@benroyce I'm just going with logical reasoning atm. I'm not arguing for societal or moral benefits. I just found your statement intriguing. (I'm not sure 'tolerance' is something that I have a ready position to state. And I'm not sure if it's the right term to base my moral and/or societal position on.)
That's the essence of our disagreement: you're calling it a position
It's a contract
If tolerance was a position then you are correct, you simply tolerate everyone and everything. Then what happens as Popper says: the intolerant grow and extend their intolerance and they eat you
But tolerance is not a position it's a contract
If I am intolerant I have broken our social contract. You no longer have to tolerate me, and in the interest of maintaining tolerance, you shouldn't
