Got it.. Thanks for the clarification. So intolerance can be prosecuted in this context since it means disallowing an individual's right(s)?
To be clear, I am not trying to be the corrector of grammar and the English language. It is just that in serious discussions, and this was a serious discussion about a serious topic, except for all of 10's posts as Halon has pointed out, it is important to use terms correctly.
I don't think anyone here would seriously argue that inconsideration ever rises to the level of a crime...it is just that, a lesser transgression. Intolerance covers a broad spectrum of things. And when that intolerance impinges on our rights, it is quite a serious thing, and possibly a crime. So, no, I have never thought of them as interchangeable. It is
always inconsiderate to be intolerant, as inconsiderateness is a minor infraction. But it is generally not intolerant to be inconsiderate...just rude, or impolite, or thoughtless. And I wasn't even necessarily talking in the legal sense (you wrote "prosecuted" above), but the general sense. And in my humble opinion, to call a serious offense merely "inconsiderate" is to minimize that offense. That is all. Thanks for being understanding masak_aer.
So, the points were not about inconsiderateness and intolerance, although those things enter into this story. The points were about personal rights of speech, expression and religion, and was this eviction justified or not? I believe the driver was patently intolerant. But did his display of intolerance impinge on the rider's rights?...that is the question.
