RE: Religious Tolerance
August 29, 2014 at 1:21 pm
(This post was last modified: August 29, 2014 at 1:46 pm by JesusHChrist.)
(August 29, 2014 at 9:27 am)Diablo Wrote: I think people's beliefs should be tolerated as long as they don't interfere in government or schools, and don't break the law. All governance should be strictly secular - no bishops in the Lords for example, and no state funding for faith schools.
The other issue is the persecution of women and minorities. Everytime someone says that gay people are evil or will go to hell, some moron somewhere will be listening and think it's OK to find a faggot and beat the shit out of him. If they don't like gays they should shut up about it.
Respect religion? No way.
For The Devil, you sure seem like a reasonable fellow.
As for tolerance of religion, just what does "tolerance" mean exactly? People being free to believe whatever horseshit they want? Sure. Whatever. People believe all sorts of nutty things. Always have. Always will.
Tolerant as in being involved in any way whatsoever with the legal or political system? No. I'll be mighty fucking intolerant of that.
Tolerant as in not challenging nutty ideas? Nope. Ideas don't need protection and should stand or fall on their intellectual merits without hiding behind the out-of-reach veil of "intolerance".
Religion, like any other human endeavor, such as politics, economics, or science, should be subject to the same scrutiny and run the same risk of public mockery for promoting idiocy. No other area gets a pass, why should mythological bullshit?
Given the potentially dangerous and cancerous nature of religious belief (see modern day middle east for one example), if anything, religion should be marginalized into the same category as any other superstitious nonsense. Creating the petri dish where it can flourish and gain sustenance seems to present the greatest risk.