In a push for tolerance how can we have tolerance the intolerant

Well, to me this means she has a point of intolerance -- or has reached her tolerance limit.

So you can tolerate the conduct of consenting adults?

For the folks that oppose their behavior?  I can see both sides of it.  But you are only going to get some folks to tolerate it by forcing them to comply, like I have been saying.

They will never tolerate it as normal and acceptable, as far as a lifestyle.  The old-fashioned way of thinking of 'two consenting adults in their bedroom', maybe they can tolerate that -- because as you have said, it has always been around.

If the man had slept with the widow without there having been any marriage contract, he need not pay any silver. I fund this point as a form of tolerance in mesopotamia in regards to unmarried sex....

And the pretense of consenting adults.

Their is a similar story in the bible.

When Judah saw her, he thought she was a prostitute, for she had covered her face. 16 Not realizing that she was his daughter-in-law, he went over to her by the roadside and said, “Come now, let me sleep with you.”

“And what will you give me to sleep with you?” she asked.

His daughter in law was  a widow.

 At that time, Judah left his brothers and went down to stay with a man of Adullam named Hirah. 2 There Judah met the daughter of a Canaanite man named Shua. He married her and made love to her; 3 she became pregnant and gave birth to a son, who was named Er. 4 She conceived again and gave birth to a son and named him Onan. 5 She gave birth to still another son and named him Shelah. It was at Kezib that she gave birth to him.

6 Judah got a wife for Er, his firstborn, and her name was Tamar. 7 But Er, Judah’s firstborn, was wicked in the Lord’s sight; so the Lord put him to death.

8 Then Judah said to Onan, “Sleep with your brother’s wife and fulfill your duty to her as a brother-in-law to raise up offspring for your brother.” 9 But Onan knew that the child would not be his; so whenever he slept with his brother’s wife, he spilled his semen on the ground to keep from providing offspring for his brother. 

About three months later Judah was told, “Your daughter-in-law Tamar is guilty of prostitution, and as a result she is now pregnant.”

Judah said, “Bring her out and have her burned to death!”

25 As she was being brought out, she sent a message to her father-in-law. “I am pregnant by the man who owns these,” she said. And she added, “See if you recognize whose seal and cord and staff these are.”

26 Judah recognized them and said, “She is more righteous than I, since I wouldn’t give her to my son Shelah.”

“Women in Babylon and Hittite Empire were practically equal to men and were even allowed to divorce, while a man in Assyria was allowed tokill his wife if she committed adultery and to send his wife away without divorce money.”

“Basically, if the husband were to cheat on the wife,the wife would have to prove it. Moreover, if the the husband or the wife with another person, the wife or the husband who cheated would be punished by death. In conclusion, Mark did an amazing job on explaining the Mesopotamian culture of sex, marriage, and love.”

You can always pick certain behaviors or certain cultures that have various laws or no laws for them.  So, sure some things are more tolerant in some times or areas — or, in some cultures — than others.  But it is not a universal tolerance.

Not sure why you mention the story of Judah and Tamar.  That is not a story of tolerance so much as punishment on Judah for what he did to his brother Joseph and how it cost him two sons.  Then even he recognizes that Tamar was more righteous than he was.  She had to resort to desperate means for her inheritance because of Onan’s greed, etc.  Then you get the story of reconciliation and forgiveness, etc.

So, while there was forgiveness, it was after reconciliation for bad behavior that was NOT tolerated and WAS punished.

Not sure why you mention the story of Judah and Tamar. That is not a story of tolerance so much as punishment on Judah

I was inferring the tolerance given Judah after visiting the shrine of the prostitute. He told the men of the tent and they weren't ready to stone him.....

Reality they denied the tent existed.....what tent there no tent like that around here.... 

Shrine of the prostitute goes back to ancient Babylonian empire however as late as nebacanizar

The practice was documented.

Babylonian custom is that which compels every woman of the land to sit in the temple of Aphrodite and have intercourse with some stranger at least once in her life.

Sacred prostitution, temple prostitution, cult prostitution,[1] and religious prostitution are rites consisting of paid intercourse performed in the context of religious worship, possibly as a form of fertility rite or divine marriage

Take me to church..... Should this be banned to adolescents....

Not sure what you are saying here?  Judah asked Tamar to live under his tent so he could have his son be with her.  Of course, there was a tent.  There was no stoning men for seeing prostitutes.  The men said there was not a temple prostitute — because there was not one. She had dressed up like that just to catch Judah and then she left.  They never saw her.  

But for sure there was no tolerance for Judah for what he had done before to Joseph.  But after recognizing Tamar for being righteous he was forgiven. 

So, I am not sure where you are seeing tolerance relating to your original question of the paradox of tolerating the intolerable.  

Yes. But in this instance there was not one. 

That is in dispute.

Sacred prostitution was common throughout the ancient world and was particularly associated with Ashtoreth worship, one of the chief Canaanite goddesses. While many scholars have assumed sacred prostitution was practiced in ancient Israel, too, the BAR article “Cult Prostitution in Ancient Israel?” by Edward Lipinski reveals that neither the Bible nor archaeology provides any clear evidence that Israelite religion incorporated the sexual rites of Ashtoreth worship.

Some Biblical scholars, for example, have interpreted the story of Judah and Tamar as a case of sacred prostitution. According to Genesis 38

Source. https://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily/ancient-cultures/ancient-israel/sacred-prostitution-in-the-story-of-judah-and-tamar/

There are 39 passages in the bible that deals with the deity ashtoreth.

https://www.openbible.info/topics/ashtoreth

I find it interesting that King Solomon was courting her.

And his wives turned away his heart. For when Solomon was old his wives turned away his heart after other gods, and his heart was not wholly true to the Lord his God, as was the heart of David his father. For Solomon went after Ashtoreth the goddess of the Sidonians,

Kings 11 : 1-43

God seemed to have a great deal of tolerance for this conduct.

At one point tolerating the practice to a point of despising it.

The children gather wood, the fathers kindle fire, and the women knead dough, to make cakes for the queen of heaven. And they pour out drink offerings to other gods, to provoke me to anger.

Jeremiah 7 :18.

Not just to the Queen of heaven but to other Gods this provoked him to anger.

Anna at the temple ties to Asher

There was also a prophet, Anna the daughter of Phanuel, who belonged to the tribe of Asher. She was very old. After she married, she lived with her husband for seven years.
37 She was now an eighty-four-year-old widow. She never left the temple area but worshipped God with fasting and prayer night and day.
38 She approached at that very moment and began to praise God and to speak about Jesus to everyone who was looking forward to the redemption of Jerusalem

There seem to be tolerance for a prophetess in ancient Israel. Being a widow.

Jesus himself showed tolerance for person keeping one from being stoned.

and Samaritans at the wall with so many husbands she went living with non of em but another man....

Still sat and drank water with her.....

No sir.  It isn't.  Read the whole chapter.  She was only there the one time.  When she knew Judah was going to be there.  Then she left.  That is why the others had no idea what he was talking about.

But either way -- this has nothing to do with the tolerance issue.  This is a whole other subject.

You are confusing tolerance with patience here. Kindness and forgiveness for things that are wrong are used to demonstrate this.  Wrong is still wrong. 

Correct.  But never is there condoning of the bad behavior or act.  There is forgiveness when a person repents and asks for forgiveness.  There are many examples of patience running out or people/countries refusing to correct bad behavior and them being punished because the acts were not tolerated.

But either way -- that is more a religious discussion and not totally philosophical.

The question is still whether or not you can convince a person, or persons, to tolerate acts they deem intolerable.  You cannot completely do this.  Especially, when it leads to more and more intolerable behavior.

Law and religion are closely aligned to what is tolerable and what is intolerable conduct .

We are dealing with terms that we should empower our government with the ability to state what is tolerable and intolerable to consenting adults in their bedroom.

This is intolerable to me.

And yet we have a group of concerned citizens taking it upon them to kill those who lead different life styles.

This is not tolerated behavior.

.The government should stay out of the privacy of the bedroom and lock up murderers.

Two different issues.  Very few people tolerate murder.  Good to know some things you cannot tolerate. 

But the things you will tolerate have now led to many other things creeping into society and being taught to young children and influencing them.  Do you tolerate this extension of what you called ‘gross’ behavior?

If you are okay with folks doing what they want in private — why aren’t you against government getting involved with forcing everyone to acknowledge it as a legal marriage?

Does one have to tolerate something done in private being forced into their own everyday lives and their children?

Or should we go back to the old days where it was simply kept private and nobody acknowledged it or bothered with it?

The sounds as an example in military justice code of law.... returning to a don't ask don't tell policy? 

You can look at it as returning to a ‘what two consenting adults do in private is their business‘ policy. 

I am asking the same questions as above.  Do you tolerate the other things that have come from this?

As empowering consenting adults in their bedroom.

Then that is up to them not my business.

Yessir.  you keep saying that part and a LOT of people agree with that and have always agreed with that.   But you implied you are okay with legalizing same-sex marriage as well.  How do you feel about that lifestyle being taught to your young children in school and all of the TV shows and magazines promoting the lifestyle?