It was a time of great and exalting progress. The country was on the defense, the war against intolerance was on, in every breast burned the righteous fire of individual rights and democracy. Every mouth uttered eloquent words championing the need for tolerance in our communities, in our schools, and in our homes. “No more bigotry, racism, or narrow-mindedness!” was the rally cry. Daily the freedom volunteers spread their message of acceptance through the airwaves, news wires, and political campaigns, the proud victims of intolerance cheering them with voices choked with joyous emotion as their call for tolerance was heeded.
Nightly the television viewers listened to brilliant oratory directed against the parochial hogwash of the small-minded. Such eloquence stirred the deepest deeps of the viewers’ hearts, and they interrupted at intervals with applause and cheering, the tears running down their cheeks as they cried, “At last! The rights of individuals are finally being upheld! We are closer than ever to purging the poison of intolerance that infects our nation.” Many people throughout the country were thrilled at the thought that once the evil influence of intolerance was rooted out of society, peaceful coexistence could finally thrive, just as the Constitution and the Bill of Rights advocated.
The holiday season came—flocks of tolerance promoters would set out en masse with new focus. At the time that many Christians began to turn more attention toward the core beliefs of their religion, those that campaigned for tolerance valiantly stifled any improper, ostentatious displays of religious opinions that might tread on or offend the beliefs of others. After all, for what was America founded, if not for fairness? Rather than promoting one narrow religious perspective, the people who made up the religious majority in America were encouraged to embrace the diversity of spiritual thought that existed throughout the nation.
The religious sects and other institutions that passed rigid judgment on the personal preferences of others, preferences such as free love, pro-choice, and homosexuality, were quickly made aware of their ignorant, narrow-minded attitudes. The heroic advocates of progressiveness encouraged these bigoted groups to open their minds to the fact that the rights of individuals allowed them to act however their moral compass guided them, unhindered by the crippling “principled” decrees of the ignorant. Diversity of action must be permitted to flourish; if not, the country was in danger of growing ever more rigid in its attitude toward an individual’s alternative lifestyle. Yes, diversity was what the nation needed.
Then came the real campaign. The meeting hall was filled; a multitude of freedom advocates were present, each face alight with dreams of the peaceful future—visions of the complete understanding, the total unity of thought, the overall fairness and opportunity of expression. With one burst of energy the entire hall rose, with glowing eyes and beating hearts as a group of broadminded public figures pledged their efforts in convincing the hordes of prejudiced Americans to adopt a more healthy perspective. One among the crowd began, in passionate and pleading language, to call for Congress, that revered body of power, to create an statute that would further allow them to aid and shield the victims of intolerance. They begged for a law that would enable them to promote liberality of thought and to crush the binding grip of intolerance upon the heart of the prejudiced.
A feeble stranger entered the meeting and slowly moved toward the platform, his sad eyes fixed upon the main speaker. As he ascended the stairs and turned to face the crowd, the people gradually stifled their pleas and turned their attention to the newcomer. For some moments he surveyed the silent but restless audience with a solemn, burning gaze; then in a quiet but unwavering voice began:
“I come from that revered body of power to which you plead!” The words resounded throughout the meeting hall, sending a thrill throughout the hearts of many in the crowd. Their pleas had been answered! “Congress has listened to your countless pleas for tolerance and open-mindedness that you so fervently hope to be spread throughout our nation. It is willing to grant help with your mission after I, the messenger, have explained to you its full import. Like many requests, it is asking for more than the requesters are aware of.
“Have any of you paused to think of what you have asked? Would your mission, if executed in the desired way, have only one outcome? No, it would have two—one being the desire you have promulgated to the world: advocating tolerance throughout America would lead to less outspokenness. But if you truly desire to promote tolerance, beware how you go about attempting to spread it.
“I am commissioned to explain to you the nature of your tolerance campaign. It is a double-edged sword. As you identify people as intolerant, it is possible that you are the ones guilty of intolerance. When you condemn one person of narrow-mindedness or unjust tyranny in their judgments of moral actions, it is likely you that is imposing your beliefs on another. When you call for greater diversity by squalling at those who express an opinion that is politically incorrect or undiplomatic, you are in reality killing the diversity that makes this nation great. Although you may claim to believe in the freedom of expression, when one man expresses an opinion different than your own, he is soundly censored and condemned. In one sense, tolerance becomes intolerance.
“It is right for you to be aware, then, that when you go throughout the country crying for an end to bigotry and narrow-mindedness, you may be saying, “Stop trying to resist my point of view. It is quite obviously superior to your own. How dare you disagree with me?’. That is not tolerance. That is intellectual cowardice, a refusal to confront a disagreement with tact and consideration. This nation was not built upon the idea of bullying and coercing people to fall in line with one specific point of view. America was created with the intent of being a safe haven for those who wish to express their beliefs freely, whether they are deemed politically incorrect, close-minded, or prejudiced by others.
“Remember, true tolerance is not a suppression of will or thought in order to fall in line with the views of everyone else. With real tolerance, two people with differing convictions are able to respect each other despite their disparity in opinion. It is not necessary that we tolerate ideas or behavior; everyone is entitled to hold strong views regarding right or wrong, and those that hinder the safety of others should be held accountable. But we should strive to be tolerant of people, to treat every person we encounter with the respect and civility they deserve, especially when their views differ from our own. People do not respond well when they are labeled as bigoted, or racist, or narrow-minded, or ignorant. A change for the better is more likely to occur if it is brought about through calm and sound reasoning. It is only then that genuine diversity will thrive. If you truly want tolerance to take root in this nation, start by practicing it yourselves.”
Afterwards, it was concluded that the man must have been unhinged, because what kind of tolerant congressman would spout off such narrow-minded nonsense?
