A Quote by Alan Barth

Tolerance of diversity is imperative, because without it, life would lose its savor. Progress in the arts, in the sciences, in the patterns of social adjustment springs from diversity and depends upon a tolerance of individual deviations from conventional ways and attitudes.
Tolerance obviously requires a non-contentious manner of relating toward one another’s differences. But tolerance does not require abandoning one’s standards or one’s opinions on political or public policy choices. Tolerance is a way of reacting to diversity, not a command to insulate it from examination.
Londoners say, 'We're so proud of our diversity and tolerance,' but what if that diversity ends up making us intolerant?
Tolerance of true diversity on university campuses - diversity of opinion and belief - has been eroding for decades while alumni and trustees looked the other way.
It is ironic that those who seek to blend and destroy individual racial identities are the biggest enemies of diversity, while simultaneously claiming to support diversity. The end result of that form of diversity is the exact opposite of their stated goal: the destruction of individual identities and ultimately, the destruction of diversity.
Pluralism and tolerance are pillars of modern society. That has to be accepted. But pluralism doesn't just mean diversity. It means that we share the same rules and values, and are still nevertheless different. Islam doesn't have this idea. And Islam also has no tradition of tolerance.
Discomfort levels in our societies are rising, or so it would seem. In theory, we invoke diversity and tolerance. But in real life, we raise our hackles and withdraw into ourselves.
Like many white liberals, Ken sees the whiteness of his social life as more an accident of circumstance than a choice. He would welcome greater diversity in the neighbourhood. However, he does not consciously do enough work either in his social life or in the larger community to make that diversity possible.
Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. We should therefore claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant.
There is a diversity of thought and philosophy, diversity of languages and dialects, diversity of political spectrum, and there's a diversity of taste for food. I don't label or characterize Jews in any way.
The United States must keep what it has - diversity and tolerance - which make us what we are.
I think overall, from a deputy, from an undersecretary standpoint, the goal of a good leader is to get diversity across there. Geographical diversity is important. Industry diversity is important: you can't have all corn growers... Not only that, you've got gender diversity, you've got racial diversity.
Tolerance, diversity, and inclusion are not political opinions. They are non-negotiable human rights - hard fought and secured in America.
Cohesion means respectful diversity, which is about much more than the weak-kneed tolerance.
I think it's important to always have diversity, in our Congress or anywhere, but you also need diversity not just for women of color who are most underrepresented, but diversity in different walks of life.
I want our students to be so accustomed to children of other cultures that the words 'diversity' and 'tolerance' won't be in their vocabulary. They won't need them - they'll live it.
The value of free expression is perceived to be at odds with goals that were considered 'more important,' like inclusiveness, diversity, nondiscrimination, and tolerance.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!