I noticed this article in Mother Jones. It strikes me as particularly inane. The title is: "Liberals Should Knock off the Mockery Over Calls to Limit Syrian Refugees." Although I am often sympathetic the notion that that, in representing a particular political view, one ought to avoid "mocking" ones opponents. Such a strategy (if it can be called that) precludes the possibility of finding common ground. It prevents us from recognizing the perspective and positions of others. It forecloses empathy.
Or, at least, that's the sort of argument I might be inclined to make, in certain circumstances.
And yet, not at all in this one. This is surely one of the most inane articles I have read in a long time. The author implores liberals not to "mock" those who would close American borders to Syrian refugees. The author asks us to, instead, acknowledge their legitimate concerns. But the issue is not about mockery at all, and their concerns are not in the least legitimate. The issue is that it is intolerable that American would sacrifice essential, founding values for the perception of increased safety. We've made that mistake too many times before. As usual, The Onion nailed it with its headline: Historians Politely Remind Nation to Check What's Happened in the Past Before Making Any Big Decisions
So, no, bigotry and intolerance must be called out, and done so unequivocally.