So AP writer Allen Breed begins his recent mosque piece by defining the word, "tolerance." It's a traditional rhetorical device, one learned back in sixth grade while plagiarizing the Encyclopedia Britannica.
His piece focuses on religion, of course, - but not Islam, Christianity or even my favorite, "the universal life force of the Grand Unicorn."
His all powerful religion? Tolerance.
Of course, for him, tolerance can only play one way. As Yanks we must kneel before the alter of acceptance, while everyone else uses us as a footrest.
I mean, I doubt Breed would MENTION tolerance to the mosque developers. Instead, true to the predictable mind grazing on hysterical cliches, he hearkens back to the witch trials - the most overused example of intolerance ever - and one that probably deserved it. I mean, witches suck.
Breed then quotes a reverend who says this is all due to a "dominant religious lens factor" - meaning, i guess, when one group thinks their religion is better than others.
He knows this, since he's a wiccan minister, a practitioner of a cult populated by veiny spinsters with cats. I guess the writer wouldn't find an imam tolerant enough to grant him an interview.
Or maybe he didn't look.
After all, it would be a sign of intolerance to question the intolerant, especially when their intolerance is protected by tolerance!
Instead, focus on us. We're nice people. We won't kill you.
But look, intolerance is not the issue. Think about your pal who can have any girl he wants, but chooses to go after the girl dating you. There, tolerance, doesn't enter the equation. Being a jerk, does.
And that's what this is all about. Tolerance now serves as a condom for jerks seeking protection from their own jerkiness.
I'd use it myself, but they don't make one in my size.
And if you disagree with me, you're a racist homophobe who owes me thirty bucks.
