Two points:
- If you cry "Tolerance!" to kickoff the boycott of a person or company because of their beliefs, you're doing it wrong.
- Even if you mean well and don't intend to reject another person's beliefs, you're necessarily doing so. If several parties are quarreling over what they believe is a fundamental truth in this or that and you step in to recommend tolerance, you've just said that tolerance is a higher moral good than the beliefs of the quarreling parties. All parties involved, including you, are making truth claims, and each party is claiming the high ground. Why should tolerance be accepted as the winning moral imperative here without question?