Are you intolerant to intolerance? Do you have any right to be so?

When I hear about racism, sexism, homophobia, hatred of Spurs, I immediately raise my liberal hackles and think ‘why can’t people just be more tolerant?’ Then I think ‘fuckers!’.

Because I hate intolerance and tend to loathe those who lack tolerance and thus often find myself in the stange situation of generally hating people with strong religious beliefs.

For although Jesus teaches us goodness and kindness to all mankind, and the preachers of all religions bang on about acceptance and tolerance, what they really mean is being accepting and tolerant to OUR VIEWS. All other views are patentely WRONG, no debate, no nuffink, its written in the new/old testament/koran/torah/Mao’s Little Red Bood/Wisdens, then that IS THE WAY IT IMUST BE.

So to Phil Robertson, the ‘Duck Commander’ (don’t ask). He’s a hillbilly hick redneck millionaire who, essentially, as voiced on his, you guessed, own reality tv show, would put all gays into a big fire and light the first branch himself happily. Cos he’s a god-fearin’ Chrischin. And thus is ‘pro-life’ (another fucked up term implying something good and honest and worthy whereas it has just become another form of mysoginistic woman control wrapped loosely in a fancy religious wrapper. Phil also wants to marry his daughers off at 16. Which is probably, in that part of Alabama/Missouri/Mississippi, about 8 years after the incest started. But I make no judgments. Hmmm…

Should I be tolerant to Phil Robertson’s views? Respect them and his right to express them?? Or want him pilloried in the court of public opinion? Obviously he has loads of outspoken support in his own country. 50% of Americans probably agree with him, the other half are over here taking their Mojitos out for a walk.

And what about Nicolas Anelka? Journeyman French tosser currently residing in West Bromwich. For whom he scored a goal on Saturday and celebrated with ‘la querelle’. No, per-lease don’t tell me you don’t know a querelle when you see one. Its a reverse nazi salute. Its a reltiH lieH. And they’re generally used because the full Paulo Di Canio is banned the world over, except in Rome and at KKK meetings in Nebraska.

Now one might think that a black Muslim would have little in common with Hitler’s aryan dream, but you’d be wrong. Apparently.
And Anelka is defending his action (currently under investigation; I’m hoping for a death penalty; that’s how fucking tolerant I am) on the grounds that la querelle was started by his mate, a comedian, who has been banned from performing due to his rabidly anti-semitic rhetoric and holocaust denial. Thus was Nic’s protest ‘for his mate; anti-establishment’.

Oh. Nothing in support of the views held by said ‘mate’ then? In that case, as long as we can easily dissociate the sign with that signified, I have no issue. You’re free to go.

That’s good. So I don’t have to be intolerant to Anelka and la querelle then.

Happy confused day and

HAPPY NEW YEAR TO ALL

A xxxx