Intolerance - a new breed of ex-JW

by LittleToe 260 Replies latest jw friends

  • Terry
    You have the right to believe whatever you wish - and I will not only tolerate it but would fight for that right. You do not have the right to have your beliefs respected or pandered to - no matter how sincerely you hold them.

    You sir--are an individual!!

  • LittleToe

    Darn, now I'm really afraid - Terry is exorcising my deemunz

    Is in or out a binary affair?

  • Forscher

    Yep, some trade a form of intolerance for another form of intolerance, go figure!
    When I first came here I'd decided to leave the Watchtower way of doing things. Like many, I was reevaluating things. With that as my background I ran into some very intolerant ones from the atheist bunch (I am not saying they are the only ones by any means, but they sure left the biggest impression on me). It didn't take long before I was being called a narrow-minded fundie, sheesh!
    I think that what all of us should keep in mind is that most, though I'll admit not all, who come here are in a similiar position as I was. They are questioning long held beliefs. To call them names and abuse them when they don't agree with our own beliefs is shortsighted, to say the least. The folks I mentioned didn't impress me in the least. They were being just as closed-minded as they claimed I was. Remember that.
    I am still trying to figure things out. Just because I defend unpopular views doesn't mean that I don't intend to rid myself of them if they don't pass muster. It may very well mean that I am testing them. The same goes for others who come here.

  • trevor

    You talk a lot of sense for a rabbit

    And, because, you were an open-minded, tolerant & non-judgmental Christian...which is a rather rare creature, imho.

    I still have that opinion about you, but, not the Bible or any religion.

    I guess you are saying that there is no need to throw Little Toe out with the Bible.

  • Terry
    Darn, now I'm really afraid - Terry is exorcising my deemunz

    Is in or out a binary affair?

    Well, your demons were looking quite flabby!

    You'll have to ask the chairman of the board of Whataburger about "in and out".

  • OpenFireGlass
    FIrst, OFG has confused intolerance with criticism. I am able and willing to endure your use of pot, so long as your use and my life don't intersect in a negative

    see in the US we tolerate drinking... we have bars .

    on the other hand, some states don't tolerate cannabis users.. they put them behind bars(jail)

    I can tolerare criticism, but I will always criticize intolerance

    I mean, if I couldn't tolerate criticism I'd be gone already..

    I guess for me, when ever someone resorts to name calling, I view that as intolerance...

    Peace, Mike

  • lola28

    Little Toe,

    I have noticed the same thing as well; it seems that many ex-witnesses have become really intolerant of organized religion and with good cause; the Society has done major damage to people. Having said that I think a few people use that as an excuse to belittle those that have a different belief system, they seem to rely on the good old “can you blame me for my intolerance? The Society made me this way” excuse. At some point we have to stop blaming the society and take responsibility for our actions.

  • startingover


    That was an excellent post!

  • AuldSoul


    What's this got to do with anything? Well, while I was mildly embarrassed to be corrected in public, I was glad that I knew more than before. I would be far more embarrassed - humiliated even - had my companion decided to be "tolerant" of my belief, and I had continued in my error. With the possible exception of pride I cannot see why anyone would prefer to be wrong but tolerated, than to be correct.
    So when someone expresses a belief I know to be false, I will usually correct it. If they express a questionable belief, I will question it. If they express a ridiculous belief, I may even ridicule it. None of this is intolerance. If they choose to hold an untenable belief, I will still tolerate them. I will not necessarily respect them, or keep silent about their error - but why should I? And why should there be any difference between correcting someone about the origin of a word, and ;correcting someone ;about the origin of the universe?

    I have been mulling this over. Something about it seemed to strike discordantly. I finally applied logic and voila!

    You have confused statement of belief with statement of fact. Your statement regarding the etymology of a word is akin to my frequently erroneous posts for which Narkissos and Leolaia patiently smack me on the head. If I understand how it works correctly, in order for a belief to be untenable it must first be framed as a falsifiable construct.

    In the case of whether God exists to my knowledge there is no such construct, just as there would be none for whether pink unicorns exist. Defense for personal belief in God is easily achieved by the invocation of the personal experience clause—it is rare that someone can successfully defeat a belief arrived at through personal experience. Defense for advocacy of belief in God is more difficult to achieve. The former is tenable, the latter less so.

    In the matter of a word origin, you stated an incorrect viewpoint as fact. You stated it as though others could confidently depend on the factuality of your statement. You were presented with evidence you perceived as compelling enough to change your viewpoint of the facts.

    I would be delighted at any effort you might similarly muster against my personal belief in God.

    With the possible exception of pride I cannot see why anyone would prefer to be wrong but tolerated, than to be correct.

    How about comfort? Have you considered that as a possible reason? Nostalgic desire to stay connected to something, a desire to not have been entirely wrong about everything could be considered pride, if you're a judgmental ass. But you don't strike me as one, so that could be another reason aside from pride. I don't think you really strained too much to come up with other reasons.

    Either way, ridiculing a belief is not the same as ridiculing a person for having the belief. All too often that line is crossed. There are thousands of reasons a person may have acquired a specific belief and very few of those reasons (comparatively) are actually deserving of ridicule. Even more rarely is the person who has the belief deserving of ridicule.

    Ridicule is the stuff of scorn. Scorn presumes that you are better than others, that you are superior. With the possible exception of pride I cannot see why anyone would prefer to be scornful and correct. I have really tried hard to come up with alternate reasons and I cannot. If there are others, please share them with me.


  • Rabbit


    I guess you are saying that there is no need to throw Little Toe out with the Bible.

    Thank you for the kind words, it's hard to outgrow my alias sometimes.

    No, no need to throw the little Toe out. He's one of the good guys, most of the time... He even gave Robdar her head back.

    * * * *

    I just think we should show respect for what others come to believe. In most cases 'beliefs' aren't harmful, but, if they start to control people in a destructive way, I think we have an obligation to voice our opinion -- even if we turn out to be wrong ourselves. It's a way to start a discussion where ideas can be exchanged.

    As far as ridicule goes, even that can be done in many shades of grey, from destructive to educational. Sometimes people need a good 'grey matter' shaking.

    If you can be nice about it, of course. And not talk down to others. I'm just sayin'...


Share this