The tyranny of the tolerant

I assume the architects of our wonderful new (secularised) world never envisioned that its advocates would turn into modern-day ideological campguards. Because dispatching religious fundamentalist ideas to the ideological landfill should solve the perennial problem of prejudice, shouldn't it?

THE MAKING OF A TOLERANT SOCIETY

Since coming to power in 2005, our centre-left government has attempted to curb what they perceive as unwarranted, undesired and discriminatory religious influence in society. Targeting the evangelical camp above any other, our ministers are hard at work tailoring new legislation aiming at defining which views are tolerable or which are not.

You see, because we propagate e.g. the 'obsolete' notion that marriage can only truly be a union between a male and a female, we are now in no uncertain terms told that unless we abandon this 'unenlightened' idea, we may have to suffer. Oh, no, they are too intelligent to do it the the Kim Jong Il-way - incarcerating people by the dozens in concentration camps. Instead, they hope to weaken our financial muscles.

TAKING AWAY OUR 'ALLOWANCES'

For decades political consensus has held that any non-government organisation, religious or secular, should be eligible for some state funding, particularly if their activities are seen to be generally altruistic. In this way both the Norwegian Red Cross as well as the local Baptist youth club may apply for, and receive, money to ensure they can continue doing 'good' to its own members and society at large.

There's only one problem. In their zeal to spread their own brand of tolerance, the Self-appointed Makers of the New Morality (SAMON) have spotted a huge obstacle: a disconcerting number of people still stubbornly defend deviating ideas - e.g. regarding the blessedness of same-sex unions. And what is even more disturbing is that these deviants won't even listen to the obviously superior, progressive arguments brought forward by the legislators.

ONLY ONE SET OF IDEAS WILL DO, THANK YOU

And since only One set of Ideas can survive in their visionary, new society, the perceived Intolerant must be marginalized if they won't kick their bad habit of resorting to old ideas, old prejudices. They must be discouraged in any way from turning a deaf ear to the only view that represents tolerance, which of course is the view the Self-appointed makers of the New Morality has on any given issue.

Consequently, our government (representing the SAMON) has decided to threaten to stop doling out kroner (our currency) to any one organisation or church group seen to discriminate against what our new laws define e.g as obvious gay or lesbian rights, whether pertaining to same-sex marriage or the right to be in vitro inseminated.

And so the secularist, ultraliberal mind-set is exposed as quite not up to par. It cannot handle competition, it cannot coexist with dissident ideologies; it has to have the upper hand in the end. And if softer measures, such as government coaxing, cannot achieve its purposes, then government coercion is the second option:

Because having the right set of opinions should pay off, right?

(Author's note: SAMON is no official term. I only used it here to save space, so that I wouldn't have to write 'Self-appointed....' and so forth every time)