Tolerance

I watched a lengthy segment on tolerance presented by Deutsche Welle TV yesterday. I speculated that it was an admirable bow to Martin Luther King Day here in the U.S.. But I found the segment confusing. A sampling of Berliners on the street left me wondering if there was a translation gap between German and English. 

There seems to be a general confusion between tolerance and accommodation in the minds of many people. These are two different concepts. Tolerance is most succinctly described as "live and let live". Accommodation entails making special allowances for certain behaviors or beliefs. The U.S. is notoriously tolerant. Our failed immigration system, which works to provide near-slave labor to exploiting employers, is a prime example of American tolerance. However, there are new immigrants who are expecting and/or demanding accommodation.

This is how I see the difference. If I am using a public space peacefully, tolerance dictates anyone else is entitled to use that same public space peacefully. However, if I am using a public space peacefully, I am not required by tolerance to share everything in my pockets with anyone who solicits or aggressively demands it. I may decide to accommodate the requests or demands. That is my prerogative. However, denying a stranger the contents of my pockets on demand is not intolerance. It is common sense. I may tolerate the stranger's demand but I am perfectly entitled to deny it or debate its validity. I would be tolerant but not accommodating.

Tolerance is not accommodation. This lies at the heart of confusion about religious influence on society and the effects of some forms of aggressive cultural isolationism. Religion has been accommodated and exploited for centuries by governments. Here in the U.S., religion is given tax immunity and often undo respect. This is religious accommodation, not just tolerance. Atheists, on the other hand, have been subjected to governmental and religion-based intolerance historically and have required no accommodation from government. Atheist protests against religious ritual in publicly funded settings has been an assertion of Constitutional rights, not a demand for unreasonable accommodation. 

Many heterosexuals speak of tolerating homosexuals but see gay marriage as an accommodation. Gay marriage for American citizens is a Constitutional right, not an accommodation, on the basis of "all men (people) are created equal". However, granting a special development deal in an urban setting to build a religious structure or cultural community center is an accommodation to that religion or cultural group. Religions or cultural minorities do not have a right to governmental accommodation.

As a practical humanist, I do not believe that any nation can afford to accommodate every special interest group. I do wholeheartedly believe in tolerance, which lies at the root of nonviolent coexistence. However, tolerance can be abused and exploited by those who are aggressive, selfish and greedy. I believe it is the role of government to keep the peace, enforce the law and educate the populace to understand that there are no real special interests. There are only human interests.