Blatantly attack person for passive political POV is insanely intolerant. So we kinda fight gays and it's troubling, but when I say it's ok to be unpolitical it's suddenly raises questions. I am not obliged to be active in politics and not going to change my mind because some person says I am naughty and I am doomed.
Well, it's not so much naughty or doomed as it is that (political) apathy is as much an enemy of your state as actively working against it. And... yeah, that's a vice, so long as you live in society. It's a particular sort of not caring that hurts the people around you.
Which is also why other people in society may -- fairly -- attack that behavior and specifically note it as something bad. It is. It hurts others as much as the self, and it
does hurt both. Doesn't necessarily mean the person is a bad person on the net, or anything, but it's definitely not a neutral or positive position to hold, and it's a position that anyone that wants society as a whole (either particular national or regional incarnations, or globally) to improve (or, at the very least, maintain the status quo), would reasonably be opposed to.
In other words, it's behavior that people
should be intolerant of, just like more active forms of damage. A person is spoke ill of if they, though they could prevent it, just watch as a child runs into traffic. To the extent that person has a responsibility to stop that child, they also have a similar (if somewhat less pressing, of course) responsibility to involve themselves in the political process. Apathy stops being neutral when it starts causing the overall situation to grow worse.