tolerance isn't nice

In the world it is called Tolerance, but in hell it is called Despair...the sin that believes in nothing, seeks to know nothing, interferes with nothing, and calls any human idea a "right" - except intoleration. In that case, you are accepting a sovereign truth, which by nature, puts others in error. Writer Evelyn Beatrice Hall said "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it". Really? Why would you defend something if you know there is something wrong with it? Is ther some virtue in allowing a little bit of wrong prevail? Or do you think your right to present the truth is only permitted if you allow all ideas to be promoted? For example, if a person's motive for sharing their faith is only done in the name of freedom, when it is available to all, what happens if that freedom is taken away (or if they travel to a country where they are not free to do so)? Does that mean your message is now not worth hearing? If you really know what's right, you should be announcing it regardless, whether it means you go to jail, suffer, or lose your life. But it's much easier to accept no responsibility and tolerate a mix of ideas. You think it's being nice, but you lead people astray without a word.
"We drift toward compromise and call it tolerance; we drift toward disobedience and call it freedom; we drift toward superstition and call it faith. We cherish the indiscipline of lost self-control and call it relaxation; we slouch toward prayerlessness and delude ourselves into thinking we have escaped legalism; we slide toward godlessness and convince ourselves we have been liberated." - D.A. Carson