I hadn't been following this thread, and I see that Steamin' Willie addressed me above and mauvepink made a related comment on tolerance. Willie thinks he wouldn't agree with me on much if we met in person, but I think he'd be surprised. He and mauvepink have some really good things to say about tolerance. I respect both of them very much.

The word 'tolerate' has almost a negative implication - it seems to mean "to put up with something." But I think the word "tolerance" has taken on a much more positive meaning, at least in the United States. To me, "tolerance" is an ideal. I don't know if I can ever achieve it perfectly, but I keep trying. Rather than just putting up with people, I think the ideal of tolerance demands that we accept and respect people for exactly who they are. If they're gay, we not only have to accept their being gay - we need to hold them in value and respect as a gay person, even if we might happen to disagree with the idea of gay sex (or at least be a bit squeamish about it, as I am).

My own code of ethics requires me to value and respect every person. I sin against that code on occasion, but that is the code I hold myself to. And what I actually strive for is to value and respect and enjoy every person. That doesn't always work, but I find it usually does - and that means I usually have a hell of a good time with people. I have to say that I believe my violations of my code are the only things I consider sinful, and the only things that God will hold me accountable for. (cf. Matthew 25 - feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, etc.)

In some ways, the idea of religous beliefs having no standing in law is troublesome to me, but maybe there's good in it. Perhaps the better thing would be if personal beliefs were respected by the law.

I'm a Catholic, and being Catholic is an important part of my life - but my personal moral code is far stricter than Catholic morals. My personal belief is that any intolerance is sinful - and for me, that especially includes intolerance against the poor, the mentally ill, the immigrant, the homosexual, and the Muslim. I am also a pacifist, although my Catholic religion does allow warfare in some situations. I think abortion is wrong, although I cannot agree with "pro-life" factions who demand that abortion be prohibited by law. And I also think that capital punishment is savage and immoral, although US Federal law and the laws of many states demand it.

I accept the fact that in some aspects, my personal moral code is in conflict with the laws of the state and country where I live. I hope that in most cases, society can accept me with my moral code, and allow me to live in accordance with that code without legal penalty. I'm up for jury duty in a federal court, and I'm a bit apprehensive about it. In conscience, I cannot vote to condemn anyone to death. But on the other hand, I think I'm a person who would be very close to absolutely fair and objective as a juror. So, should I be disqualified from a jury because I oppose the death penalty, or should I be chosen because of my objectivity and my sense of fairness? should I be punished or penalized because of my opposition to the death penalty or my favoring of rights for immigrants?

So, maybe it's right that religious beliefs not be respected by law, as long as the law does respect individual beliefs.

-Joe-