The debate raging over the issue of consuming non-halal food by non-Muslim students in the presence of Muslim students and the request/demand of some non-Muslim parents that Muslim students not consume beef in the presence of Hindus invariably introduces the request/demand for tolerance by the other.

Each time I read that word 'tolerance/tolerate' used within this context, I feel this rage inside of me. This word is also used when we hear our politicians speak of the tolerance for all religious practices and places of worship.

Unfortunately, the speaker and the context within which it is said makes one feel that there is instead a lot of effort being placed in holding back an opposing instinct or force within himself.

Let us examine the word 'tolerance/tolerate' for a moment and maybe this rage inside me can finally be expressed and I can be rid of it once and for all.

I know I tolerate a lot of nonsense from my kids. I don't accept a lot of that nonsense. Similarly I tolerate the pain and suffering my bosses impose on me cause I need the job. I tolerate the odour and the smoke of my colleagues because they are, after all, my colleagues or I don't have the gall to tell them off.

The need for me to tolerate all these things is because I feel an inconvenience. In all these situations, anyone can see that I can take the moral high ground to showcase my level of tolerance and have one aspect of my character measured by this attribute.

With religion, beliefs, faith and religious practices, each of us hold sacrosanct our own positions. Who is to say that one is more virtuous than the other? I can believe what I want of my religion, practices and faith, yet my only support for my faith rests on a belief.

I can assume a lot of what is said of my religion, faith or belief to be fact. But beyond being an assumption that my faith allows me to act on, I would be stretched to bring forward evidence that would meet the standards demanded of an English court. (Let's not taint this discussion by applying Malaysian court standards).

That being the case for each and every one of us, what is demanded of us of another's religion, faith, belief and practices is understanding and acceptance. Tolerance applies only when one assumes superiority or virtuousity over another's faith.

Within countries, the assumption that the predominant religious following dictates the freedom of the religious worship of other faiths is something that is not evidenced when one sees the freedom with which (and the rate at which) alternative religions are growing within these territories.

Islam in Britain, France, the United States, Australia, Sweden and New Zealand is indeed growing and - provided the same criteria that applies to churches is complied with - mosques also proliferate as a matter of right rather than a privilege granted.

Everyone is treated as a person rather than as a Christian, Muslim, Hindu or Buddhist. There is no question or need for tolerance as you are accepted as you are and your practices and your faith or your religious preference respected. Whether the religion is respected is another question altogether.

On the other hand, in Malaysia we are always being reminded that the freedom of worship is allowed, is permitted and is tolerated. Who are they to say that they tolerate my worship or my faith or my religion?

When that word is used, the user seems to assume a 'one-upmanship' with whatever religion he or she adheres to. Is there this assumption that one is holding back from an injunction to lash out by way of tolerance?

Honestly, I wish there not to be anyone tolerating my religion on my behalf. I only urge them and ask them to respect my belief, my faith and my religious practices.

I know that because I respect my Muslim friends and colleagues I provide for their sensitivities. It does not matter that I forego my favourite pork chops for nasi pandang or my beer for teh tarik.

This I do out of respect, not because I tolerate their needs. I respect the call of the imam early every morning. I don't see the need to tolerate it as to tolerate it would assume one-upmanship on my part. Tolerance is not a factor here at all. Respect overcomes your opposing instincts.

In the matter of the halal/non-halal food being brought to schools, if only respect can be thought of and inculcated, there would not be the need for this discussion. Naturally, people would do what is right to respect one another.

Even if there is an infringement or a violation, respect for the other person's ignorance would go a long way to get the message across better than this long running debate that just does not deal with the root of the matter.

Sadly what I see is social and human relations that have been cast to the byways in preference for something more vile. This needs to be checked. But first we should stop tolerating people who invoke tolerance to move their messages.