February 4, 2009

Toleration is not Virtue

A recent Comment by our Supreme Court Chief Justice:

“I mean, you have a Statue of Liberty; do we have to have a statue of despotism? Or do we have to put any president who wants to be on Mount Rushmore?” Chief Justice John Roberts asked, acknowledging his examples might go a bit far.

A bit far, but not by much. Toleration is defined in the classical sense in the dictionary definition as 'putting up with someone'. Rather in today's society, the definition now entails encompassing or promoting the opposing view. A recent court ruling in England gave credence to Sharia Law. Do you believe that we should implement this law in America because we also have a minority of Muslims? Sharia Law would allow men to marry multiple wives and stone those who commit sodomy . George Washington said in his farewell address that religion and morality are the indispensable supports that lead to political prosperity. For a democracy to work we have to have a moral people, a people who takes offense at evil and promotes the general welfare of all. We have to take a stand for morality and decency. However we cannot take a stand to tolerate all views, as to do so risks losing our own.

Victor Davis of National Review had this to say about the issue:
On social issues, there has to be some conservative touchstone, like reverence for uniqueness and beauty of individual life. What unites skepticism about euthanasia, abortion on demand, or embryonic stem-cell research is fear of a sort of soulless Brave New World notion that individuals don’t matter, that ease of lifestyle trumps every other difficult moral consideration, and that such thinking is the beginning — not the end — of something frightening.

Complacency has overtaken virtue in our country as we have failed in the simplest processes of vetting a president. We vote on looks and image, not substance. When asked how your candidate stands on issues such as marriage, public prayer, ten commandment displays, and so on can you give a definitive answer?

We must take a stand and regardless of your religious preference, realize that religious displays and actions are just fine in their own right--we don't need to succumb to pressure to display the opposite view. Do Muslims--In Arab countries-- ask permission from the small Catholic and Christian minority to practice their religion? Not even close. We may live in a democracy, but the same principle applies---that those who control the majority control the law. If our nation relies on our Judeo-Christian roots, we should not feel obliged to establish a Mulsim Mosk across the street from every church in America. We are free nation because our founders stood for principles such as the rule of law and moral norms while intolerant of the opposite. For those on the side of free society, Intolerance is not vice, rather virtue.

It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people’s minds.” Samuel Adams

No comments: