And So I Go: Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow

American Thinker: When Tolerance Trumps Principle

Posted on: January 24, 2010

American Thinker: When Tolerance Trumps Principle

Dare to be intolerant!   I am intolerant as all hell in my old age.  I refuse to turn the other cheek or to consider the source or  consume any of the other pablum that my Mom and society in the past 50 years has pushed as acceptable behavior.   Why is this the case?  Because while I and other decent human beings have been being tolerant and turning the other cheek and considering the source the source has been galloping along changing my society into one I don’t want to live in,  and certainly don’t want to pass on to my loved ones.

So when I see hear or smell bad behavior I speak up!  We all need to do that .  We all need to look bad and family destructive behavior in the eye and say that is wrong and you are wrong to act that way.  Yes you!   You who believe living together and having babies and then allowing the fathers to move on while the government supports his and your children are wrong.  You who believe any means justifies the ends are wrong!  You who believe any form of coupling should be given the cloak and blessing of the traditional marriage are wrong!  You who believe that difference races should be given different treatment and preferences are wrong!  It was wrong when Whites were given the preferences and it is equally wrong when Blacks are given these same preferential treatments.   Welfare recipients carrying around a $50 a month cell phone is wrong!  A home phone can be gotten for as little as $25 a month from the phone company.  This will keep you in touch as much as you need to be.  Children didn’t die  or starve and there was no more mayhem in the streets before cell phones so there won’t be now.  But that $50 a month you are spending is my money and I resent your spending my money on your luxury!    Even the far less harmful but still wrong breaking in line is wrong.  We have to be judgmental and intolerant and speak out.  Our preacher have to speak out from the pulpit that all of these activities are wrong!  Killing babies is wrong!   Allowing children and babies to stay in homes that are abusive is wrong so we put them in foster homes and keep them in loveless limbo while we try to correct the problems of the family while other families would give these children the love and care they need.  The foster system is wrong!

Dare to speak up and be intolerant!  this is your world and you have allowed the thugs and cruds and ignorant SOB’s to take it over.  Because all these people indulging in bad and destructive behavior are not tolerant of decent behavior.

This is a good article that should be read and digested. You might want to skip the first three paragraphs and just get to the meat.  I almost missed the article because the first three paragraphs didn’t excite me and didn’t really allow me to understand what the author was talking about.   And then go out there and be as intolerant as you want of anything smacking of bad behavior. BB

Tolerance is the pry bar by which the modern liberal moves boundaries.
Robert H. Bork, in his introduction of Slouching Towards Gomorrah (1997), cites the Durkheim Constant: “Emile Durkheim, a founder of sociology, posited that there is a limit to the amount of deviant behavior any community can ‘afford to recognize.'” As behavior worsens, the community adjusts standards so that conduct once thought reprehensible is gradually thought to be normal. However, Mr. Bork conjectures that the limits to deviant behavior have expanded in both directions, so that what was deviant is now considered normal, and what was moral is thought puritanical or extremist and therefore irrelevant. Modern liberalism makes every effort to redefine or blur (whichever is more expedient) both boundaries of the acceptable norm and label opponents as “intolerant.”

The controversy over the definition of marriage serves as an example of expansion of both boundaries. On the one hand, homosexuality was viewed as deviant behavior in the first two thirds of the 20th century. By the end, national politics encouraged the acceptance of gay lifestyles. On the other hand, a normal marriage has always brought to mind one man and one woman. Now progressives claim that the definition is too narrow and should include gay unions. To think otherwise in their view discloses intolerance and a homophobic prejudice.
In the name of polite statesmanship, conservatives have allowed the infringements and withdrawn traditional discernment and thereby relinquished boundaries on both sides of that vague line of normalcy. Mr. Bork summarizes: “So unrelenting is the assault on our sensibilities that many of us grow numb, finding resignation to be the rational, adaptive response to an environment that is increasingly polluted and apparently beyond our control.”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

See topic cloud at bottom of page for specific topics.

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 97 other followers

BB’s file cabinet

%d bloggers like this: