This letter is a response to the column "No Tolerance for Intolerance," that ran on Feb. 3.
Recently Mr. Hobson of The Daily Gamecock wrote a piece for his regular column titled “No Tolerance for Intolerance” outlining his position that evangelical Christians, and conservative Christians in general, offer nothing more than hate and vitriol to the conversation about sexuality and gender in America. While as a criminal justice and political science student I applaud his interest in ensuring equal protection under the law for all citizens, I must wholeheartedly disagree with his methods and characterizations of conservative ideas on the matter.
First and foremost is the implication that he will not “tolerate” other, often more nuanced opinions. Deeming counterarguments ineffective by dismissing them with “an eye roll” is not the way to best establish one’s position on any matter and is not any form of an argument, logical or otherwise. In fact, such a form of passive-aggressiveness is patent-pending a la presidential candidate Donald Trump.
Additionally, “tolerance” itself is an interesting concept for one who would champion the civil liberties of individuals. The connotations of tolerance suggest a necessary evil or something that one would not fully embrace if they had the option, but rather reluctantly approach. One tolerates pain, rain, traffic jams and politics. One does not tolerate sunny days, a Gamecock football resurrection or an unexpected influx of money. I would kindly remind Mr. Hobson that if he is “tolerant," surely he should “tolerate” opinions that run counter to his ideology.
Furthermore, as a practicing Catholic, I can and will only speak on behalf of my own beliefs on the matter. The Catholic Church is one of the oldest institutions that currently exist, religious or otherwise. Catholic doctrine teaches that marriage is between one man and one woman and that same-sex marriages are immoral and not recognized by the Church. Simultaneously, marriages conducted outside of the Church are not recognized because in the eyes of the Church, matrimony is not merely a legal contract. In fact, it is the divine joining of two persons into one and a reflection of God’s love for all mankind. This is important, because not only is any fruit of marriage (e.g. a child) a physical manifestation of God’s love and an imitation of the Holy Trinity, but an example of the grace and holiness in each individual. In fact, the Church recognizes Catholic homosexuals and notes that any hateful act or speech them due to their sexuality is inherently evil, just as any slander or act against any other is. As far as the practice of homosexual actions, they are unjust as any other act outside the bonds of marriage would be.
Still, as “conservative” and traditional as the Church may be, it is one of the most progressive organizations in existence. The Church has had a complicated relationship with science but has admitted its wrongfulness in arresting Galileo and has established the modern university system that enables Mr. Hobson to express his opinion in the school paper; the scientific method and figures that have developed leading theories and scientific fields such as the Big Bang; genetics; and Sisters who have pioneered in computer science. The Church has also worked for the protections of migrant workers and established countless homeless shelters and hospitals. These same hospitals that have saved lives are now under scrutiny in the Supreme Court for wishing to fulfill their moral duty, not providing contraceptives and abortifacients to their employees.
Yes, the Church is run by flawed men and women, and its members are equally flawed. Yet so are the U.S. government and the citizenry of the United States. Instead of spreading a message of intolerance for opposing viewpoints, I would challenge Mr. Hobson to respect my First Amendment rights of freedom of practice and speech as I respect his freedom of speech and press. May we all work for the betterment of society and fight injustice, wherever it is, whenever it may be and whomever it may be against.