Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: epicure who wrote (51568)	6/20/2002 12:01:47 PM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

You can be morally against the product without treating those who drink it as "abnormal." "Normal" is one of those words that are problematic in this issue. At least "acceptance" and "tolerance" mean two different things. Normal has multiple, conflicting meanings. Homosexuality is normal in the sense that it occurs naturally. But it is not normal in the sense that is the standard pattern. And whether it is normal in the sense of acceptable as opposed to tolerable as opposed to intolerable is a matter of opinion. I'm not sure which meaning the opponents are using when the express fear of normalization, acceptance or increased demographics. Lousy word best not used in this context, IMO.

To: epicure who wrote (51568)	6/20/2002 12:33:42 PM
From: The Philosopher	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 82486

it seems some people did NOT get that distinction between tolerance and acceptance I'm not so sure. I think rather that there are people who believe that there are some lifestyles that should neither be accepted nor tolerated. The question becomes whether homosexual parenting is one of those. (Homosexual parenting as opposed to practicing homosexuality -- in the latter case it is only the adults involved who are affected; in the former, children who have no voice in the matter are affected. So a distinction can be made there.) We have seen, in the Catholic church, the consequence of tolerating without accepting certain activities. Let me say immediately, though I'm sure there are some who will accuse me of this, that I'm not saying that homosexual parents are abusing children, or that the abuse in the Church is based on homosexuality. The only point I'm making is that for years, while claiming not to accept abuse of young children, certain church elders did knowingly tolerate it. In that case, I hope it's clear, there should have been neither acceptance NOR toleration. So I think we can say that there are certain activities where both toleration and acceptance are appropriate, some where acceptance may reasonably be withheld but tolerance should be extended, and some where neither acceptance nor tolerance are appropriate. If one sees homosexual parenting as of the third category, that doesn't necessarily mean they don't understand the distinction between acceptance and toleration, but it may mean that they understand the distinction but think this is an area in which it should not apply.