Tol-er-ance: the ability or willingness to tolerate something, in particular, the existence of opinions or behavior that one does not necessarily agree with.
Tolerance is the act of tolerating something when you know you don’t approve of it. Tolerance is what you do when the three year old won’t stop crying on the plane, you tolerate it. Why? Because the three year old doesn’t know any better.
That’s tolerance, but then, there’s forced conformity under the skew of tolerance. When it’s sponsored by the state, it’s usually called fascism.
What has happened in modern day America, especially on the issue of religious freedom, is that you are forced to tolerate a certain issue. When it’s forcing someone to tolerate an issue, there’s actually no tolerating at all. You either agree with it, or if you don’t, you’ll be forced to endure it. That’s how modern day progressivism defines tolerance: forced moral, social and verbal conformity, but hey, it’s with a smile. So perk up you intolerant jerk.
Don’t believe me? Let’s take a little trip to Colorado. See, Colorado is facing the exact problem that the rest of the country is debating, which side does the state side on? Does it side with those advocating for religious freedom, or marriage ‘equality?’
That question is being put to the test. In Colorado, a local bakery owned by Jack Phillips, is being sued for discrimination from a gay couple who got married in Massachusetts. So far, it seems as if the state will side against religious freedom.
The gay couple, David Mullins and Charlie Craig, is outraged that a bakery owner would not sell them cake for their gay wedding; therefore, they are victimizing themselves as sufferers of discrimination. On the contrary, Jack Phillip’s Lawyer sees the issue as an issue of religious freedom.
Which it is. What we see here is yet another case of tolerance run amok. Tolerance with no real guidelines, but a very real agenda, would rather side with those who paint themselves as the victims. Tolerance would rather side with the perceived David over Goliath, even if David is bigger, meaner and with poor intentions. Believe me, Jack Phillips is the real David of this case, even though many would gladly make him the Goliath.
What we have here is a one-sided tolerance with an agenda. This is not your run of the mill tolerance; it has a target. In this case, those pushing that agenda would force the bakery owner to violate his religious beliefs in order to seem tolerant. We are about to learn whether or not being intolerant is illegal in the state of Colorado.
Why should you pay attention to this case? Because it will be a forefront to the rest of the cases across the nation that are similar to this one.
The judge, I expect, will rule in favor of David Mullins and Charlie Craig. This ruling, should it happen, would violate, in my opinion, the right to freely exercise one’s faith. This situation, should it unfold would deem it perfectly legal to force one to go against his or her religious obligations in order to appease someone else.
This case is about appeasement, not about tolerance, or equality. This case is about acceptance and appeasement of the couple and ultimately: winning. This homosexual couple could have utilized the free market and taken their business to another bakery in town. But, this is the bakery they want, therefore, the owner must comply.
This is what happens when tolerance becomes conformity and non-conformity is in-tolerance and bigotry. Ultimately, if we are attacking Phillips for his decision not to sell the cake, isn’t this case an example of reverse bigotry? Yes, we are forcing a private individual to violate his religious beliefs in order to appease someone’s desires.
See, this man, Jack Phillips, would be labeled a bigot if he tried to make others conform to his own religious belief by forcing the state to define marriage by one man and woman. But it is not bigotry if we force him to conform against his own religious beliefs?
That’s exactly what we are dealing with, but don’t tell LGBT advocates that. The side of David Mullins and Charlie Craig will come back and cry that Jack Phillips is violating their right to pursue happiness. But in the name of tolerance, the private contract that would normally be confined to private citizens will be disrupted by the state of Colorado under the name of tolerance and equality, wearing the clothes of appeasement.
Tanner Brumbarger | @brumbarger