You're absolutely right! Being difficult does not in any way make something a virtue. However, in cultural terms we generally don't aspire to traits that are trivially achievable (example: having skin).

I would say difficulty is a neccessary, but as you so right point out, woefully insufficient condition.

Tolerance didn't become a virtue solely because it was difficult. It became a virtue because it was difficult and the alternative was war - total, global war that could've annihilated the human race a lot more quickly than global warming.

We've largely forgotten what war was like - it's become something that we send disenfranchised young soldiers from poorer economic backgrounds to so corporations can make more money. I suspect that if people were actually faced with a direct choice between tolerance and war and could make the choice rationally, they'd choose tolerance every time. But of course, usually once wars happen it's because people are no longer acting rationally. And right now few people really believe that the alternative to tolerance is war, they just believe that the people they can't tolerate will willingly give up the beliefs they find repugnant.

> it's become something that we send disenfranchised young soldiers from poorer economic backgrounds to

I know this is an article of faith in some political circles. Promising poor kids money for killing Those Other People is the only way military service makes sense.

Just FYI, this isn't actually true. US military recruits are more likely to be from the three middle quintiles than the first or fifth. Data here: https://www.cfr.org/article/demographics-us-military