It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Intolerance is not a bad word! What are you intolerant of?

page: 1
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 03:26 PM
link   

in⋅tol⋅er⋅ance 

–noun
1. lack of toleration; unwillingness or refusal to tolerate or respect contrary opinions or beliefs, persons of different races or backgrounds, etc.
2. incapacity or indisposition to bear or endure: intolerance to heat.
3. abnormal sensitivity or allergy to a food, drug, etc.
4. an intolerant act.

Dictionary.com

I was accused of being hypocritical in another thread because I was intolerant to someone's beliefs on one thread, then asked for tolerance on a different issue on another thread. This got me to thinking. The poster was correct, I was being intolerant in the first instance and I was asking for tolerance in the second instance. Is this hypocritical? No, it is not. There are some things that we humans need to learn to be more tolerant of, but there are plenty to be intolerant of. So here's my list of things that I am absolutely, positively, completely intolerant of:

I am intolerant of inequality, no matter what the justification is.

I am intolerant of injustice, no matter who the victim is or what they have done in the past.

I am intolerant of intentional ignorance and closed mindedness.

I am intolerant of anyone trying to force their religious rules and values on anyone, especially those who do not believe in that religion.

I am intolerant of hate.

So, what are you intolerant of?




posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 03:34 PM
link   
im pretty intolerant of people claiming the moral high ground claiming religios backing even though they clearly ignore most of what their religious text teaches
im also intolerant of people who use the words"liberal", "skeptic", "debunker", and "atheist" as if they were swear words.

also people who the use term communist. 999/1000 its used in a McCarthyistic way (from what i hear)

im also intolerant of jello. it creeps me out.



posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 03:36 PM
link   
Hehe, intolerant of religious people....if, you haven't figured out by now.


Second line, with a smiley face



posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 03:44 PM
link   
I must admit that I am extremely intollerant of close minded people who think they already know something

Therefore I must work at knowing more about nothing at all and then it won't matter to me who is lost



posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 03:44 PM
link   
I'm intolerant of intolerance.

No contradiction there.

Jacob


CX

posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 03:52 PM
link   
I'm intolerant of bad manners and totaly disrespect for another person.

It's unneccessary, rude and ignorant.

CX.



posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 03:53 PM
link   
I'm intolerant of lactose, I just won't stand for it...




posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 04:06 PM
link   
I am intolerant to crazy conservative bat goat squirrels!


[edit on 16-7-2009 by DaMod]



posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 04:10 PM
link   
reply to post by DaMod
 


So it's not just me then.

Phew big relief, thought I was the only one who hated them.



posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 04:46 PM
link   
reply to post by JaxonRoberts
 


I am intolerant of inequality, no matter what the justification is.

I am intolerant of injustice, no matter who the victim is or what they have done in the past.

I am intolerant of intentional ignorance and closed mindedness.

I am intolerant of anyone trying to force their religious rules and values on anyone, especially those who do not believe in that religion.

I am intolerant of hate.


Good thread in my opinion.

Part of my view on intolerance is...

Being intolerant, by definition, breeds ignorance.

You may not understand the hate a person has unless you can tolerate that person and listen to his story.

On the other hand intolerance is a form of protection as it is a way to teach a subgroup in society to abhor certain behavior that may be considered harmful.

For example most Fundamentalist Church Groups in Texas are intolerant in various degrees toward Homosexual behavior. This intolerance "protects" those who may want to venture into that lifestyle would be the reason that this "intolerance" exists. It is a self perpetuating cycle with roots that many would consider Ethical.

Just an example of how intolerance can be used. I am not saying I agree with the Fundamentalist belief system.

Intolerance does function as a powerful formation of each generation in every society with what could be argued as a step between the first two levels of consciousness.

That is the stage of consciousness and ego...Emotional Territorial (Ego) and Bio-Survival (consciousness).
We can allow ourselves to become aware of other areas, in other words expand our consciousness (awareness) , which one can do by simply reading an exciting article as this changes our chemistry and the article then becomes part of us though something called a bio chemical signature.

A bio chemical signature is a chemical release in response to stimuli. A good example is the taught reaction of a frown or a smile. (Heads and Tails.) A baby when scolded is taught intolerance in response to a action such as touching a electrical plug. The child then has a bio chemical signature in relation toward a few things.

1. A earlier bio signature of smile...meaning good job...or more important socially acceptable at this point in time and situation....or a frown ...meaning ...not socially acceptable in this situation at this time.

2. A signature of some form of response from the degree of a smile...or yes bio signature as taught earlier in the childs life.

The learned "degree" stimuli response pattern if taught in conjunction with the sub culture or culture the child is raised around allows the child to explore certain formerly taboo areas.

For example the child who is taught not to touch a electrical outlet may develop an interest in the area of electicity simply because the child may have developed an earlier bio stimuli which gave reward for something that was formerly taboo such as crawling up and down a set of stairs. Once taboo but not now , because of a series of bio chemical responses, the child can climb up and down the stairs. lol

Fun huh!



For example if you read "...Bill almost died..." and you have a experience or "taught" emotional response to the phrase "...Bill almost died .." your body will respond with a bio chemical signature which may or may not reinforce that signature depending upon another earlier bio chemical signature which allows us to chose "either..or" or "heads or tails".

So we are taught to "tolerate" or we are taught "intolerance" via the same method.

Standard Pavlo. Or Skinner pigeons!

Good thread though...good topic.

The most common areas of intolerance shown to us come from National Geographic.

For example their is a tribe in Africa who have a ritual in that one must raise a dog, slaughter the dog and eat the dog even though the dog is viewed as a pet.

It seems repulsive to us but when viewed through the belief system of that particular tribe it makes perfect sense.



posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 05:11 PM
link   
reply to post by JaxonRoberts
 


Actually, yes it is hypocritical to expect something from another you refuse to give yourself. Sorry.



posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 05:18 PM
link   
Well, Jaxon, as you surely know by my participation in one of your threads, I'm intolerant of folks that use the Bible or other religious dogma to persecute others. In parTICular, I'm intolerant of those that cherry-pick one part to use it as a weapon and disregard the rest.

I'm semi-intolerant of labels. I could do without: debunker, truther, shill, disinfo agent, birther, neocon, neolib, as well as a whole host of racial/gender invectives that don't need mentioning.

Soon as I get my spiffy cape back from the laundry, I'll be intolerant of injustice.



posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 05:22 PM
link   
Oh yeah, and koolaide. that stuff just bites.

Canned cheese.

Whiney music.

Constitutional degredation.



posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 05:38 PM
link   
I agree with whiteraven.

Intolerance, of any kind is a form of ignorance.

When you are intolerant of anything, you are casting judgment from a limited perspective, with limited experience, with limited comprehension.

To be intolerant also denotes an emotional attachment.

It takes far greater intellect and wisdom to detach oneself from what their own personal experience and what they know to admit that they are not in any kind of position to cast judgment over any other and practice intolerance in any way, shape, or form.

It is for this reason that crimes are judged by a jury of peers rather than one person. It takes many people from different walks of life, different perspectives, and different experiences to see something clearly from many different angles. Murder is socially unacceptable and therefore criminally unlawful, but that isn't to say that at times, if put in the shoes of the Defendant, that the majority of the Jury wouldn't have done the same thing. In such cases, although as a society we are intolerant to criminals and murderers, as individuals we tolerate some instances where murder is justifiable.

And I also agree with Watcher-In-The-Shadows who stated that you should never ask for what you refuse to concede to another. What is good for the goose is good for the gander...do unto others as you wish them to do to you...and all that sticky jazz. If you are intolerant but ask for tolerance from others, then you are expecting better treatment than you are willing to give in return.

Now if it had been said that "Discrimination is not a bad word!" I would agree.

Discrimination
–noun
1. an act or instance of discriminating.

Discriminating
–adjective
1. differentiating; analytical.
2. noting differences or distinctions with nicety; discerning; perspicacious: a discriminating interpreter of events.
3. having excellent taste or judgment: a discriminating interior designer.
4. differential, as a tariff.
5. possessing distinctive features; capable of being differentiated; discriminative.

Actually one can't be logical or use Scientific Method without discriminating! One can't be moral without discriminating! One can't be an individual without discriminating!

However, somewhere along the way the word "Discrimination" came to denote something very bad and repugnant, and now the word is a loaded word that doesn't mean anything good like the Dictionary definition would show.

Thankfully there is such a thing as a Thesaurus and we can replace the word "Discrimination" in the good sense with the word "Discretion" or "Discernment".

It's funny the way that soundbytes can ruin the English language out of fear of not being Politically Correct.



posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 05:41 PM
link   
reply to post by Watcher-In-The-Shadows
 


OK, let's explore this logic a little further... In order to ask others to tolerate the sexual preferences of others, I must tolerate pedophilia??? Otherwise I'm a hypocrite???

And should I respect your religious views when you make a mockery of mine and insist that I adhere to yours whether I like it or not??? (You in the general sense, not you personally)

Should I tolerate someone and their beliefs when they not only wish to, but are actively trying and succeeding to impinge my equal civil rights?

Sound logical to you???

And to those who are under the impression that I'm intolerant to the religious or spiritual (or atheists for that matter), I'm not at all. I feel that everyone should have the freedom to believe as they wish (or not believe), it's when some wish to force others to accept religious values that they do not share that I become intolerant. Spirituality & Religion should never be used as a weapon or a means to control people. That's an example of hypocrisy as it goes against the core message of the Divine.

[edit on 16-7-2009 by JaxonRoberts]



posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 06:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by JaxonRoberts
reply to post by Watcher-In-The-Shadows
 


OK, let's explore this logic a little further... In order to ask others to tolerate the sexual preferences of others, I must tolerate pedophilia??? Otherwise I'm a hypocrite???

And should I respect your religious views when you make a mockery of mine and insist that I adhere to yours whether I like it or not??? (You in the general sense, not you personally)

Should I tolerate someone and their beliefs when they not only wish to, but are actively trying and succeeding to impinge my equal civil rights?

Sound logical to you???

And to those who are under the impression that I'm intolerant to the religious or spiritual (or atheists for that matter), I'm not at all. I feel that everyone should have the freedom to believe as they wish (or not believe), it's when some wish to force others to accept religious values that they do not share that I become intolerant. Spirituality & Religion should never be used as a weapon or a means to control people. That's an example of hypocrisy as it goes against the core message of the Divine.

[edit on 16-7-2009 by JaxonRoberts]

Why does everyone feel they need to be tolerant? If you find something morally offensive,why should you be tolerant? What is so wrong with moral outrage? Is it creeping political correctness? I find most people expect tolerance when it affects the cross they bear,yet scream in anger at what is morally objectionable to them.
It is human nature to distrust things they don't readily understand....learn to live with it.



posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 06:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by JaxonRoberts
OK, let's explore this logic a little further... In order to ask others to tolerate the sexual preferences of others, I must tolerate pedophilia??? Otherwise I'm a hypocrite???


Well, since you picked such an emotionally charged example, yet again...let's roll with that, shall we?

I think it is safe to say that the majority of well-adjusted individuals in Western Society universally agree that Pedophilia is repugnant. Therefore, we make stricter and stricter man-made laws outlawing such, with stiffer and stiffer penalties.

There is nothing intolerant about expecting people in Western Society to abide by these man-made laws lest they face the penalties for their actions.

However, being intolerant, even in this case, is indeed ignorant because I can guarantee you that either your grandfather or your great-grandfather was a Pedophile. Just because it is socially unacceptable, and now illegal for a grown man to marry a girl under 18, doesn't mean that it was always that way. In WWI it was common-place for a grown man in even the U.S. of A. to marry a girl who was but 14 or 15 (or even 11 or 12). It wasn't just commonplace, but it was both legal *AND* socially acceptable. From the perspective of that time and place, there wasn't anything wrong with it (although I'm sure that even the mobs back then still would have lynched those that abused prepubescent children). Does that make it right for this time and place? Absolutely not! However, as it isn't a violation of the Law of Nature, but merely a violation of the current Laws of Men, it would be ignorant and wrong to judge others who may have different Laws of Men and different Customs than we do.

What if we discovered Intelligent Alien Life but it was customary and legal in their civilization to be pedophiles? Should we be so intolerant that we judge them, casting stones from our glass house, and start an interstellar war with a more evolved species because we don't agree as a society with them and have different Laws of Men than they do?

What you are trying to defend, being intolerant when Natural Law does not apply and the Laws of Men differ, is the very reason we fight wars over Religion, or Race, or Creed, or Politics, or Philosophy. It is easy to justify Genocide using the Laws of Men to placate your guilt, but it is still petty rationalization.

As I mentioned, it is one thing to expect people to abide by "When in Rome, do as the Romans do" and honor and respect the Laws and Customs in your home, just as it is expected of you to abide by, honor, and respect the Laws and Customs of another when you are in their home. As Pedophilia is currently illegal and socially unacceptable under any reason in our country, there is nothing intolerant about expecting those who are here in this country to abide by those laws and social customs, but it is indeed intolerant and ignorant to insist that others do as you do and cast judgment on others who have different laws and customs than you.

And, it is CERTAINLY ego-centric and self-entitled to demand that people abide your laws when they are in your home, but violate those laws when you are in theirs! (ergo, ask for tolerance but be intolerant to them)



posted on Jul, 17 2009 @ 12:23 AM
link   
In most cultures a group of individuals are assigned to explore what is considered "intolerable'.

In older cultures it may have been the Shaman.

In our culture it is the writer, the actor as well as some in the sciences and some in the military.

Their is a cycle in American culture that utilizes the above system or cycle...namely the arts in partnership with both the "extreme military" and the arts in conjunction with the "criminal element" as interpreted by North American society.

This is a cycle that we are using to tell stories to our children to educate them as to what we as a society may see coming.

I say "we" in a very, very broad sense as those who are part of Western culture in the North American sense.

The system when recognized as it is can become subversive in my opinion but i believe that we as a culture would soon recognize it and began to react as a culture against it if it interfered or we recognized it as interfering with our immediate need for food and shelter. Bio survival.

Of course everybody sees this and so then we begin a whole other course of events which are used to bring the above cycle within the area of what we would consider to be normal.

The problem with normal is that it always gets worse.



posted on Jul, 17 2009 @ 01:21 PM
link   
reply to post by JaxonRoberts
 


OK, let's explore this logic a little further... In order to ask others to tolerate the sexual preferences of others, I must tolerate pedophilia??? Otherwise I'm a hypocrite???


Um, since when does logic involve such leaps as you are taking with the above statement? You are taking it WAY beyond the context of the statement.

It IS hypocritical to expect tolerance for you beliefs from another and not give it yourself. I in no way said anything about accepting obviously harmful and wrong actions. You are an atheist and that is fine but it is also hypocritical to bitch about others intolerance while showing none yourself. You lose the moral high ground that way. Especially when you view it in the light that like those that attack you you are now attacking those who did not attack you.

[edit on 17-7-2009 by Watcher-In-The-Shadows]



posted on Jul, 17 2009 @ 01:36 PM
link   
I'm not sure that the atheist can support their position, and that they would have to be "agnostic" to be intellectually honest with themselves, and others.




top topics



 
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join