Yes, ethnicity, by definition, consists of people of a similar culture. If you don't agree with that definition, then it doesn't matter anyway, since the term 'ethnocentrism' is based around culture regardless.
So do you admit to being ethnocentric?
As for intolerance, I agree that mere disapproval may or may qualify as intolerance, depending on certain person's definition of the term. For clarity, I suppose it's appropriate for me to ask: Do you respect runqvist's actions? That should make your tolerance, or lack thereof, more obvious.
As for how long I want this convo to be (not sure why you italicized 'be')...as long as it takes you to admit to your ways.
Ethnicity in some contexts can refer to cultural uniformity, but often not; one would not refer to "ethnic Chinese living in Toronto" as being culturally homogenous, because they aren't; China is home to many cultures, regardless of the fact that ethnic Chinese share the same racial background and place of origin. My wife qualifies as ethnic Chinese, but she's removed from China by at least two generations on her father's side and one on her mother's. To claim that she shares the same culture as her grandmother, who fled China ahead of the cultural revolution while my wife was born and raised to be Canadian, would be fallacious in the extreme.
Now, "ethnocentric" is a problematic term in and of itself because it implies that I am basing my views concerning a person's actions on their culture, race, creed, or other identifying group (usually race where I'm from, apparently culture for you). That's not the case; my responses are to the action itself, regardless of the cultural framework that spawns it, so by definition my disapproval cannot be ethnocentric.
Now, that doesn't mean that I am not ethnocentric as a rule, but that really has nothing to do with the topic at hand.
I reject the validity of "respecting" actions; rather it is appropriate to say that I respect his right to carry them out but I hold it to be ethically questionable at best. Your question is meaningless, because it applies a sense of agency that it's not possible for that particular word to have.
Now, we've established that I can't be ethnocentric in the context of my disapproval, and that you have failed to qualify what "intolerance" means.
Also, I type like I talk, and italics are there for emphasis. It is a natural extension of the emphasis I use in speech.
I assume we're done here; if we aren't, you're in for a long conversation.