4 ms·

More tolerant by allowing people to discriminate against tattoos?

• nine_k 11y ago
  In private setting — yes, if you please. Having a tattoo is not a constitutional right. Did you notice how smoking in places like cafes is discriminated against? This is not considered unacceptable. To make this point a bit more clear, let me quote a bit of Scott Alexander: -- The Emperor summons before him Bodhidharma and asks: “Master, I have been tolerant of innumerable gays, lesbians, bisexuals, asexuals, blacks, Hispanics, Asians, transgender people, and Jews. How many Tolerance Points have I earned for my meritorious deeds?” Bodhidharma answers: “None at all”. The Emperor, somewhat put out, demands to know why not. Bodhidharma asks: “Well, what do you think of gay people?” The Emperor answers: “What do you think I am, some kind of homophobic bigot? Of course I have nothing against gay people!” And Bodhidharma answers: “Thus do you gain no merit by tolerating them!” -- (http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/09/30/i-can-tolerate-anything-except-the-outgroup/ http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/09/30/i-can-tolerate-anything...)
  • glibgil 11y ago
    The ad posted by the "Startup Castle" was not private. It was posted to the public. Your quote is a complete non sequitur. Are you suggesting that I will gain Tolerance Points by tolerating the Startup Castle ad, which I hate, that discriminates against people with tattoos? If so, I will get a ton of points for tolerating your tortured logic which I also hate. I really hate your argument.
    • icebraining 11y ago
      I think the point nine_k is trying to make is that one is not really tolerant if one only tolerates the things one likes, or is indifferent to. Toleration only exists regarding things one disapproves of. And I believe that publicly saying you hate something is quite the opposite of tolerating it.