It is no secret that people have disagreements on just about every issue. Mormons disagree with a variety of positions that some have taken. Mormons have certain standards and feel certain ways about social and moral issues. Yet, I have never heard a position that the Mormon or LDS Church took that advocated anger or hostility toward another for that position.
Specifically, and most recently, the Church's position on homosexuality has been taken under attack. This is not a new position, nor is it unique among the Christian world in that the Mormon Church considers acting on homosexuality a sin. However, it seems from much of the media reports, that the Mormon Church bears an almost singular target of persecutions and in some cases, violent protest for this position. The LDS Church stands unique amongst those who disagree with Homosexuality, in that the LDS church advocates for civil unions and for equality of the benefits under the law.
Because of this position, and a position on many other social positions, Mormons are often accused of being intolerant bigots. It would seem that the position that many have taken in defense of their retaliated disgust of their Mormons is that they are being intolerant of intolerance. The old "two wrongs somehow makes me right."
Human Beings have the right to opinion. Citizens of the United States have the right to express that opinion and even to propagate that opinion. The only limit to that freedom is if that expression results in the violation of another persons already established rights. Some have said that the acts of the Mormon Church to defend their positions and opinions on the issue of Gay Marriage has crossed that line when it came to Prop. 8 in California. Clearly there is a line, but what is crossed and by whom?
As with so many issues, the crux of both arguments goes back to the constitution. The Mormon Church hold at its defense, the 1st amendment which GUARANTEES that congress will not abridge the free exercise of their religion, or the abridging of the freedom of speach and assembly. The LDS Church's encouragement for the passage of a certain proposition is a peaceable and legal manner in which they operated. Nothing unconsitutional, nothing violent, or hostile.
On the other side, Homosexuals, the gay community, or gay sympathizers, however they are to be determined or described, have made libelous attacks, staged violent protests outside of sacred temple sites, made movies attacking the faith, includeing the descriptive attack de jour - saying that those who disagree with gay marriage are intolerant.
At what point are people not allowed to disagree without fear of insult or injury? To call someone intolerant is to effectively say that they should be denied their God given right to an opinion. To call someone intolerant is to say they are not worthy of their constitutional first amendment rights. The first amendment right is so fundamental - the right to marry is not. If there was a violation of rights with whom lies the greater fault?