• RadicalEagle@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      30
      ·
      9 months ago

      I think you can “love” someone without tolerating their nonsense. It’s all about being willing to find a consensual way of interacting. Theoretically it may be impossible, but we can still try.

      • greenskye@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        9 months ago

        Ironically this is the whole ‘love the sinner, not the sin’ bit that Christians love to use to excuse their own intolerance.

        • RadicalEagle@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          9 months ago

          Yeah, I think a lot of modern Christians are unaware of how masochistic and sadistic they really are. They get so hung up on the idea that they have a “get out of jail free” card that it justifies all the rest of their behavior, even when that behavior is explicitly called out in their manual lol

      • CileTheSane@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        9 months ago

        I have an ex who cheated on me. I’m not holding on to anger about it, I do honestly hope they’ve found happiness, but I want nothing to do with them again and if they showed up at my door I would tell them to leave.

    • Ephera@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      27
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      Yeah, the paradox of tolerance.

      My favorite solution that I’ve heard, is to treat tolerance not as a moral imperative, but rather as a social contract.
      Anyone who is tolerant will have tolerance extended to them. Those who are intolerant, on the other hand, can fuck right off.

      • LwL@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        Yes, I’ve never really seen the paradox as a paradox for that reason. The question, rather, should be what precisely we require from the social contract. The old question of “where is the line at which point my freedom impacts your freedom”. But no matter where that line is, it means that if someone spews hate, you’re allowed to respond in kind

        (Morally, that is. If it’s covered by law then legally it should be handled through the justice system and responding in kind would fall under vigilante justice)

      • Manmoth@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        Secularly everything has to be a social contract because there is no moral authority.

      • Drewelite@lemmynsfw.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        The way I practice it is that everyone gets a basic level of tolerance. Free speech, basic human rights, and a low level of respect and decency. But until you treat others the same there will be a social friction wherever you go and eventually a hard line. Like, no, we don’t want you in here if you’re just going to be an asshole everyday. Come back in a week and we’ll see if you’ve learned some self-control.

      • MonkderDritte@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        They did that in east europe (fucking off), founded ISIS, flooded an area with drugs and overran it.

        • Drewelite@lemmynsfw.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          Yeah the Internet has insulated people from how a society works. They can “fuck off”… to where? Somewhere they’ll still vote and encourage people to follow their example? Somewhere without people telling them they’re wrong where they can become more and more extreme?

          It’s like prison. Yeah let’s take all the people that have a proclivity for crime and put them together. Then teach them to obey the system by using it to punish and traumatize them. After all, they deserve it. They’ll realize that, any day now.

      • melpomenesclevage@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        9 months ago

        No I’m pretty sure its more about telling them everything that sucks about them is totally fine and even good actually.

        • Flax@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          It’s been 2000 years, how have we not gotten the hang of this already

          • melpomenesclevage@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            9 months ago

            Pretty sure love is more than 2000 years old.

            Unless you believe in incredibly-young-earth creationism, where the OP and all your memories older than dinner last night are just a lie planted here by god to trick us into thinking the world is more than 16 hours old.

                • Flax@feddit.uk
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  9 months ago

                  I’m talking about interpretation of Jesus’ words (•-•")

                  • melpomenesclevage@lemm.ee
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    9 months ago

                    Dude we don’t even know if he existed, and even if he did we know he wasn’t even the coolest guy the romans executed on a cross.