Chicken Drumstick, Pork Pie, Glass Of...
News1 min ago
Religious intolerance; who is to blame?
87 Answers
Does religious intolerance stem from the teachings inherent within different teachings, or from the manipulation of those teachings by politicians and clerics?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Khandro. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
I don't care if some people think there is a higher power and creator. We can't know the truth and it makes very little difference to anyone else.
The problem comes when religion comes in and prescribes the way one is to live. The Abrahamic religions also promote a vision that those who do not subscribe to the faith will be killed off in a glorious expression of the will of their deity.
This institutionalisation of tribal prejudice is what the Abrahamic religion is all about. It is no better typified by anything more than the invasion of the Promised Land by the Hebrews. Their brutal genocide eliminated more then thirty tribes where they hacked every man woman and child to death.
Those who were not killed were enslaved. The failure to kill them all as instructed by God is one of the reasons the Hebrews fell out with God.
The reason given for these tribes to be murdered is that they were sinners who would not believe in God. All their women were deemed prostitutes and since this is against the will of God they all deserve to die. Even the little children since God also hold that the descendants of a sinner are also punished to the third and fourth generation and the were so bad as to be beyond redemption.
The great success of the massacres by such a small band of raiders is attributed to the help of God and held up as proof of His glory.
So here we have a religious philosophy that prescribes everything about the way one should live without the right to question and without providing any justification beyond saying it is the will of a God as attested by an old book even where that book conflicts with the practice being promoted by the theocrats. Retribution for any transgression is merciless.
Their heroic founders slaughtered everyone who did not conform with their notion of morality (bar a few kept for slaves) then collected all the gold and silver plundered from the people and kept it in a box which was then treated as a shrine to God.
Despite this obviously vile, arrogant, viscious, xenophobic attitude at the very centre of their faith, apologists like Khandro expect us to swallow the idea that the intolerance of some religious orders is not inherent in religion itself but due to political manipulation.
Moreover the intolerance embodied in the Abrahamic faiths is played out every day in lands where we see the interminable inevitable conflict where adherents to various factions of the same bigoted fascist philosophy live side by side.
And atheists are chastised for not showing the respect the apologists insist religious beliefs should be afforded.
The problem comes when religion comes in and prescribes the way one is to live. The Abrahamic religions also promote a vision that those who do not subscribe to the faith will be killed off in a glorious expression of the will of their deity.
This institutionalisation of tribal prejudice is what the Abrahamic religion is all about. It is no better typified by anything more than the invasion of the Promised Land by the Hebrews. Their brutal genocide eliminated more then thirty tribes where they hacked every man woman and child to death.
Those who were not killed were enslaved. The failure to kill them all as instructed by God is one of the reasons the Hebrews fell out with God.
The reason given for these tribes to be murdered is that they were sinners who would not believe in God. All their women were deemed prostitutes and since this is against the will of God they all deserve to die. Even the little children since God also hold that the descendants of a sinner are also punished to the third and fourth generation and the were so bad as to be beyond redemption.
The great success of the massacres by such a small band of raiders is attributed to the help of God and held up as proof of His glory.
So here we have a religious philosophy that prescribes everything about the way one should live without the right to question and without providing any justification beyond saying it is the will of a God as attested by an old book even where that book conflicts with the practice being promoted by the theocrats. Retribution for any transgression is merciless.
Their heroic founders slaughtered everyone who did not conform with their notion of morality (bar a few kept for slaves) then collected all the gold and silver plundered from the people and kept it in a box which was then treated as a shrine to God.
Despite this obviously vile, arrogant, viscious, xenophobic attitude at the very centre of their faith, apologists like Khandro expect us to swallow the idea that the intolerance of some religious orders is not inherent in religion itself but due to political manipulation.
Moreover the intolerance embodied in the Abrahamic faiths is played out every day in lands where we see the interminable inevitable conflict where adherents to various factions of the same bigoted fascist philosophy live side by side.
And atheists are chastised for not showing the respect the apologists insist religious beliefs should be afforded.
As is continually demonstrated on various threads here, the main thrust of intolerance comes from the resident atheists toward anyone with any sort of religious leanings, in fact I have never seen a single case of inter-religious criticism let alone intolerance. beso lays out his stall in the Christian quarter, and cites examples of anomalies in the old testament, I would rather look directly at the teachings of Christ, and as I said previously, would find no "vile, arrogant, viscious, xenophobic attitude" there, but the exact opposite.
Regarding your last sentence, it sounds like a bad case of paranoia.
Regarding your last sentence, it sounds like a bad case of paranoia.
Khandro, //in fact I have never seen a single case of inter-religious criticism let alone intolerance.//
You haven’t? You must have missed some of Keyplus’ stuff then. Apart from that, you will see little inter-religious criticism here because the resident religious are preoccupied with defending religion - regardless of its philosophy and actions - against those damned atheists – just as you appear to be - some of them carrying their spiteful vitriol to completely unrelated threads in other sections – and even to places outside AB. You see, whilst atheists despise only the philosophy, others despise not only the message the atheists carry, but the messengers personally.
Here, it seems, atheists are not only their opponents, but along with religion, they are their obsession – but outside I’ve no doubt they harbour plenty of criticism for opposing religions. After all, they’re all right, aren’t they?
You haven’t? You must have missed some of Keyplus’ stuff then. Apart from that, you will see little inter-religious criticism here because the resident religious are preoccupied with defending religion - regardless of its philosophy and actions - against those damned atheists – just as you appear to be - some of them carrying their spiteful vitriol to completely unrelated threads in other sections – and even to places outside AB. You see, whilst atheists despise only the philosophy, others despise not only the message the atheists carry, but the messengers personally.
Here, it seems, atheists are not only their opponents, but along with religion, they are their obsession – but outside I’ve no doubt they harbour plenty of criticism for opposing religions. After all, they’re all right, aren’t they?
^ I don't despise anybody, and I don't look on atheists as my "opponents", however, anything I say, or any question I ask on this site called 'Religion & Spirituality', I am immediately beset by atheists attacking me and defending their own outlook, which is very boring, - I know you eschew God and religion, it's all you ever say, and I don't really care. This question is of a politico/religious nature, and nothing at all to do with atheism.
As for Key+, I haven't read all his posts, but I don't recall him attacking other religions, rather just defending his own, though you (or he) may wish correct me on that.
As for Key+, I haven't read all his posts, but I don't recall him attacking other religions, rather just defending his own, though you (or he) may wish correct me on that.
Khandro, You see, you done exactly what I said some people do. You’ve accused atheists of attacking ‘you’. They are not attacking ‘you’ – they are attacking the message you’re putting across – and I didn’t accuse ‘you’ of despising anyone – merely saying that some appear to be incapable of conducting a discussion without resorting to personal attacks and maintaining that disdain both here and outside R&S for time immemorial. I love debate and I’ll argue a point – and if I feel strongly enough about it, I will argue it vigorously – but that doesn’t mean I dislike my opponent as a person simply because he or she disagrees with me. Children do that.
As for atheists defending their own outlook, isn’t that what everyone does? Why is that only a problem to you when atheists do it? You surely don’t agree with everything the religious say? Or do you? And if the question is nothing to do with atheism, why say //the main thrust of intolerance comes from the resident atheists toward anyone with any sort of religious leanings//? That makes no sense.
Regarding Keyplus’ posts, I won’t bother to correct you on that. It’s all there - if you want to read it. And actually, although I do dislike religion, it’s not all I ever say – but perhaps you don’t read my posts either. I have to say you do appear to be rather miffed rather often which is odd for someone who doesn’t really care. ;o)
As for atheists defending their own outlook, isn’t that what everyone does? Why is that only a problem to you when atheists do it? You surely don’t agree with everything the religious say? Or do you? And if the question is nothing to do with atheism, why say //the main thrust of intolerance comes from the resident atheists toward anyone with any sort of religious leanings//? That makes no sense.
Regarding Keyplus’ posts, I won’t bother to correct you on that. It’s all there - if you want to read it. And actually, although I do dislike religion, it’s not all I ever say – but perhaps you don’t read my posts either. I have to say you do appear to be rather miffed rather often which is odd for someone who doesn’t really care. ;o)
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.