Friday, May 07, 2004

TOLERANCE IS NOT ENOUGH

Email from a reader

It is fascinating to watch PC linguistic gymnastics at work. "Tolerance", "diversity" and "acceptance" are three magic words the PC crowd claim for their own. For example only some kinds of diversity are p.c., other types are definitely not. A diversity of opinions on the value of the three magic words is definitely not.

Nonetheless, of late, the PC crowd haven't been quite happy with 'tolerance'. For example the gay activists now demand acceptance of their "lifestyle" (as if they did nothing else) not mere tolerance. The idea is that "live and let live" is insufficient so "anti-gay" institutions and groups, like the Church, must not merely "tolerate" homosexuality but embrace it and endorse it, thus "accepting" it. Presumably the next step after 'acceptance' is compulsion. The Church, which has no power to force gays to do or not do anything, is thus wrong for promulgating it's traditional warnings against homosexuality (e.g here) and ipso facto criminally implicated with 'homophobic violence', something the Church strongly opposes.

Similarly Australian p.c. commentator and lightweight sociologist Hugh Mackay is arguing that Australians must move beyond multiculturalism and 'mere tolerance' of ethnic diversity to outright 'curiosity' about other ethnic groups. Presumably curiosity will increase community bonds, lead to greater acceptance and not, as the old adage says, kill the cat.

The push for "acceptance" is quite totalitarian. It denies that there can be legitimate grounds to "agree to disagree" on issues of import to the grand viziers of political correctitude. For example, freedom of religion was never based on the assumption that Protestants should accept, love or have the slightest interest in Catholicism or vice versa. Merely that for the good of all, all faiths are free to pursue their affairs independently and respect the right of other citizens, of different faith, to pursue theirs. To the PCs, this is at best merely tolerance, if barely that.

Rather than engaging in a tussle with the PC thought police over ownership or use of the three magic words, dissidents should merely emphasise two of their own: Manners and respect. For someone with good manners and respect for the individual rights of others, the magic words are rendered unnecessary. For someone without manners and respect, the three magic words are a meaningless travesty.

This writer makes similar points.


REAL TOLERANCE

An account of what REAL tolerance is like is to be found here. Excerpt:

"I don't believe in Santa Claus, but I'm not going to sue somebody for singing a Ho-Ho-Ho song in December. I don't agree with Darwin, but I didn't go out and hire a lawyer when my high school teacher explained his theory of evolution.

Life, liberty or your pursuit of happiness will not be endangered because someone says a 30-second prayer before a football game. So what's the big deal? It's not like somebody is up there reading the entire book of Acts. They're just talking to a God they believe in, and asking him to grant safety to the players on the field and the fans going home from the game.

No comments: