A bit of a side-track: “tolerance” does not mean “allowing others’ opinions to squelch one’s own.” Just because X, a man, —-s men, does not mean that my negative opinion of their choice to indulge that urge is invalid. People make value judgements about others’ choices every day. One person criticizes others’ choice of an SUV as vehicle; another rails about smokers. Nobody seems to think twice about tolerance before trashing Christians (probably because Christians don’t tend to riot or cut throats when offended). *cough*

But, say some, homosexuality is a genetic trait. Well the inclination towards it might be (or might not, it’s very much undetermined), but hey, lots of people are born with addictive personalities and nobody says to the alcoholic, “oh, that’s ok, you’re an alkie, so here’s another fifth. Cheers!” Another is born with pedophiliac urges but we don’t condone it if he acts on them. So not even all inborn tendencies are tolerated and certainly not celebrated, even if they affect nobody but the person himself.

Anyway Christians tolerate homosexuality very well. We voice our opinion. Tolerate it. An example of intolerance can be readily seen over in Iran where they deny there are homosexuals, or in Saudi Arabia where they stone them.

Speaking of terms of use: the old definitions of ‘liberal’ as ‘expanding freedom’ and ‘conservative’ as ‘reactionary’ are long-dead, perished in the ’50s. What has been used above as ‘liberal’ is called ‘classical liberalism’ and what carries the ‘progressive’ or ‘liberal’ name now is merely soclalism, the accretion of power to the State and away from the individual. “Conservative” at least in the U.S. is a fractured name with “social conservatives” and “neo-conservatives” and “paleo-conservatives,” libertarians and many other varieties all fighting bitterly to define the word their way. (Thus the current crop of GOP candidates)

As for writing, I think a writer ought to be willing to write about anything, or else he’s going to be very limited in where he can work. That’s not to say the writer can’t use his values and opinions. OTOH if the assignment is “write about and express it as a positive experience” then, well, there are other jobs. Strong moralists are probably not a good fit as scriptwriters for Rockstar games. Readers’ Digest is not likely to publish any amusing anecdotes about the festival experience from Wiccan writers.

My advice: work in companies developing products with which you have qualms. As an insider, you at least have a chance to make a stand. If you’re unsuccessful there, then your work still eventually contributes to the conversation, which should be viewed as an opportunity for communicating your point of view and disseminating your message.

It didn’t work for the Democrats, so why do you think it will do it for Republicans?

This is the internet, don’t hold your breath. Expect everyone to post like J.

On the kidney issue alone, I am not particularly troubled by the idea of selling organs, and people are sickening and dying at a rate that I believe would be significantly reduced by legalizing paying for organs, and it makes me really irate. Beyond that, I am troubled by any number of vice-related activities, but I am much more troubled that we’re still jailing people for many of them, and that makes me irate too.

Also, if there’s any chance I might be right that people have been arguing by Macaulay’s standard with the occasional dollop of sneering sarcasm on top, consider how easy it is to address such an argument in a charming diplomatic feather-smoothing way. I’m not sure I’ve ever seen it done.

“Buggre Alle this for a Larke. I amme so sick to mye Hart of typefettinge. Master Biltonn if no Gentelmann, and Master Scagges noe more than a tighte fisted Southwarke Knobbefticke. I telle you, onne a daye laike thif Ennywone withe half an oz. of Sense shoulde bee oute in the Sunneshain, ane nott Stucke here alle the liuelong daie inn thif mowldey olde By-Our-Lady Workefhoppe.” — an early knowledge worker, quoted by Gaiman and Pratchett in _Good Omens_

But you sound like a jerk, William, so you can go screw in my book.

By the way, Singapore lifted its ban on hot blue alien lesbian action. And yes, this is a video of the encounter.

I hope you believe in such ‘you live your life, I live mine’ tolerance consistently. As in, even for behavior that you find disturbing, not just selectively for behavior that you basically approve of anyway for reasons of taste. (E.g., approve at least at casual levels like “hmm, big gay community there? I bet I’d like living there.”) Tolerance of things they like comes easily to most people, right and left alike.:-| But do you apply your ‘you live your life, I live mine’ principle to prostitution, and to selling and buying kidneys for transplant? If so, cool.

Oh, and Amber, Sanya, you rock, if I haven’t said so before .

I’d have to respectfully disagree, there are plenty of discussions on the topic, but nothing proven. Also, I don’t believe that science has much play in the morality sphere.

Incidentally, science possibly also shows that psychopathic tendencies just ‘are’ as well. http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/25078.php. But that condition, we should fix, “The discovery that psychopathic tendencies are strongly heritable suggests that we need to get help for these youngsters early on”.

Regarding the larger group of participants in the conversation, the most amusing thing about the blogs and comments on this topic are just how intolerant the outspoken and supposedly ‘tolerant’ folks are when they disagree.