@dave @crunklord420
I think the LGBT movement perverted the meaning of the word "tolerate" and this twisted definition is what actually causes the "paradox of tolerance".
Just thought about this now, so maybe there's a flaw in my thinking, but I don't think tolerating something means accepting or agreeing with that thing in any way. It doesn't mean you can't criticize it or you can't actively show you disagree with it. It just means you don't get to attack an individual over who their are or what they think. You don't get to try to fire someone or ruin their life. You don't get to go on Twitter or Twitch and say "we need to cancel this fucker". You don't get to bully someone, you don't get to harass them, you don't get to do what so much of the internet has devolved into doing.
Tolerating someone/something should basically be the definition of the Christian saying: "hate the sin, not the sinner". Meanwhile, I think the LGBT movement managed to transform "tolerance" into "you can NEVER say anything bad about a homosexual or homosexuality, or else you're intolerant".
Their version of "tolerance" seems to have some amount of censorship and compelled speech in it. I think we need to return tolerance to "I'm gonna criticize the heck of what you do, but I won't try to kill you".
@emtm @dave @Philoxenus @crunklord420
>the problem with modern philosophers
Maybe we have a different understanding of the word modern, but I'm confident what you're describing has been a problem for longer than just modern times.