Tolerance used to mean respecting a person and their right to speak, even if you strongly disagreed with what they had to say. Now it is the demand that we must embrace, accept and endorse not only every opinion, but every lifestyle, every ideology and every action going around.
If we don’t, we are said to be hate-filled and intolerant. Well, as I have demonstrated countless times now, there certainly is plenty of intolerance and hatred out there – but it sure ain’t coming from our side. It is all coming from the militants and hatchet men of the secular left.
In the past two days I have penned two articles documenting six cases of such tolerance, and now, for a third day running, we find yet three more clear cut examples of what the ‘peace and love’ brigade are up to. They are on a crusade, and their push for tolerance will be the end of all of us sooner or later.
Consider the first example: another reprehensible edition of Q&A on the ABC Monday night. As usual, one or two conservatives were pitted against four or five lefties, with the host being just as to the left as any of them. Sydney Anglican Archbishop Peter Jenson did a valiant job defending faith and family against all the secular leftists.
One atheist and “comedian” Catherine Deveny was especially offensive and ugly. It was so bad that yesterday the Australian even ran an editorial on it. It said in part: “It signalled Q&A’s retreat from discussion towards crass confrontation, and a reluctance to reason with traditional views when they can be shouted down instead.
“Discussing the use of the word ‘submit’ in Anglican marriage ceremonies, the comedian (Catherine Deveny) offered this insight to the Archbishop: ‘Now you can choose to go to the Anglican Church and be married in a museum by a dinosaur.’ This was the sneering tone she is renowned for and presumably what she was invited on to the show to deliver. Important social issues might deserve a little more intelligence and respect.
“Archbishop Jensen defended the institution of marriage, and the right of Anglicans and those of other religions to maintain distinct traditions – which are not forced upon others. He was frank, concerned and conciliatory on homosexual health issues in the wake of recent controversy. As a religious and community leader, the Archbishop is the custodian of a creed more than 2000 years old that provided the foundations of our society. While he shouldn’t be isolated from sensible debate about tolerance, diversity and reform, nor should he be shouted down without respect. ‘I couldn’t be a Christian because I’m intolerant of intolerance,’ spouted Deveny, demanding acceptance for refugees, homosexuals – even comedians – but apparently not for Christians.”
Yes she was that despicable. Well done to the Australian for having the courage to take a stand on our taxpayer-funded vigilantes at the ABC. I sent a letter in, but it has not appeared, but a few other good ones did. This is what I said in my letter:
“Thanks so much for your courageous editorial. It certainly has become open season on all things Christian, and anyone who even dares to suggest that marriage is between a man and a woman is subject to the most horrific abuse and hate – all in the name of tolerance of course.
“The tolerance brigade squawks all day about tolerance but they are among the least tolerant folk around. Deveny is just a blatant example of this rank hypocrisy. If she really believes that the best basis for toleration is to avoid having strong convictions about good and evil, then she should not try to harbor the strong conviction that intolerance is so evil.”
The second case comes from the US: “A theological professor at an African-American Christian seminary has complained to federal anti-discrimination officials that he was fired based on his conservative views, particularly his stance against homosexuality.
“Rev. Jamal-Dominique Hopkins told the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission in a filing last month that administrators at the Interdenominational Theological Center (ITC) had begun mistreating him after attendees at an event he organized were given a book that called homosexual activity sinful. ‘It was primarily the book that created an issue,’ Hopkins, 42, told Religion News Service.
“After he was confronted by his department chair, Rev. Margaret Aymer, Hopkins said administrators began criticizing his conservative religious ideals, ‘intimidating me, slandering my character, giving me poor evaluations, and changing student grades from failing to passing with no merit’. Joe Hopkins, a California attorney representing his son, told RNS the affair could lead to a lawsuit if no action is taken. ‘This is retaliation for standing up for his rights, bottom line,’ he said.”
The third case concerns the situation in France with homosexual marriage: “There will be no allowances made for conscientious or religious objection in upcoming French legislation instituting ‘gay marriage,’ the French minister of Justice, Christiane Taubira, revealed in an interview today.
“Speaking to the mainstream Catholic daily La Croix, Taubira gave the broad outlines of the same-sex ‘marriage’ bill to be presented by the government by the end of October. That Taubira chose the quasi-official newspaper of the French Catholic bishops conference is being seen as a strategic move to head off Catholic and other religious objections. She acknowledged in the interview that the change would constitute a ‘societal and legal revolution’.”
So there you have it folks: three more cases of “tolerance” and “diversity” from the activists. That makes nine cases in just three days. Yet the activists insist that nothing will change when they are granted special rights and marriage. Yeah right.