Acceptance vs. Tolerance... in Controversy, opinions, etc.
- April 8, 2015, 3:07 p.m.
- |
- Public
So much in the news lately about Indiana and other states with their religious freedom laws. Perhaps these people are lashing out because they feel forced to approve of something?
No one has to approve of anyone or anything, for any reason. I don’t approve of the term “marriage” when applied to same sex partners, I think their union is equally valid, but fundamentally different, and needs another word than marriage. Sorry, that’s “our” word, and we had it first. (To deny there is no difference demonstrates a shocking ignorance of genetics, psychology and anatomy.) But tolerance is required in life, and as long as the actions of another have no impact on me personally, I really don’t care how they choose to live. So I will tolerate same-sex couples calling themselves married, while reserving the right to reject and mock the term.
I think people who hide behind the shield of religious beliefs to justify their intolerance are cowards, and probably don’t really get the teachings they are supposed to espouse. And any business owner who uses that as an excuse to turn away business is just an idiot. I don’t approve of (or even like) many of the patients I see, but as long as they are compliant I will tolerate them and they are welcome to remain a patient.
But these people who feel victimized need to get a thicker skin. Someone will always be there to mock your beliefs, practices, haircut, or a million other things. Being offended is the national pastime in US these days, but the only right answer when someone is offended is, “So fucking what?”
EvequeFou ⋅ April 08, 2015
I know.... Does that mean doctors should stop treating patients who have STDs? What about patients at risk for STDs because of their promiscuous behavior?
Bedlam Hill Farm EvequeFou ⋅ April 08, 2015
Not at all. A physician should treat the patient, educate them, and hopefully resolve the situation. But the patient has every right to contract an STD if they make those life decisions, in the same way a patient has the right to smoke and develop lung cancer. But physicians can (and do) refuse to treat patients who will not take their medications, or follow instructions about putting others at risk. So if an HIV+ patient made the statement that they planned to infect as many people as possible, the physician would report them to law enforcement and refuse service.
shamb*ala ⋅ April 08, 2015
I really didn't think it would ever bother me to have someone say something to me on the street, until someone did it. You really have no idea what it's like until it happens. I kissed Kelsey in the street, a peck on the lips was all, and someone thought it would be ok to yell "DISGUSTING" at us. Yeah, I'll get a thicker skin, but it will never feel ok.
And how is gay marriage any different? Sure, I can't have Kelsey's baby biologically, but does that mean that people who adopt don't have a real marriage? What about people who choose not to have children? I'll be legally bound to her and it's also a way of telling people that I'm no longer available ... it's all pretty much the same as straight marriage. If you want to call it a civil union because marriage is a religious word, that's valid ... I'm not religious anyway. But then we shouldn't call any non-religious union a marriage.
=bernard= ⋅ April 09, 2015
As it happens, and this may surprise you, as a gay man I also think that the term "marriage" is a word that should be used only to describe a union of a male and female. I see nothing wrong in describing a relationship between a same sex couple as life partners. And the idea of same sex couples referring to themselves as husband and wife is in my view equally redundant.