Uncertainty, even outright confusion, IS perfectly valid; advocating or promoting it with bumperstickers and T-shirts reminds me of that "not only maybe, but HELL, maybe!" line moondog likes so much. It is fine to say one does not know, more honest and respectful, IMHO, than DECLARING not only ones own ignorance, but everyone elses, too. Yes, you, I and many others know better than people who think eating OTHER people, stoning them for their sexuality, gunning them down over drug money, lynching them because of their race etc. is also "fine." There is no cause to be embarrassed or apologetic about that, quite the opposite, in fact, because pretending otherwise for the sake of some well meaning but misguided notion of tolerance just concedes such brutality is legitimate when it is not.


I understand the concept; again, I support bona fide ecumenicalism backed by knowledge and understanding of both ones own beliefs and those of others. What I oppose is the smug attitude I see all the time whereby people ignore complex challenging questions and smugly assume not bothering to investigate or even ask them constitutes a superior belief based on the notion superior beliefs are impossible. While disgustingly common, that is not even internally consistent; in a very real sense, I have more respect for cannibals. Their beliefs are still morally bankrupt and repugnant, but at least have a kind of logic, and lack hypocrisy.

Understand, I do not claim all the answers either, but consider that motive to search harder rather than justification for not bothering. Arguing the latter is not only ignorance masquerading as wisdom, but excuses even the most heinous acts on the grounds their legitimacy is solely a matter of interpretation. I may not be able to list everything that is right, but some things are indisputably wrong irrespective of personal beliefs.

Real tolerance is valid and valuable; just because someone is horribly, terribly and sincerely wrong does not make them any less a human being, and the constructive response to such glaring destructive error is to correct it, not condemn the human being as irredeemable. However, in many cases that brings to mind another classic line: If you are not angry, you are not paying attention. People still have every right to not pay attention, however much I wish they would, and even to encourage equal obliviousness in others, but I have just as much right, as well as a duty, to DISCOURAGE that obliviousness as the harmful phenonemon it is.

"People like me" (a quintessentially tolerant phrase, yes? ) are not the reason the Mid-East is at war, but such cavalier comments, made as if they grant supposedly impossible superiority, are the reason the Mid-East will probably always be at war. Sometimes there are no good guys, sometimes there are no bad guys and sometimes there are none of either. However, sometimes there are guys whose behavior is undeniably bad, and pretending educating ones daughter for literacy and EXECUTING her for it are equally valid depending on cultural norms only ensures each remains equally prevalent. That is not "enlightened," but "counterproductive."