“…. the notion of tolerance is inapplicable to rights violators. If a man beats his wife, it makes no sense to say that we must be tolerant with him. When a government bans women from driving cars in public, it is even more ridiculous to suggest that we ought to be tolerant with public officials. When a court orders a death sentence for leaving the religion, it sounds equally perverse to say that we should be tolerant with the executioner. Maybe there are reasons why we should often not interfere, but it is certainly bizarre to suggest that one of such reasons is that, as liberals, we must be tolerant of such practices. Rights violators are not the proper objects of tolerance. Those who call critics of these practices Islamophobes commit a fallacy: they move from the correct idea that we must be tolerant toward different religions to the incorrect idea that we must likewise tolerate anything that is done in the name of religion. So critics of these practices are not intolerant of Islam. They are not Islamophobes. They simply point out that people have rights, and so there are certain things others may not do to them even if done in the name of religion…. ”

Via True Islamophobia @ Bleeding Heart Libertarians.

Comments are closed.