Tolerance is a popular word right now. Given the events of the last ten years or so, it is no surprise that this key value of our culture should come so vividly to the forefront. The problem with our approach to tolerance though, is that we misunderstand it. When it boils down to it, tolerance actually means that we allow others to believe/practice (within limits) what they wish without fear of repercussion or persecution. Tolerance does not mean that we validate others' beliefs. We do not have to agree, we are not barred from trying to change others' beliefs. We are allowed to think someone is wrong. We are allowed the notion that of all possibilities, only a limited few can possibly be correct.
Our culture tries very hard (and succesfully I might add) to tell us that each person's path is equally valid. The reality is that if each person's path was equally valid, then truly, there would be no validity to any path since so may paths stand in direct opposition to one another. An atheist says there is no god. Others say there is a god. Both are not equally valid. To say both are equally valid is to ignore and minimize the claims of each. (see wakabayashi)
Oddly I find myself agreeing with Richard Dawkins (a devout Atheist) who says that it makes no sense for our religious beliefs to be beyond the scrutiny of others. Given that the nature of God is so central to our experience as humans, it only makes sense for our beliefs to be up for public debate. If you are a Christian, you have absolutely no business making your faith a merely private affair.
But tolerance does not mean that we cannot seek to change someone's mind. It only means that we cannot force our views upon another.
