Given:
Many folks nowdays use the word "tolerance" but really mean "acceptance."
In today's PC multi-cultist milieu, the worst sins are "intolerance" and being "judgmental." No thought is given to the consequences.
=======
As you might expect, I urinate on the PC multi-cultist POV. I heap derision on it and bash it over the head with contempt.
This whole notion that we are required to tolerate anything and everything is a tool developed and used by those who would destroy W civ.
Some things are intolerable.
Take, for example, TR's Hypothetical Neo-nazi Neighbor (HNN). Why should TR keep his mouth shut when HNN goes off on a HNN rant? Why should he tolerate HNN in the "fair, objective, and permissive attitude toward" sense? Why should TR not use the means available to him to run HNN out of town on a rail?
I would draw the line at physical violence to persons or property and the use of the law to silence HNN. Pretty much every other tool ought to be considered fair game, especially the use of TR's speech/writing, social stigma, social discrimination*, refusal to do business with, etc.
Such tools can and ought to be used against those whose views are antithetical to Western civ in general, and American constitutional republicanism in particular. Why tolerate the speech of those who would end our freedom to speak? Such is deserving of all the social brickbats the community can muster.
The freedom of speech does not come with a freedom from criticism codicil. Same thing goes for legal actions: just because it is legal does not grant immunity from criticism.
* Another fine word and practice deplored by the self-anointed