<p>well, you could start thinking about the nature of tolerance and the difference between tolerance in conversation and in society, and think more deeply about the issues you are raising </p>
<p>e.g.: "Indiscriminate tolerance is justified in harmless debates, in conversation, in academic discussion; it is indispensable in the scientific enterprise, in private religion. But society cannot be indiscriminate where the pacification of existence, where freedom and happiness themselves are at state: here, certain things cannot be said, cannot be proposed, certain behavior cannot be permitted without making tolerance an instrument for the continuation of servitude.”</p>
<p>[A</a> CRITIQUE OF PURE TOLERANCE by Robert Paul Wolff, Barrington Moore, Jr., and Herbert Marcuse](<a href=“http://www.webster.edu/~corbetre/personal/reading/wolff-tolerance.html]A”>http://www.webster.edu/~corbetre/personal/reading/wolff-tolerance.html)</p>
<p>Kei</p>