This conversation is fascinating.  I wonder how the idea of tolerance fits into all this.  I wonder if tolerance isn't the short term answer, the cease fire that allows the understanding to begin.  Tolerance has always seemed tepid to me, but I think that's the point: it isn't a fiery response, but a mild one.  I once had a professor at UIUC who was a lesbian, and she posited that it wasn't enough to be tolerated, that she wanted to be accepted.  On it's face, this seems like a reasonable feeling, but the more I think about it the more I realize that that isn't the way the world works.  People tolerate each other until they get to know each other, then get to like each other, then learn to love one another.  I know that I am big and loud and opinionated, and there are people every day who just tolerate me.  Sometimes even the people who love me just have to tolerate me because I'm doing something they don't like.  Tolerance, to me, seems like the kindest form of disagreement.  If the conservatives at ND had simply tolerated Obama, we wouldn't even be having this discussion.  Same for Bush at Calvin.  Some things, some actions, some ideas, shock the conscience and should not be tolerated, but I wonder if there is any human anywhere who is fundamentally intolerable? I don't know, but I haven't met them yet.