undefined | Better HN

0 pointsslibhb4y ago0 comments

Your fundamental error is not recognizing the existence of the "tolerant bigot".

Most bigots are tolerant. Most people (in the US) who think homosexuality is a crime against God, a sin, wrong, or just gross are tolerant. They will keep their opinion to themselves and they can be friends, neighbors, coworkers with a gay person with no issues.

People are weird and complicated. It just isn't the case that someone who is against gay marriage is "against your right to exist". Tolerance is putting up with things you disapprove of not approving everything.

0 comments

drewbug014y ago

You're not really wrong, on any point. But you did make an interesting connection, that a lot of people are making: "Tolerance is [...] not approving everything."

It's honestly fascinating to me that this keeps coming up. I never asked for approval - the hypothetical I continually stick to is "this policy could allow someone to label me saying 'my husband and I ...' as 'political speech', and silence that aspect of my life." (And, specifically, that I have experienced this before myself and have seen it happen to others and that it's not all that uncommon).

But I'm not asking for approval - but you jumped there anyways. Why is that? To me, that reads as "asking for tolerance" is the same as "asking for approval," but that would contradict what you stated earlier.

There's a logical inconsistency there, and I don't know how you resolve it?

slibhbOP4y ago

People, including me, are making the "tolerance is not approval" connection because we look at society and see a lot of tolerance and then we see lots of people who conflate tolerance with approval, sometimes explicitly, e.g. if someone says "I am very tolerant, I support gay marriage," they are using the word "tolerant" wrong.

Your argument is basically "my relationship is political because I am gay". I disagree. I think that reasonable people understand that your marriage is not political. Acquiring your right to marry was political, but exercising that right is not. If someone doesn't understand this and interprets you referencing your husband as some political statement, they are wrong, and I expect most HR departments would realize that if push came to shove.

drewbug014y ago

> Your argument is basically "my relationship is political because I am gay". I disagree. I think that reasonable people understand that your marriage is not political.

My argument is "my relationship is political because I am gay" and part of why I make that argument is because people have told me they think it's political.

So - you disagree. About what, precisely? If you don't want to believe me that this has happened to me, and happened to others, that's something only you can decide and control.

But it would be nice if you could at least assume I'm telling you the truth about my own life and experiences, and engage in debate accordingly. Otherwise just be up front about the fact that you don't think I'm telling the truth about this, or that you think I'm wildly mistaken.

1 more reply

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 comments

drewbug014y ago

You're not really wrong, on any point. But you did make an interesting connection, that a lot of people are making: "Tolerance is [...] not approving everything."

There's a logical inconsistency there, and I don't know how you resolve it?

slibhbOP4y ago

drewbug014y ago

> Your argument is basically "my relationship is political because I am gay". I disagree. I think that reasonable people understand that your marriage is not political.

My argument is "my relationship is political because I am gay" and part of why I make that argument is because people have told me they think it's political.

So - you disagree. About what, precisely? If you don't want to believe me that this has happened to me, and happened to others, that's something only you can decide and control.

1 more reply

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse