> This seems to neatly capture the problem. If you can paint the other side as irrational, it excuses almost any pre-emptive bad behavior. I'd argue that this

> This seems to neatly capture the problem. If you can paint the other side as irrational, it excuses almost any pre-emptive bad behavior. I'd argue that this response neatly captures the flip side of the problem. To quote my other post: --- Both things are true: - Intolerant zealots (religious or otherwise) can weaponize tolerance against itself. - Bigots can weaponize the paradox of tolerance for purely hateful aims. You must contend with both of these realities. There's no avoiding judgment and practical considerations. --- So yes, you are right that "believing something is wrong does not mean the adherents are out to kill people or use force against them." But sometimes it does mean that. You don't get to take the high road until you address what to do in those situations.