this subject is fascinating....and i have more questions than answers
What does tolerant even mean anyway?
Tolerance is an interesting concept. The word- tolerate- sounds like an ugly word (to me). I think that I am probably....generally an intolerant person but... i find the concept confusing in general. Looking up the dictionary definitions and synonyms of tolerance....i dont believe that i could ask myself or anyone else to be tolerant except in a situation that was ....unavoidable, short term, and there was a plan to either end that situation, change that situation, or to remove oneself from that situation, or the object/persons/environment of toleration.
There is a big difference between accepting/loving/respecting a person, and accepting/loving/respecting his/her behaviour, beliefs, world views, attitude etc. And a bigger difference when faced with behaviours that are harmful. People are worthy of respect, dignity and hope regardless of actions...but this does not mean that actions that are intolerable should be respected and tolerated. People are more than their actions and their beliefs, and in my own opinion, actions and beliefs do not make a person...but the beliefs and actions define the experience of that person for the time that she/he choose to hold them. Blessedly, opinions and beliefs can change, especially if there is a cultural climate that allows freedom of thought and expression, and limits censorship. Conversely, I have found the surest way to ensure someone holds blindly onto a belief is to back them in to a corner, censor them, persecute them, make them feel stupid or inferior, threaten them, deny them information, deny them alternate viewpoints...basically anything that engenders fear, distrust and causes the person to go into defend/attack mode. If a person chooses to identify themselves with a belief/action rather than seeing the belief/action as something he/she holds...than the person will be on attack/defence autopilot mode trying to assert and justify their very identity in relation to others...and generally this manifests as close minded, hostile, and with either a superiority or inferiority complex.
Personally, I would throw away the concept of tolerance. And rather than judging/hating/condemning people for their beliefs and behaviours...i would make clear what my expectations for behaviour are, and demand accountability for the behaviour instead...after that said behaviour is committed...not before.
When someone comes to my house, either invited or uninvited, guest or friend, or new housemate...i expect them to be respectful (respect being a core value that I hold) of me, my family, and my home. If we do not share the same values and beliefs, and yet we have enough respect for each other to find other common ground, or to agree to a set of norms and values that we can abide with happily...then that's great, and that also creates future potential for exchanging of ideas based on respectful and mutually enjoyable communication. However, if we do not share the same values and beliefs, and there is no mutual respect to facilitate the creation of common ground and the sharing of ideas, than this situation would be intolerable if the person/s behaved in a manner which violated my beliefs. In this circumstance, I would either ask them to leave, or would ask them to change their behaviour if they wanted to remain at my home, or to explain the justification or rationalisation of said behaviour.
If I had a new house-mate moving in...i would explain to them what I expected and what was needed to operate the house efficiently, and set up a regular time to discuss things. This is pretty much what I have done in the past. I have lived with more people than I can count! A share-house is a great environment to examine the concept of tolerance...and probably why I know that personally...i cant abide living in a situation that I am unhappy, and it makes me unhappy to tolerate behaviours that I find intolerable.
Generally I believe that people should do what they want as long as it's consensual, open, and not hurting anyone. So there's a big scope for 'tolerance' there. I do not believe that it is okay to hurt people, tyrannically restrict people, or to force/coerce people into beliefs/actions. So in that situation I would be intolerant. When we agree to live in a group, individual desires do need to be balanced with group/social desires. The individual should not be sacrificed for the group, nor the group sacrificed for the individual. The only way to achieve a good balance is to have shared values, open communication, a socially mobile society, privacy, and accountability, and pathways for recourse. Generally this is better achieved with democratic libertarian secular societies, which tend to be more transparent and more accountable to the people.
In the case of religious and cultural immigration, refugees, multiculturalism.... things can get messy...and ugly on all sides...but I believe that it 'should' be simple. People are welcome into the home, the share house....and they must treat the house and its people with respect. No one has to be 'nice', simply respectful and polite. As always, example is the best way to model desirable behaviour, as well as making sure that our desire for this is communicated clearly. Everyone can believe whatever the hell they like, as long as their actions abide by the laws of the nation that they have chosen to reside in, and they are held accountable for their actions. If they want, they can take action to change these laws...using the same process available to all citizens.
In regards to things like traditions and customs and fashions and diets....these things can be either used to enjoy life by shared meaningful experience...or they can simply create separation. In regards to the toleration of these things....who cares unless it is in violation of laws or are used to hurt people.
In saying all these...i found that generally intolerance attracts intolerance, as tolerance attracts tolerance. And I am even more confused about what tolerance actually means. I dont think it is the same as acceptance, or condoning....but to tolerate something...are we in effect condoning it? Does the difference matter? Or is it arbitrary when the results are the same?
and sorry for going on tangent and off topic
