to change anything about that country. Stating your opinion is really all you can do.



Again, what rock are you living under? That idiot sparked tremendous outrage from Muslims around the world. And yes, someone who was worried about letting his daughter go near any Lebanese people would be racist. So what?



You're wrong because in this country, we believe in freedom of speech and freedom of religion. Those concepts are absolutely worthless when you change them into "freedom of speech provided you say only things I agree with" and "freedom of religion provided you believe in only things I approve of."

1: Yes I've seen protests against Phelps. Tell me exactly how it helped poor gay woman who lost her job and was run out of her town and had her life ruined by his intolerance? I dont see anyone trying to stop that.
2: Scary thing is that alot of Muslims don't see anything wrong with it. They think its normal every religion but theirs is prohibited. They want full rights for themselves when out of Muslim countries but don't see why anyone else should have them. If you don't belive me check what Soviestan wrote in reply to me asking him that question.
3: There was outrage, and there was also huge amount of people praising him for saying the "truth" to infidels.
4: How about "say whatever you want untill you are ruining someone's life and limiting somoenes freedoms?

I stopped reading there.

Thats ok, I have about as good opinion about left wing fanatics as I have about right wing ones. I think they are both morons.

I think I just visited Fred Phelps WBC official website, either that or it was an amazing piece of satire. Do they really think the Swedish royal family are a bunch of incestous zoophiliacs? and that God hates American, Canada and Sweden? Not to mention the fan episode of South Park they did.

They are REALLY serious. Read up on them in Wikipedia. its enough to turn anyones stomach

You tolerate the intolerant because nobody is qualified to judge whose opinion matters and whose doesn't.

If some cleric wants to say that rape victims brought it on themselves, that's ignorant crap, but he's entitled to believe it. That's what freedom of speech/freedom of religion is. It means EVERYBODy gets it, even the ones most people find unsavory.

And if, as a result, some guy is afraid to let his daughter near Lebanese as a result, that's not racism, that's playing it safe. When you don't know who listens to the idiot cleric and who doesn't, you play the odds as best you can to keep safe.

If freedoms in some foreign country are drastically limited and they protest something you do because it "limits personal freedom of religion," ignore them. That's hypocrisy. They do have a right to say it, but you also have a right to say "piss off." That's freedom of speech.

Human beings are expected to use rational judgement. If the people of Arabis are massively oppressed, it's up to them to turn it around. We had to do it in our history. We handled it. When they're tired enough of oppression, they'll revolt. It's that simple. Social change comes from within.

And no, saying that what goes on in another country is their own problem is not the same as supporting Hitler, Mao Tse Tung or anyone else like that. We use rational judgement. There is a point at which we can say "Okay that's crossing the line, time to get the military moving." Being able to make that call doesn't give us the right to jump in at any little internal strife.

You tolerate the intolerant because nobody is qualified to judge whose opinion matters and whose doesn't.

If some cleric wants to say that rape victims brought it on themselves, that's ignorant crap, but he's entitled to believe it. That's what freedom of speech/freedom of religion is. It means EVERYBODy gets it, even the ones most people find unsavory.

And if, as a result, some guy is afraid to let his daughter near Lebanese as a result, that's not racism, that's playing it safe. When you don't know who listens to the idiot cleric and who doesn't, you play the odds as best you can to keep safe.

If freedoms in some foreign country are drastically limited and they protest something you do because it "limits personal freedom of religion," ignore them. That's hypocrisy. They do have a right to say it, but you also have a right to say "piss off." That's freedom of speech.

Human beings are expected to use rational judgement. If the people of Arabis are massively oppressed, it's up to them to turn it around. We had to do it in our history. We handled it. When they're tired enough of oppression, they'll revolt. It's that simple. Social change comes from within.

And no, saying that what goes on in another country is their own problem is not the same as supporting Hitler, Mao Tse Tung or anyone else like that. We use rational judgement. There is a point at which we can say "Okay that's crossing the line, time to get the military moving." Being able to make that call doesn't give us the right to jump in at any little internal strife.

I agree with most of your post. I do think that we let intolerant get away with far too much. and by the time we realise their harmless yelling has grown dangerous, its too late. Don't forget that when Hitler started his speeches. He was called little drummer and no one thought he is serious.
And I agree that there should be a line that cannot be crossed, and then we have to do something. But Call to power claimes that NEVER should we interfere with country as long as what they do is inside their borders. Genocide included. That I think is sick.

yay! (apart from that Poland Invading Hitler and that Finland invading Stalin)

Wait... Poland invaded Hitler? So it was self-defense really when he invaded them...

The intolerant flourish because we are so tolerant, they use it against us and make our world a living hell. And what do we do? Nothing. If we do something then lefties and PC jump at you calling you a nazi. And only reason they can is because its people like you who run things, not people who they defend.
I mean there are people PROTESTING "Let them rest in peace" law. Saying that while, yes, it protects families of dead soldiers from Phelps' idiots, it limits their right of assembly. And right of free speech.
But I have not seen them protesting against Phelps putting families of dead soldiers through living hell. Or when Phelps drove that poor gay woman out of two jobs before she had to flee the state. No one protested that. Why? Because intolerant Phelps would make THEIR life a living hell. So they protest when tolernat people try to defend themselves.

Or when countries like Saudi Arabia and Iran protest when France wont let muslim women wear face veil on official document pictures.
Aside from fact that anyone and his granma could be in the picture. Aside that it would be both legal and public safety risk. Aside common sense.
They protest religious freedoms. Seeking it for themselves. How are western people treated in Saudi? Well woman dressing as her culture alows it (in say a mini skirt) would be arrested. And if she was raped it would be her own fault. If you walked around with a Bible and people could see it, you would get arrested and your bible burned. Any bible found in Saudi gets burned. If Muslim man tries to convert to Christianity... he gets killed.
But no one attacks that. No one asks for equal religions from countries where Muslims rule. Why? Because its dangerous. So PC groups again attack France for being intolerant.

When a powerful Islamic cleric in Australia goes public and says that western women who get raped are to blame, and not men who rape them. Because you see they are not covered like Muslim women. because "its not fault of a dog if dog runs away with meat you left uncvered before its eyes" then there is NO outcry from Muslim community. And outcry from Australians dies off in a week and this guy is STILL preaching in largest Australian mosque. And young men are listening to him. When this happened Http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sydney_gang_rapes guys acctually defended themselves with "clash of cultures, we thought they wanted it because they were so lightly dressed" And then when someone says "I'm worried of letting my teenage daughter go near Lebanese" he is called racist.

How long do we have to tolerate intolerant, and those that would clearly not tolerate anything we do if they were in power. Why do we have to listen to "Its freedom of speech." or "freedom of religion" or "cultural diversity"?
Why is it wrong of me if I say that there should be a law against Fred Phelps and that he shouldn't be alowed to preach any religion. Why is it wrong of me if I say that I think no Muslim should be alowed to immigrate in my country unless he says he is against terrorism and extremism and is willing to integrate, and we can deport him if he dont?

Everyone's intolerant, nazis were intolerant of Jews as commies were intolerant of capitalists, and they're opposite on the spectrum, everyone's intolerant of something, being completly tolerant is impossible. If you are too far to the left or the right you end up doing something evil, centrism is the least evil since they aren't fanatical about the left/right spectrum.

Tolerant is perhaps the wrong word. Tolerate means put up with something you dont like. That we dislike other cultures is taken as a given, when that is not the case. But because that word is used we have to tolerate ramadan, even though no one minds it so its not really tolerating it, and we have to tolerate crazy clerics inciting terrorists, even though it is intolerable.

We should embrace other cultures, but if they do something that is unacceptable in our culture, and they do it in our country, we should not have to tolerate it any more than they tolerate us in their countries.