What on earth kind of law do you want to set up where I can't preferentially trade with people whose opinions I like, or preferentially not trade with people whose opinions I don't?

Again, tolerance means I don't want to imprison or kill people with distasteful opinions; it doesn't mean I have to like them or their distasteful opinions.

People can be bigots, they can be jerks. Go nuts, folks, be bigots or jerks, I don't care. But I'm not going to trade with bigots or jerks, I'm not going to hire them, and I'm sure as hell not going to say "hey, you're a bigot and a jerk but tolerance so let's have a beer".

Some people have no place in my life, and the beliefs they hold are a big determining factor in that decision. If they really wanna be my friend or business partner, they can change their beliefs.

That is pretty much the definition of not tolerating a person, to remove a person from your life, not tolerating having their existence in your sphere. If it's mostly based on their beliefs, then it's an example of not tolerating that belief.

You're perfectly fine to do that, as people do, but then you can't claim that you're tolerant of others' beliefs just because you happen not to be killing or imprisoning them.

> it doesn't mean I have to like them or their distasteful opinions.

Tolerance does NOT mean liking them! I keep hearing false dichotomy over and over. To be decent and civil to a person, to tolerate their beliefs existing around you, does not require condoning them. It's simply being a decent human being and not being an overprovoked reactionary, intolerantly policing all others around themselves, determining what others are not allowed to be like.