There is great absurdity in calling “the left” intolerant, as it relates to the Duck Dynasty / Phil Robertson “story,” when the Christian right is masterful at employing intolerance by masquerading it as a protected religious belief. They wish to portray “the left” as being intolerant when liberals criticize hateful religious beliefs. If these religious beliefs were harmless, and if these religious beliefs were not discriminatory, then maybe, just maybe the Christian right would have a point. But if a Christian conservative vocally condemns an entire group of people based on sexual preference, or race, or anything else that is part of what makes them human, that is true intolerance, and they will rightfully be labeled a bigot.
What makes a person human and what makes them the unique individual they are trumps a religious belief EVERY time, no exception. I understand some will say religious beliefs also define a person, but beliefs are subject to change, whereas, the core of who you are as a person (gender identity, race, sexual orientation) are non-negotiable. To attack a person at the core of who they are is to negate any protection you might get by stating that you are simply conveying your religious beliefs.
If you hold these views, and “the left” accurately describes these views as racist, or sexist, or in anyway intolerant of another person’s identity, that does NOT mean liberals are intolerant of religion. It means liberals will not accept hateful, judgmental, and xenophobic views as protected religious beliefs. You do not get to hide behind religion. You will continue to be called out each time you make a hurtful and ugly comment about a person’s identity.
Society NEED NOT offer shelter to faith-based bigotry.