(September 6, 2016 at 11:20 am)Crossless1 Wrote: The Christians weren't house-broken until after they had spilled a hell of a lot of each others' blood. I suspect the same will be true of Islam. Tolerance is not a virtue that is associated with the Abrahamic faiths. It comes as a result of fatigue, disgust, and enough people in positions of authority saying, "This bullshit needs to end."
Catholicism comes with infinite flexibility, as does nearly every other religion, Christian or otherwise. The use of violence in the defense of religion is completely "justified," if there is really an eternal Hell where "poor sinners" go and if we can have 100% certainty of such a place and state. After all, if someone broke into your home and was threatening your wife and children, would not you defend yourself, killing that invader, if necessary? And, yet, a "heretic" (and, remember, the word 'heresy' means 'choice") were threatening the eternal salvation of your wife and/or children, why would you tolerate that person?
And, so, yes, violence in the name of a religion, if true, makes perfect sense, as long as there is a real, eternal hell with all the associated torturers and torments. No afterlife, however, means tolerance towards an ever-declining set of beliefs, as well as tolerance towards Us, who have no beliefs.
