Quote:
Originally Posted by Infinit47
Sure, I have reframed not being a bigot as a social contract instead of a moral issue. Morality involves a discussion over right and wrong. There is no discussion when it comes to bigotry vs. inclusion. Inclusion (i.e equality) is a given in modern society.
Considering this a moral discussion opens the door to people like Bolevi throwing out the invented "tolerance paradox" whereby we are required to be tolerant to his intolerance...otherwise we are intolerant.This is a load of crap.
Intolerance to bigots, whether they be Nazis, racists, homophobes etc. is simply our reaction to their breaking the social contract of equality.
Bolevi also intentionally ignores the harm caused to at risk groups when they are attacked by bigots like Reimer (yes Bolevi, that was an ideological attack). But that's more of him showing his personal bias.
|
You are conflating a number of different concepts. Liberal ideals actually require one to be tolerant of intolerant ideas and even statements. It's when ideas and statements turn into actions that cause harm that we can say the line has been crossed.
There is no tolerance paradox - it's a myth. It is only confusing to people who confuse statements/ideas with actions.