Connect with us

Dancing With Bristol Palin’s Perversion Of Tolerance

Published

on

When people feel the need to state explicitly how “tolerant” they are, it’s usually a sign that something is amiss. Such is the case with Bristol Palin’s recent blog post, where she declares that she would have no problem with a gay dance partner, but laments that others are unwilling to extend the same tolerance to certain Christian beliefs:

In their simplistic minds, the fact that I’m a Christian, that I believe in God’s plan for marriage, means that I must hate gays and must hate to even be in their presence. Well, they were right about one thing: there was hate in that media room, but the hate was theirs, not mine. …

Look, my responsibility is pretty darn clear: to treat people as I would like to be treated, to be gracious, and – yes – to uphold and advance my Christian principles in all that I do. Would I want a gay dancer to refuse to dance with me because of my beliefs? Why would I refuse to dance with a gay man because of his?

To the Left, “tolerance” means agreeing with them on, well, everything. To me, tolerance means learning to live and work with each other when we don’t agree – and won’t ever agree.

At first glance, this seems like a pretty straightforward example of tolerance: I accept you, can’t you accept me? The problem is that, in this case, the ideal of tolerance is being used to call for inaction in the face of intolerance. Palin implicitly parallels two instances of tolerance – the first is simply tolerating the existence and presence of gay people; the second is tolerating the belief that the defining feature of gay people, as embodied in their relationships, is immoral and should be legally treated as unequal.

These are clearly quite different things. Under a meaningful understanding of what tolerance is, there are indeed some beliefs that are simply unacceptable – indeed, they are intolerable. Think about it: Is there any belief that you would consider so unreasonable and inhumane that passively tolerating it, and remaining silent in the face of it, would be more unacceptable to you than speaking out and letting it be known that you’re not okay with that? For instance, do you see no difference between women voting and those who would act to prevent them from voting, or gay people holding a parade and those who would seek to suppress them by violence, or women wearing the clothes of their choice and those who demand they be cloaked in veils, or gay people merely existing and others who want to execute them? At what point do you recognize that such things are not just two sides of one coin, not just an innocuous difference of opinion, and plainly not the same?

If you can acknowledge that it is possible for certain beliefs to be so troubling that you cannot accept them, then you can understand that this is only a matter of where we draw that line. And many of us draw the line at the belief that gay people’s love is immoral and should be legally unrecognized. If our commitment to tolerance has any teeth to it, then advocating tolerance of gay people necessarily precludes being okay with such anti-gay beliefs. After all, if someone claimed to tolerate your own beliefs, how much would that really mean to you if they never spoke out in protest when others called for such homophobic Christian speech to be criminalized? Such an obligation to object should at least be familiar on a conceptual level to Christians, who have often claimed that “loving” someone demands that we tell them the unvarnished “truth” about the supposed sinfulness of their sexuality.

Calling for tolerance, at the most basic level and regardless of the specifics of what we believe ought to be tolerated, means advocating one approach to beliefs and expressions over another. A kind of universal “tolerance” that says literally anything is okay negates that, and as a result, it’s barely even coherent or distinct as a position. At most, it has all the force of “I think this might be a good idea, but, you know… whatever.” If you think that tolerance of you or your beliefs is at all important, then realize that tolerance needs to be more compelling than that. Tolerance doesn’t mean agreeing with “the Left” – it means, at a minimum, agreeing that tolerance should actually stand for something. And if you expect to be admired for your tolerance, then espousing a position that amounts to “I’m so tolerant, I’ll never let anyone know I disapprove of prejudice against minorities!” isn’t the best way to make that happen.

Image, top: Bristol Palin and Mark Ballas, Dancing With The Stars, 2010

 

Zinnia Jones is an atheist activist, writer, and video blogger focusing on LGBTQ rights and religious belief. Originally from Chicago, she’s currently living in Florida with her partner Heather and their two children.

Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

News

‘I’m Not Talking About That Meeting’: Noem Implies She May Have Met With Kim Jong Un

Published

on

Republican South Dakota Governor Kristi Noem continues to make media appearances promoting her new book, which has received massive attention for the story about her shooting to death her 14-month old dog, Cricket, and a goat, and her reportedly false claim she met with North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un.

But in discussing that apparent lie that appears in her book, Noem appeared to tell a few more – and seemed to suggest she may have actually met with Kim Jong Un but should not have put that meeting in her memoir. Experts have said it’s unlikely she did meet with him.

“The book is called, ‘No Going Back,’ but it sounds like the publisher, Center Street, is going back on a couple of the details in the book,” CBS Mornings told Noem.

“Well, I don’t believe so,” Noem replied.

After hearing the apparently false details of her alleged meeting with Kim Jong Un being read on-air straight from her book, Noem explained, “when I became aware of that we changed the content, and the future editions will be adjusted.”

READ MORE: Judge Hands Trump ‘Incarceration’ Threat as Experts Say Next Time He’ll Toss Him in Jail

Noem also said she’s “met with many, many world leaders, I’ve traveled around the world. I should not have put that anecdote in the book, and at my request they have removed it.”

She was then asked, “That specifically didn’t happen?” but Noem appeared to brush off the question.

“What I’m saying is I’m not talking about that meeting, I’m not talking about my meetings with world leaders, there are some that are in the book and there’s some that are not in the book.”

Asked, “Did you tell your ghost writer to write that?” Noem refused to answer the question.

“I specifically have worked on policy for over 30 years, and over that time I have traveled around the world and met with leaders around the world. And that anecdote, I’ve asked them to change the content, and it will be removed.”

“It’s a simple question, did you or did you not meet with Kim Jong Un?”

“That’s the answer that I have for you,” Noem replied.

READ MORE: Congressman Pummeled for Praising Students Mocking Black Protester With Monkey Sounds

She also did not tell CBS why she chose to put it in the book at all, if she knew it was false.

Noem does not mention that she recorded the audio book version for “No Going Back,” and would have read those words about meeting with the North Korean dictator aloud, yet apparently did not ask her publisher to remove it until a local newspaper, The Dakota Scout, published a report starting her account of the event was “in doubt.”

On Sunday, Noem first began to suggest the meeting might have taken place. Speaking with CBS’s “Face the Nation,” Axios reported, “Noem declined to talk about specific meetings she had with various world leaders, and never outright said she didn’t meet with Kim during the interview.”

A CBS News transcript of that interview shows “Face the Nation” moderator Margaret Brennan saying, “you released video of your recording of the audio book. you didn’t catch these errors when you were recording it?”

“Well, Margaret, as soon as it was brought to my attention, I took action to make sure that it was reflected,” Noem responded, before leaping into an attack on the media.

Also on Sunday, The Independent reported, “North Korea experts say it’s highly unlikely Ms Noem ever met the North Korean leader.”

“From 2011 to 2018, Mr Kim did not leave North Korea, according to University of Notre Dame professor and North Korea expert George Lopez.” The Independent added, “Benjamin Young, a professor at Virginia Commonwealth University and an expert on North Korea, told The Dakota Scout that Ms Noem’s account of meeting Kim was ‘dubious.'”

“I cover North Korea very closely, and I have never heard of Kim Jong Un meeting congressmen or congresswomen,” Young said.

Watch Noem’s full CBS interview from Monday below or at this link.

READ MORE: RFK Jr., Embracing Far-Right, Spoke at Fundraiser for Anti-Government Group With J6 Ties

Continue Reading

News

Judge Hands Trump ‘Incarceration’ Threat as Experts Say Next Time He’ll Toss Him in Jail

Published

on

New York State Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan ruled on the tenth allegation of Donald Trump violating his gag order, finding the ex-president in criminal contempt of court and warning the presumptive Republican nominee for president directly that he may put him jail if he again violates the gag order.

“Mr Trump, as you know, the prosecution has filed three separate motions to find you in criminal contempt. It appears that the $1,000 fines are not a deterrent,” Judge Merchan told the defendant Monday morning, as The Guardian reports. Merchan, who is overseeing the Trump criminal trial commonly called the “hush money case” also said, “I have a job to do and part of that job is to protect the dignity of the judicial system.”

“Mr. Trump, last thing I want to do is put you in jail, you are the former president of the United States, and possibly the next president as well,” Merchan told Trump directly, ABC News reported.

“Defendant violated the order by making public statements about the jury and how it was selected,” Merchan’s five-page ruling reads. “In doing so, Defendant not only called into question the integrity, and therefore the legitimacy of these proceedings, but again raised the specter of fear for the safety of the jurors and of their loved ones.”

READ MORE: Congressman Pummeled for Praising Students Mocking Black Protester With Monkey Sounds

MSNBC legal Analyst Danny Cevallos on-air reported he believes Justice Merchan may give Trump one more chance if he violates the gag order but that could be it before ordering him to jail.

“The judge is saying that this is absolutely on the table and that jail could happen and in fact, I think that might justify him doing it sooner rather than later. I mean, maybe one more chance,” Cevallos said.

But former Assistant U.S. Attorney General Harry Litman took Justice Merchan’s warning to be a more immediate threat: “So there it is — next time –> jail. The final warning. It’s in Trump’s hands now,” he wrote on social media.

CNN legal analyst Norm Eisen appeared to agree with Litman, writing that Trump “was told for violation #11 he’s going to jail.”

“In response to jail warning,” Eisen adds, “Trump gives Judge the absolute laser glare–if looks could kill…”

And former FBI Asst. Director Frank Figliuzzi adds, “I expect the next violation will put Trump in the lock up. He knows that. So if Trump violates again, consider that he views jail as helpful.”

READ MORE: RFK Jr., Embracing Far-Right, Spoke at Fundraiser for Anti-Government Group With J6 Ties

Some legal experts felt Justice Merchan should have imposed a jail sentence for his criminal contempt of court finding.

NBC News/MSNBC legal analyst Glenn Kirschner wrote, “yes, it IS way past his jail time.”

See a copy of the final page of Justice Merchan’s ruling below or at this link.

 

Continue Reading

News

Congressman Pummeled for Praising Students Mocking Black Protester With Monkey Sounds

Published

on

U.S. Rep. Mike Collins, Republican of Georgia, is under fire after praising University of Mississippi students, some wearing American flag outfits, mocking a Black woman protester by making monkey sounds and shouting, “lock her up.”

“Counter-protestors at the University of Mississippi made racist remarks — including monkey noises and comparisons to Lizzo — towards a Black woman who was part of a planned protest against the war in Gaza,” Los Angeles Magazine reported Friday.

Collins, who tried to defund Vice President Kamala Harris’ Office in November, declared his support for the counter-protesters at “Ole Miss,” as the University is called.

“Ole Miss taking care of business,” he wrote on social media, atop the video (below).

The counter-protesters, as evidenced in the video, appear to be mostly white.

A large number of users on the social media platform X responded, accusing the Congressman and the counter-protesters of racism.

“When is the inevitable ‘I don’t have a racist bone in my body’ tweet coming,” wondered Rewire News Group editor-at-large Imani Gandy.

“Which part is your favorite, Mike?” asked Fred Wellman, the former executive director of The Lincoln Project. “Is it the white kid acting like a monkey at the black woman or the white security guy acting like she’s a threat? I’m trying to figure out which flavor of racism has you all excited the most?”

READ MORE: MAGA State Superintendent Supports Chaplains in Public Schools – But Not From All Religions

Harvard Law Cyberlaw Clinic clinical instructor Alejandra Caraballo responded to the Georgia GOP congressman, “Thanks for confirming you’re a massive racist piece of sh*t.”

Mississippi Free Press news editor Ashton Pittman wrote: “Rep. Mike Collins, R-Georgia, praises a video showing a University of Mississippi frat boy dancing like a monkey and making monkey noises near a Black woman student who was protesting for Palestine while other frat boys chant ‘lock her up.'”

In a separate post describing a separate video taken of the same group Pittman wrote: “Frat bros at @OleMiss chant, ‘Lizzo! Lizzo!’ and shout, ‘F**k you fatass, f**k you b*tch’ at a Black woman who was protesting for Palestine. Do people really think these counterprotestors are doing it to support Jews?”

Journalist John Harwood did not mince words, writing, “Congressman proud of the racism.”

“Okay, Mike. We get it,” wrote podcast host, documentary director, and author W. Kamau Bell. “You want to be famous for being a racist. Fine. I’ll help you become a famous racist. You’re welcome.”

The original video is here.

See Rep. Collins’ post and the video below or at this link.

Caution: the video is disturbing.

READ MORE: Noem Heads to Mar-a-Lago After Branding Kids She Ministered in Church ‘Little Tyrants’

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.