Tolerance being intolerant

[Lord Krunk]

Tolerance for smokers would be a start.

The whole intolerance thing stems from the unhealthiness of the cigarettes; a lot of people (like myself) don't like the smell or the issues with passive smoking, and can't see the actual point in it aside from masochism.

 

[Robert632]

if we tolerated everyone, then murderer's would be out on the street, looters would be everywhere, the KKK and nazi's would still be powerful. just becuase "they have a different view on the world." see the flaw in your logic? i hope you do.(sorry if you think this is flaming or soemthing, but i jsut wanna get my point across. so it's my opineon.)

 

[cobra_ky]

I too see how people throw around the word "racist" as an ugly word without knowing how to use it. So many don't truly know what that word means. People throw that word around when people point out a cultural norm.

The word has gripped white people in a vice. They are afraid to mention anything bad about a member of another race because they will be racist. They can't get mad at someone else of a different race, deny them something,tell them they can't, or accuse them because some will say that they are racist.

that's unfortunate. what people need to do is accept that they're a racist, say what they think, and then open a dialogue.

I don't like people smoking, but the fact of the matter is that I should be tolerant of their habits. Luckily for me, my society doesn't seem to think so too.

I should be tolerant of people in the KKK and the Neo-Nazis. It seems very difficult to accept people who hate for the sake of hatred and are consumed with differences so deeply that they can't see beyond it even for a moment. They are actually willing to kill innocent people because of how they feel.

Let's be clear about what we should and shouldn't be tolerating. Personally, i can tolerate anything people believe or do to themselves. If they express those beliefs publicly, I may respond, as is my right, but i have no problem with them expressing their views.

What I can't tolerate are people who harm others without their consent. When smokers start exposing others to their smoke, or the KKK starts trying to lynch people, then i have a problem.

Should I really tolerate the sadists out there, the people that get sexual arousal from someone else's pain and suffering?

Should I really tolerate the Muslims out there that want me to die just because of the soil on which I was born?

Should I really tolerate the Christians who discriminate and shove their religion in others' throats?

yes, in all those cases (except possibly the last.) First off, as a sadist I hope you find me tolerable. Second, none of those examples involve a directly harmful action towards others (depending on what kind of discrimination the Christian is involved in.) If one of those people were to act on those beliefs and harm another person without consent, then that would be intolerable.

 

[cobra_ky]

But homosexuals, they are a good example. For me it's just another deviation in sexual behavior. At the end of the day sex is about having offspring. We enjoy it along the way but thats what sex is about, what's "normal". And I don?t have anything against deviations, I don't really care if a man likes doing it with a dog, a plant or another representative of the same sex. But what pisses me of is claiming that homosexuality is normal and should be accepted as something equal to heterosexuality. While obviously it isn't. It's a deviation, a weird form of enjoying your life. If a man will be born with some defect, lets say a 3rd hand, his different. If he don't want to cure it, it's his business (and no one knows is homosexuality even curable) I mean there are lots of uses for a third hand. But if he will tell me that having 3 hands is normal, I call blullsit. And suddenly I'm called a Gorophobe, what a weird world we live in.

Even assuming homosexuality IS a deviation, why shouldn't it be accepted as something equal to heterosexuality?

As for the rich, well they got rich somehow. Mabe by work, maybe by luck and maybe by wit. Most likely thans to all those aspects. But their work is theirs and why should they pay more.
And to become a star or a really succesfull business man you ned a hell of luck and work. What most people don't know is how much work and tetermination goes into success. Luck too, but much less then you would think.

Actually sometimes they just exploit flaws in the system to make themselves rich at the expense of their country and their fellow man. This is how wall street works, incidentally.

 

[The_root_of_all_evil]

Tolerance for smokers would be a start.

The whole intolerance thing stems from the unhealthiness of the cigarettes; a lot of people (like myself) don't like the smell or the issues with passive smoking,
and can't see the actual point in it aside from masochism.

Having been on both sides of the butt, I can sort oof understand it but it seems way in excess of it's dangers almost purely of the smell.
To a smoker though, it's as natural as answering the mobile. Or even logging onto facebook. If it didn't smell so bad, I'm certain that it'd be as ignored as alcohol.

I still say that if smoking is that bad, why isn't it banned?

 

[Lord Krunk]

Tolerance for smokers would be a start.

The whole intolerance thing stems from the unhealthiness of the cigarettes; a lot of people (like myself) don't like the smell or the issues with passive smoking,
and can't see the actual point in it aside from masochism.

Having been on both sides of the butt, I can sort oof understand it but it seems way in excess of it's dangers almost purely of the smell.
To a smoker though, it's as natural as answering the mobile. Or even logging onto facebook. If it didn't smell so bad, I'm certain that it'd be as ignored as alcohol.

I still say that if smoking is that bad, why isn't it banned?

Because the government can make money out of it. That's pretty much it, really.

 

[Rolling Thunder]

Tolerance for smokers would be a start.

The whole intolerance thing stems from the unhealthiness of the cigarettes; a lot of people (like myself) don't like the smell or the issues with passive smoking,
and can't see the actual point in it aside from masochism.

Having been on both sides of the butt, I can sort oof understand it but it seems way in excess of it's dangers almost purely of the smell.
To a smoker though, it's as natural as answering the mobile. Or even logging onto facebook. If it didn't smell so bad, I'm certain that it'd be as ignored as alcohol.

I still say that if smoking is that bad, why isn't it banned?

Because the government can make money out of it. That's pretty much it, really.

And because the untaxed profits from a second prohibition would fund enough organised crime, terrorism and general illegal shit to fight a medium-scale war.

 

[The_root_of_all_evil]

Because the government can make money out of it. That's pretty much it, really.

And because the untaxed profits from a second prohibition would fund enough organised crime, terrorism and general illegal shit to fight a medium-scale war.

And smokers are being used to fund the government that says "SMOKING BAD, AIRBUSH IT OUT OF HISTORY", but still stands behind Churchill.

Oh, nonononono.

 

[Lord Krunk]

Tolerance for smokers would be a start.

The whole intolerance thing stems from the unhealthiness of the cigarettes; a lot of people (like myself) don't like the smell or the issues with passive smoking,
and can't see the actual point in it aside from masochism.

Having been on both sides of the butt, I can sort oof understand it but it seems way in excess of it's dangers almost purely of the smell.
To a smoker though, it's as natural as answering the mobile. Or even logging onto facebook. If it didn't smell so bad, I'm certain that it'd be as ignored as alcohol.

I still say that if smoking is that bad, why isn't it banned?

Because the government can make money out of it. That's pretty much it, really.

And because the untaxed profits from a second prohibition would fund enough organised crime, terrorism and general illegal shit to fight a medium-scale war.

Not to mention that everyone smoked back when it was considered healthy (and companies added nicotine to hook people), there would be an uproar if they did.