• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Is Intolerance Wrong?

Is Intolerance Wrong?

  • I honestly don't know

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    42

Wake

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 31, 2010
Messages
18,536
Reaction score
2,438
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
This is a simple question:

Is intolerance wrong?

The question arises because people have a tendency to connote intolerance with something negative.
 
Last edited:
This is a simple question:

Is intolerance wrong?

The question arises because people have a tendency to connote intolerance with something negative.

Thats because it can be negative.
 
So then it is not wrong to be intolerant of homosexual marriage, if intolerance is only wrong according to the beliefs of biased people?
 
So then it is not wrong to be intolerant of homosexual marriage, if intolerance is only wrong according to the beliefs of biased people?

See my post in your other thread.
 
So then it is not wrong to be intolerant of homosexual marriage, if intolerance is only wrong according to the beliefs of biased people?

Acceptable intolerance has to be based on something more known to be harmful. In tolerance of mature consenting adults doing loving one another is not equal to be intolerent of someone harming someone, like say a pedophile.
 
There is nothing wrong with intolerance. There can be something wrong with how you chose to demonstrate that intolerance. I'm intolerant of people who eat unhealthily. I don't allow it in my house. My wife, kid, cats and dogs get the best food I can afford. I don't go around trying to ban people from going to McDonald's. Why? My intolerance of unhealthy habits isn't dogmatic or even something I care to preach. It's a personal choice and if you want to live under my house, you'll have to abide by it. I don't write to my congressman about the need for healthier foods in public schools. I don't want to ban fat kids from the military. I don't even support those fat taxes. Do I believe kids should eat healthily? Sure. Do I believe public schools should serve healthy food? Sure. Do you see what I'm getting at yet?
 
Last edited:
Acceptable intolerance has to be based on something more known to be harmful. In tolerance of mature consenting adults doing loving one another is not equal to be intolerent of someone harming someone, like say a pedophile.

Out of curiousity, where does it say that in the rulebook?
 
Out of curiousity, where does it say that in the rulebook?

Don't know of any rule book, and your free to be as huge an asshole as you want to be. But you asked if it was wrong, and not what rules or laws were. If you're being intolerant of something that is none of your business, that isn't harmful to others, and breaks no laws, well, you can't call that equal to something that does one or more of thsoe things.
 
Don't know of any rule book, and your free to be as huge an asshole as you want to be. But you asked if it was wrong, and not what rules or laws were. If you're being intolerant of something that is none of your business, that isn't harmful to others, and breaks no laws, well, you can't call that equal to something that does one or more of thsoe things.

You're avoiding my question.

Where does it say that "Acceptable intolerance has to be based on something more known to be harmful"?

You?
 
Intolerance when attached to a moral is subjective and means different things to different people. Intolerance on it's own can be good or bad, period. I am intolerant when it comes to crime, this is a good thing. I am intolerant of Jews because they are Jews, would be bad.

So a yes or no answer does not fit.
 
Can it be said that it's not wrong to have a differing opinion against, say, homosexuality/homosexual marriage? Or an opinion against abortion? Or tax breaks for the wealthy?

So basically, can I simply dismiss people who negatively label me as intolerant, as biased partisans?
 
Can it be said that it's not wrong to have a differing opinion against, say, homosexuality/homosexual marriage? Or an opinion against abortion? Or tax breaks for the wealthy?

So basically, can I simply dismiss people who negatively label me as intolerant, as biased partisans?

How about this.

You can be intolerant of gays all you want, you can have a big intolerant cake and have a giant intolerant parade and march right through intolerant square.

And then I will simply be intolerant of you :)

See how that works.
 
How about this.

You can be intolerant of gays all you want, you can have a big intolerant cake and have a giant intolerant parade and march right through intolerant square.

And then I will simply be intolerant of you :)

See how that works.

See, you're still not answering my question.

It's made know that intolerance is not 100% wrong or right.

And when you say it's wrong to be intolerant of homosexuality, you're biased.
 
Can it be said that it's not wrong to have a differing opinion against, say, homosexuality/homosexual marriage? Or an opinion against abortion? Or tax breaks for the wealthy?

Not really. All those issues are again subjective. Someone being more intolerant then someone else does not automatically make them wrong.

So basically, can I simply dismiss people who negatively label me as intolerant, as biased partisans?

That would depend on the individual. If they have a good argument, no. If they are just being hacks themselves? Yes, like a hot potato.
 
What a riveting question! I don't know about everyone else but I've been hoping someone would ask. :roll:

Is intolerance wrong?

Maybe.

I certainly hope my answer helps people find a light in the darkness of such a profound question.
 
See, you're still not answering my question.

It's made know that intolerance is not 100% wrong or right.

And when you say it's wrong to be intolerant of homosexuality, you're biased.

Hi, welcome to obvious statements in obvious discussions 101. You have just now made an obvious statement. With that we'd like to obviously congratulate you and wish you an obvious afternoon.
 
I cannot tolerate this thread. There's nothing wrong with that. It's just how I am.
 
Out of curiousity, where does it say that in the rulebook?

Is there a rulebook?

The only thing I'm aware of is a sense of morality - or social norms - or culture - or the law. These things all change.

There is no one rulebook that we all follow. If there was then we'd all be ****ed for breaking the rules :)
 
Can it be said that it's not wrong to have a differing opinion against, say, homosexuality/homosexual marriage? Or an opinion against abortion? Or tax breaks for the wealthy?

So basically, can I simply dismiss people who negatively label me as intolerant, as biased partisans?

It isnt wrong to have a differing opinion. Its the actions you take thats wrong...for the most part.
 
I am intolerant of people that are intolerant of intolerant people
 
Intolerance of other people due to their race, religion, ethnicity, sexuality, nationality...is 100% wrong.

Intolerance of other people due to their political beliefs is also wrong...but not as much..in my personal opinion.

But yes, being intolerant of someone due to something about them that they cannot change, is disgusting & very low-class.
 
Back
Top Bottom