Tolerance is not a moral position, so reasoning about it in moral terms is nonsense.
Tolerance is a social compact and it requires mutuality. "My preference is to punch you in the face, if you claim to be tolerant you must accept that" is obviously foolish, no matter how much you dress it up.
To be clear, I wasnt the one who framed it in moral terms. And you are exactly right - intolerance isnt always bad, nor good. Which is another reason why this is non-sensical:
> It is, of course, morally just to be intolerant towards intolerance
"Tolerance of intolerance" just kicks the can down the road.
A Conservative might argue that Muslims are intolerant and thus should not be allowed in the country or that trans people are intolerant of people using the correct pronouns for them.
You can phrase pretty much any side of a political question as being either tolerant or intolerant with a bit of work.
Tolerance is a social compact and it requires mutuality. "My preference is to punch you in the face, if you claim to be tolerant you must accept that" is obviously foolish, no matter how much you dress it up.