Muslim Child Abuse

[Judas BentHer]

With regards to the US, I absolutely agree with you. A small but vocal minority aside, I think we're doing pretty well. That doesn't address the situation for the world as a whole though, does it. In any case, where religion stands today and claims tolerance, it is type of tolerance of one and others existence...with the implied understanding that everyone else is wrong, and will suffer eternal punishment. Not quite the same as idols standing next to each other, is it.

Well, I for one would never presume to police the world. I live in the U.S. and as a consequence I concern myself with what affects my life and liberty here at home.

The world is on it's own. Individuals who care to live free will fight for it. As we see in headlines world over each and every day. When protesters in Egypt are tolerated for far longer protesting a corrupt President than are Americans in both Wisconsin and Tennessee protesting Unions, we have a problem as that what is considered the "beacon of freedom to the world". So conflict on all fronts in this country is what concerns me because it all stands to affect me. Be it in the religious sector or the secular.

As it stands, there has never been a global religious utopia in the history of the world. Every religion that professes itself tolerant, proves in it's exercise and especially through the authority of hierarchy be they priests or monks, or Lama's, that that is not true. It's the stuff of ego and elitism, to first profess something unseen polices, parents and guides the mortal realm and as such there are rules in place to not only accept that as truth but to live it as if one's life and imaginary soul depend upon it.

Primacy, is the stuff of religious doctrine. And that was not abandoned during the reign of Polytheistic Rome, or any armed authority that sought to bring the world to heel under a certain doctrine that may have included a religious flavor. Rome wasn't a bed of roses, with god's and goddesses standing erect as marble centuries over the faithful. Rome was bloody, oppressive, zealous and tolerant only in as much as it served to keep the peace among an eclectic mix of the conquered.

Christians, who will often cite their oppression under Roman pagan rule, weren't slaughtered simply because they were Christian. They were brought to trial and suffered capital punishment being fed to lions and suffering other sundry punishments, because their monotheist doctrine ensconced amid a polytheistic community dared insist polytheism was wrong and a god damnable offense! That pronouncement threatened the peace, and as a consequence was construed as a threat to Roman rule just as sure as if one raised an army.

Idols standing next to each other do not bleed. Nor do they act as foundation stones to secure the peace amid a polytheistic community, which would of course include those who profess monotheism in the mix, simply because their marble feet are secure their united implication that all faiths in all god's can get along.

Individuals who give worship to that what they credit as being real, while invisible, unseen and unheard, give life to the stuff of gods and goddesses. And that in and of itself implies it is to be thus inferred that the adoration is reciprocated. That one's god or goddess loves them best. And as such, that god reigning supreme in one's personal life is just as entitled to rule other lives because if a philosophy can be accepted as moral and true for an individual that believes it as fact it is egoism that imagines it's good enough for one's community so that one can be surrounded by those who see things the same way. And that's the stuff of conflict, sectarianism and "holy" wars.

Polytheism does not nor did it ever give life to peace.