The Reactionaries Speak

Tolerance is a component of political correctness. It is a means used by the left to stifle debate and argument over right and wrong.
Tolerance, by definition, from dictionary.com is as follows:
One: a fair, objective, and permissive attitude towards those who opinions practices race religions and nationalities etc. are different from one’s own; freedom from bigotry.
Two: a fair, objective, and permissive attitude towards opinions and practices that differ from one’s own.
Three: interest in and concern for ideas, opinions, practices, etc., for into one’s own; a liberal, undogmatic viewpoint.
Four: the act or capability of enduring; endurance: “my tolerance of noise is limited.”
Now for myself, out of these definitions, the one that describes what conservatives are expected to apply is the fourth. “The act of capability or enduring.” The definition currently prescribed by the politically correct machine, is the first i.e. a fair, objective, and permissive attitude towards those whose opinions, practices, race, religions, and nationalities, etc. are different from one’s own. In other words, “Whatever I do, you must accept, and view as normal”.
However, this first definition is a club used by progressives to isolate, deride, and paint those of us who may not necessarily be on board with the latest definition of “civil rights” to further the progressive cause.
It is through the use of this club that many ideas that run contrary to the societal norm of the majority of Americans have been thrust into the mainstream.
First, to be viewed as victims that require pity, and special status.

Second, to equate behavior outside of societal norms as behavior that must be accepted as normal.

As an example, I give you the continuing battle for gay marriage. I am not here to cast judgment on gay people, what their wants and needs are, I am using this particular instance as an example of how tolerance is used as a club by the left.
First, there have always been gay people on earth. It’s really not an arguable fact, when there are so many examples in recent and ancient history that prove this to be so. There’s no point in arguing over whether this is a genetically ordained or chosen behavior, because that’s not the point of what I’m talking about.
One: when people started “coming out of the closet”, for lack of a better expression, the cry from the gay factions was that “We’re here, we’re queer, get over it.” Which, for most fair-minded people was just fine, they were willing to get over it.
Not being satisfied with the idea that their behavior would be tolerated (but not embraced) by society at large, there was a rush to put out ever more self-aggrandizing displays of their cause. Gay Day parades, Gay Pride weeks, these things had but one purpose: to bring into the public consciousness that this was normal behavior and despite anybody’s objection to it on moral, or philosophical grounds, you, as the public will have to accept this, or be guilty of being “intolerant”.
This of course, was aided and abetted by the Federal Government, who dared not to be seen as being intolerant.
When fair-minded people tolerated (endured) this amount of integration into society, then the next phase of the indoctrination was started, which was to indoctrinate the youth by bringing into the school system, the “Why Wendy has 2 Mommies”, or “Why Johnny has 2 Daddies” books. Then, the cultural curriculum could be foisted upon a new generation that has come to believe through their indoctrination that it is perfectly normal for Wendy to have two mommies.

Once again aided and abetted by the Federal Government.
This in turn, has led to the next phase of forced normalization, which is to define gay marriage as being the same as heterosexual marriage.
This forced normalization, or “tolerance”, if you will, of the idea that gay marriage is equal to heterosexual marriage has been met with furious resistance across the nation. While there have been some victories for the concept of gay marriage in the United States, they are not the norm.
Currently, the resistance to gay marriage being legalized, runs pretty strongly throughout the U.S. You can see that the measure has failed twice in California, which by all intents and purposes, should be the mecca for such legislation. And yet California voters have roundly resisted the idea twice. So, what has the reaction to this obvious rejection of the normalization of gay marriage been? The movement, has pulled out the old playbook of suing, demonstrating, demonizing those who disagree with him, and, the saddest thing of all, which is to compare themselves and their “struggle”, to the civil rights movement in the early 60s. This, of course, is blatant bullshit, and an attempt to prey on any white guilt left over from the 60s.
This is only one example of the use of the club of “tolerance” by the left. Every time there is a new group of victims designated, there is a great hue and cry for the new “victims” to be set aside special privileges, perhaps special rights, and special protections to keep them safe from the majority of Americans, thereby depriving them the ability to integrate.

What is the solution for dealing with “tolerance”?

First, I do believe that there are certain things in a society that are tolerated for the greater good. Every day, we tolerate certain behaviors by others that run contrary to our own moral and philosophical compasses. In some respects, even day to day politeness is an example of tolerance in action.
When tolerance (as practiced by the left) becomes oppressive to the point where you cannot speak your mind about what you believe to be right and wrong, because you will be cast as an unenlightened, intolerant redneck, the whole game has gone too far.

What I can tell you is what I believe. It is my belief that I will no longer be silent about what I believe to be right and wrong. I will no longer tolerate bad behavior, I will no longer be cast as some sort of right wing Neanderthal, because I don’t believe as the left-wing herd does.
You, are perfectly free to do as you will. I don’t have a problem with it, as long as you don’t try to shove your beliefs down my throat by threats, intimidation, or legislation.
Tolerance, as currently practiced is a means to an end. As I go through the various components of political correctness, you may start to see a pattern develop. A pattern when brought to its logical conclusion, will have necessarily brought about the repression of a free man or woman to state their own political, personal, religious, or philosophical views without fear of reprisal.

Political correctness, and one of its component parts, tolerance, are one of the greatest threats to our First Amendment currently being foisted upon the American people. Unfortunately, there are many more.

I’ll close with a quote from a great British television series from the 60s, “The Prisoner”.
“Be Seeing You”