So much for tolerance

"Intolerance in the name of tolerance is hypocrisy." -- Marco Rubio

* Army Punishes Chaplain For Discussing His Personal Faith During Suicide Prevention Training -- "It is outrageous that an Army chaplain would have his career threatened because he cared so much about his soldiers that he opened up to them about his personal struggles..."
* Atlanta Fire Chief Suspended Without Pay for Calling Homosexuality 'Sexual Perversion' in Book About Christian Values -- "Cochran, who first served as fire chief in 2008, began the month-long suspension this week and city officials are said to be considering further disciplinary action."
* International Human Trafficking Conference Cancelled Because Organizer is Christian Abortion Opponent -- "...three days before the beginning of the conference, the conference was cancelled because ...Mrs. Ruth Nordström...had defended a midwife in a freedom of conscience issue."
* Red Cross volunteer, 71, axed over gay marriage protest -- "The church-going pensioner received his dismissal letter after holding a one-man protest outside his local cathedral."
* Trinity Western grad 'attacked' for being Christian in job rejection -- "Bethany Paquette claims her application to work in Canada's North for Amaruk Wilderness Corp was rejected because she's Christian."

The intolerant tolerants do not tolerate any kind of discrimination except the kind of discrimination that they like to tolerate. The above are examples of the intolerant tolerant. In succumbing to the viewpoint that every viewpoint is legitimate, every viewpoint becomes legitimate except the viewpoint that will not admit that every viewpoint is legitimate.

All the above are examples linked I have noticed on the internet recently. They are posted for your viewing pleasure. That does not mean that I feel the same about each incident. For example (most of you probably won't agree, but) I believe that a private employer like Amaruk Wilderness Corporation should be able to refuse to hire someone who is Christian if they don't want to hire them for that reason. They nevertheless seem to be hypocrites who think that only their kind of viewpoint discrimination is legitimate and certainly not the views of Trinity Western College and its students. It appears that they enjoyed being extremely obnoxious about the rejection. Interestingly, they retreated to a position "solely based on the fact that she did not meet the minimum requirements" to be hired by them!

On the other hand, if government entities such as a city or the Army are going to be viewpoint neutral, that neutrality should extend to defend the views of Kelvin Cochran and Joe Lawhorn, as well as their detractors.

So much for tolerance. So, instead, how about protection of speech and viewpoints that we don't like and cannot tolerate? (For more information, please see the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.)