Everyone has opinions that they don't like or don't agree with but that we tolerate and will politely debate over. However should you tolerate EVERY opinion? Are there opinions that you will simply not hear and not respect? How do you generally react to these opinions? What makes them so bad to you?

I would definitely say there is a tolerance to having an opinion.

Acceptable opinions can be whether you support gay marriage or gun control etc. However when the opinion gets to the point where it basically defines you as a immoral human being in political views I would say that's when the line is drawn.

I say political views mainly because it's what people as humans have defined to be politically and morally correct. However to someone like a Nazi who truly believes Aryan to be the superior race then they would see nothing wrong with killing people with other ethnic affiliations.

To put it simply if someone were to say "murder is fine as long as the other person doesn't feel pain" or something along the lines of that, society has deemed murder all in all immoral and unjust. Therefore that is where we would draw the line in tolerating an opinion.

I feel like any opinion made with the intent of finding reality and truth deserves tolerance.

In general, I don't care what people think, just how. If they're honestly searching for truth behind issues using rationality, like I try to, then I don't care what position they have at any one moment. I might find out I'm wrong and end up agreeing with them, or vice versa.

If the intent is to harm others (insulting or flaming), that's where I think the line should be drawn.
As for who should draw that line... that's the hard part.

I personally draw the line in all kinds of neo-nazi stuff. You know, racism, homophobia and also with sexism.

What makes them bad to me? Well pretty much everything they stand for. They always want to tell you how much they are for the free speach themselves but all they are about is to abolish that same right for everyone else. So no, no thank you.

How do I react? Well, depends. I read a lot of hate speach on the net each day but I dont react to it as much since I see most of it as pointless and not worth of my time.

Kinda sad.

Absolutely all opinions deserve tolerance. I do understand that some opinions can be extremely radical and dangerous, but in my opinion you can't build and maintain a free society unless everyone's views are tolerated, even the ones we absolutely cannot stand.

I feel that someone should have whatever opinion they want. Having an opinion affects nobody, so they have a right to it, even if it is racist, sexist, twisted, hate filled, etc. But it is what they decide to do because of those opinions. There is a difference between tolerating an opinion and tolerating actions. For example, I have no problem if someone is against homosexuality. That is their choice, and I have quite a few friends who believe wholeheartedly that homosexuality is wrong. But when you start openly oppressing others, insulting them, treating them as a lesser human, that is where I don't tolerate it. My general view is that you have every right to do whatever you please as long as your actions don't create victims. Opinions, you can have whatever opinions you want. I might not respect you for some opinions you hold, but I respect your right to have those opinions. Just don't use your opinions to cause others harm.

Hoochman : I disagree.

Opinions that do not take respect of others' rights, like the right to life, have no business being tolerated.

Imagine a group of people who feel everyone with a certain religion, ethnicity, or are from a particular place should be dead.  It's offensive to my God, my political leader, or my ideology that you even exist.  My life mission is to kill you and wipe your culture off the face of the earth.

That is not an opinion that should be respected.  

Opinions that lump everyone together like, "People who like wrestling all have autism" or "Any males over 8 years of age who like My Little Pony are gay" shouldn't be respected, appreciated, or tolerated in any sense of the words.

There's no room on this planet for that sort of thing.  I don't have any tolerance to the Westboro Baptist Church because they lead hate.  Hate should never be tolerated.

Myelin : There are some opinions that are just plain harmful to the community as a whole and should not be tolerated. For instance, if I said "there's nothing wrong with terrorism" Would you not say that is an opinion that should not be tolerated. On the other hand, if I said, "Obama needs to tighten up on immigration laws to help prevent terrorists from being in our country," that would be an opinion that some would agree with, some would disagree with, but in reality is tolerable. Because it is not dangerous. Opinions are good, but I think that our country is consistently going downhill because we listen and tolerate too many of them. For instance, someone decided to voice the opinion that prayer shouldn't be in school. The government listened to that one, and look where the school system has been ever since. Opinions may seem relatively harmless, but not all should be tolerated, because some opinions are toxic.  I'm not talking about opinions about favorite color or whatnot, but the kind of opinions that killed millions of jews during the holocaust, the kind that is killing jews and christians alike in the middle east. The kind that attempts to remove accountability from our lives. WE HAVE BECOME TOO TOLERANT A NATION AND NEED TO GO BACK TO BEING THE STRONG UNITED NATION UNDER GOD THAT WE WERE BEFORE. Think I'm crazy? People are using any justification to do what they want. Don't believe me on that one? The word Fergeson ring a bell. These idiots raided and looted, burning down gas stations, only proving that they were a stupid, irrational mob, instead of banding together respectfully and doing things right and peacefully. Where human will is unrestrained by morals, chaos roams free. The thing of tolerating every opinion so we don't hurt people's feelings is just the kind of setup in Judges...where every man did what was right in his own eyes. I know what happened to that nation, and I don't want to see it happen to the U.S. But...It already is

I feel that someone should have whatever opinion they want. Having an opinion affects nobody, so they have a right to it, even if it is racist, sexist, twisted, hate filled, etc. But it is what they decide to do because of those opinions. There is a difference between tolerating an opinion and tolerating actions. For example, I have no problem if someone is against homosexuality. That is their choice, and I have quite a few friends who believe wholeheartedly that homosexuality is wrong. But when you start openly oppressing others, insulting them, treating them as a lesser human, that is where I don't tolerate it. My general view is that you have every right to do whatever you please as long as your actions don't create victims. Opinions, you can have whatever opinions you want. I might not respect you for some opinions you hold, but I respect your right to have those opinions. Just don't use your opinions to cause others harm.

FaithFighter : it seems to me from your post that you advocate for a homogenous, Christian United States. However doesn't that opinion violate someone's rights (specifically freedom of religion)?. Others in the thread have stated that an opinion that stands against someone's rights does not deserve tolerance, in that case, yours wouldn't. How do you reply to those who did your opinion not worthy of tolerance on the basis that it violates fundamental human rights?

Myelin : To answer to your question is this. From your post, I believe that you stand against what I am saying, and therefore not mentioning GOD or acknowledging that he exists. Rather you would have us all not mention religion for fear that we might be violating someone's rights. Would that not include my own to share my religion? You see, we can play this bogus game of "human rights" or we can face up to the real thing here. People don't like the words UNDER GOD. And anyone that believe in it and advocates it is targeted as a human rights violator. What about all the atheists that are constantly saying there is no GOD, and the professors that try to force Christian students to agree with them. People don't seem to get upset when OUR rights are violated. Be honest, you're not really talking about rights, because if you were, you would know that we have this thing called freedom of speech.

My other thing is your question to define harmful to the community. No matter what I answer, I have no doubt that you would find some smart counter for it. Is stealing harmful or beneficial? Is tyranny harmful or beneficial? Is a mob good or bad?

All opinions should be tolerated.
Only some should be listened to.
Only a few should you actually respect and take in.

FaithFighter : You deflected everything I asked, whatever, I can still work  with the points you made. When professors force students to abandon their religious beliefs, it IS a violation of their rights (though it doesn't happen outside the incredibly fallacious film "God is Not Dead") however someone claiming there is no God does not violate religious people's rights just as Christian people saying there is a God does not violate the rights of atheist people.

Myelin : Clearly, a couple of my points were mistaken. It's not that human rights are bogus. We all have rights. It is the way that I feel people hide behind them to attack Christianity that I feel is bogus. Btw, you do not think that it happens, because you don't look for it. I have heard so many stories of young children getting punished in public school because they prayed. You don't think it happens huh? I remember the stories. Besides that, did you see the credits? If i am not mistaken, it takes into account the names of students that went through similar trials. And to answer your point about government bias, if they just take out everything about GOD, does that not favor atheists? Or am I wrong? I don't want christianity to be obligatory, I want it to be respected. I want people to realize, even if they do not agree with the theology of my beliefs, that there is a base of morals and ethics that comes with what I believe. And that base needs to still be here. And from what I see--as in the case of Fergeson--it appears to erode more and more everyday, as now more and more people disrespect the police. Why? In the name of someone else's rights being broken. I'm sorry, but I just do not see that being cause for attacking police officers and burning down gas stations. True, the Pledge of allegiance was written in the sixties. In fact, it was written as part of a contest. This entry won, because people felt that it was the true embodiement of our country. It still should be.

How can it be wrong if the government talks about religion? You do realize that the government is made of a variety of people with a variety of beliefs.
P. S. I love my rights, I just want people to understand the difference between getting offended and their rights being violated. 

FaithFighter : Why do you think secularity benefits atheists? Secularity does not mean "the government believes there is no God" but "The government and religious belief are separate and must remain so" additionally, cases of "relgious prosecution" against Christians in te US, are generally inflated by Christian media and rumors. A Proffessor teaching evolution or Nietzche isn't prosecution but education, but if it has happened that Christian students have been discriminated against, it's not right, though I'm 100% sure it must be rare given that Christians at e a powerful majority in the US.

Just about every opinion should be tolerated in my opinion, but of course like always, there are those exceptions.

Many people, if not all people, in this world all have different opinions than mine, and I am ok with that, well I am ok with it at least most of the time. I like to group opinions mostly into two main categories:

1. Views on the world
2. Stereotypes

I'll start with number one here. Peoples views on the world are all different, when it comes to things such as politics and religion (as has been mentioned a few times above) and other things that are smaller, even down to foods and things like that. Politics is one of the ones that is probably most obvious and most separated in this world, as there are tons of political parties and branches of political parties all around the world. Even here in the USA we have multiple ones outside of the Democrat and Republican debate such as Tea Party and Libertarian. I don't agree with much of anything that most of the Republican people say, but really, I can most of the time get past all of that, and I really don't care. Tgags is one of my best friends here on Vizzed and he is a Republican, but I still respect him even though our views are different. The only thing I don't care for and the opinion on politics that I don't tolerate are those of communist/dictator views. Some people use these kinds of government, and I personally wouldn't tolerate to deal with that kind of government, but as long as they don't harm anything, I don't really see the whole problem. Next is Religion and one of the things that is a very touchy subject all around the world. Isis is a huge threat currently to the entire world as they try to establish a Muslim county and are trying to kill all of us west people. Honestly, I don't at all have a problem with their religion, but what they do with it. I don't think that their opinion that they should kill all of us out west should be tolerated, and it isn't. The government is taking this into our hands and are getting rid of those people, so it just goes to show that those kinds of opinions should under no circumstance be tolerated.

Oh boy, Stereotypes. These are some of the things that I honestly hate the most. These are opinions as they haven't been proved to be true, but they can sometimes be things that people live by. These kinds of opinions should be tolerated-most of the time. Bring up all of those Isis people again, that is a stereotype against us in the US and in Europe, and is one that in no circumstance should be tolerated as it is just completely crazy and just overall dumb. Things like this are awful, and are just stupid. I can't really put it into words how wrong it is to stereotype to this kind of degree as these Isis terrorists are doing.

Just putting this all together, opinions are a hard thing to really understand and talk about, but they should be tolerated to an extent. Once these opinions start to get out of hand, that is when the (ban) hammer should be dropped on them and those opinions have to stop. These are the main reasons why people in this world are so afraid, but what can you say; this world would be mighty boring if everyone always thought the same thing. As long as it doesn't get out of hand, let people believe things, it's just normal for people to think differently, so you've just got to tolerate it.

Opinion:

"I'm going to kill you."


Opinion:

"Oh yeah? Not if I kill you first!"


Opinion:

"We shouldn't tolerate the first opinion."


Opinion:

"We shouldn't tolerate any of the above opinions."



* * * * * *

Opinions are worthless on their own, and respect is not generally given to an opinion in itself, but rather the person who carries the said opinion

What makes a person respectable?

I would say putting slander aside enough to actually debate an idea if it seems to have some actual salt. Those who say "respect all opinions" May not want to admit it, but they would have to respect the opinion of a murder then. It's still an opinion, and you may think it's ridiculous, but it's another opinion.

So, they go back to saying "respect all opinions except these."

But.


That's just their opinion.

No one has the right to say what opinions ought to be respected and which ones should. I won't deal with those who pass of their human ideas as absolute, when they aren't.


As of the things of Yahova, those who act wrongly must be dealt with, and this responsibility is given to the government, it even executing this purpose as it is today.

I'll respect you and your opinion based upon your ability to explain it, and based upon what I know about your upbringing. Generally, I don't look upon people with spite, and it's not worth it to let other people's idiocy annoy me, but I don't respect them necessarily.

If this thread is to ask the question. "What opinions are to be respected" then it already will not get a full answer, for all opinions will be answered with opinions!

I'm ready to 'tolerate' whatever it is coming out of your mouth because I have no control over what you feel and obviously if your opinion needs to be discussed between the two of us (hypothetically) then you don't have cotrol over what comes out of your mouth either.  When your opinions are meant to cause harm to myself or soimeone else who does not have any intention of harm, be it emotional or physical harm then i will no longer idly wait to see what you do.  Unless your opinion is meant to harm unsuspecting people, then I have no interest in stopping or proving your opinion wrong, and I'd say that goes for most people.

To answer the question, one need to check where an opinion originates from.  It's not the opinion that matters, but it's really an issue of morality (A system or collection of ideas of right and wrong conduct).  What does morality mean to you and which of those "moral" values do you hold dear? To take it further, what makes something moral or rather where did morality come from?  You see, all of us have a point of reference in our lives that shaped / is still shaping your life.  Whatever that point is or was, that's where you will draw your morality and eventually your opinions from.  If your moral compass is totally screwed up or if you have no idea of solid right or wrongs, you will have distorted opinions of things in life.  If that's the case then I would personally not tolerate those opinions.

warmaker:
: I absolutely agree when something is calling directly for violence it definitely should not be tolerated. I kind of erred with my wording on my post not being clear at all on that and I apologize. Beyond that though, how do you define hatred in modern society? Like I said, I agree something directly and obviously violent should not be acceptable such as Nazism or terrorism. However in society today I think the word "hate" is used far too liberally. As an example; Is hatred solely Westboro protesting gays and funerals saying God hates fags? Or has it now extended itself to anything merely disagreeing with gay rights. This is the point I attempted to make. I think opinions should be tolerated regardless or peoples perception of them such as being perceived as being hateful which like I said I think is very liberally defined now. And again I agree actual violence and extremism should not be tolerated.