The Mind of Alan

Sorry...since I zapped the discussion of politics I'm not going to let this through.

Having said that, Hitler's hate of the Jews was not religiously based (ditto with Nazi-ism). Regardless of whether Christians didn't properly speak up, it was an atheistic belief system that sent millions to gas chambers (even if it was a nationalistic atheism).

As for Stalin and Mao, I agree that any belief system could be called "a religion." However, clearly when people blame religion for the ills of the world, they aren't including communism or atheism. My note was in response to the false belief that religion is more responsible for cruelty than atheism. Pure power corrupts evenly across the political spectrum, but it's also true that it was Judea-Christian thought that has been responsible for the republics/democracies that have shown the most freedom (including freedom of religion) -- although I'll admit that the "experiment" is short-lived in historical terms.

It's especially interesting that the freedom to show such energetic rejection of religious thought that is sweeping many in western civilization was provided to them by people who they wouldn't allow govern if they were alive today...

Take care

Alan

P.S. Please don't get me wrong...I don't want to let religion off the hook. I just think that it is unfair to judge religion more harshly given the same

Only because I can't see this not leading back into politics, I'm not letting it through...

But to answer your question.

Imagine you have a roommate who throws their clothes all over the place. You ask if there can be a rule that dirty clothes must go in the hamper and clean clothes in the closet and dresser.

Your roommate refuses. Are they not then "forcing" you to live in a mess?

When it comes to the "rights" that many are fighting for, it's the equivalent. If everyone can do whatever they want, I am forced to live in the results of their moral squalor.

I'm not asking for a Talibanic society. I'm asking for a give and take where society gets to decide what is appropriate and what is not. Those who scream loudest for freedom really are only asking for the freedom they want (and are glad to limit freedoms they don't agree with).

Take care

Alan

I'm not letting this through because I called a hiatus on political discussions...but since it's directed at me, I won't ignore it :-)

[ snip of a quote from the writer's original post that I included in my response ]

I still disagree. Cruelties are from the evil heart of man -- religion, nationalism, etc. is just an excuse.

You might notice that I did limit myself most to Christianity in my response to you. Radical Islam may ultimately "take the cake" before the world ends...but I definitely don't believe that Christianity has equaled atheistic governments in brutality.

As for Hitler, please take a look at:

http://www.nationalreview.com/shiflett/shiflett012102.shtml

One good quote from Hitler in it is, "One is either a Christian or a German. You can't be both." (1933)

Sure, Hitler may not have been an atheist. Regardless, the evil system he convinced his nation to embrace was. (And just because someone wraps himself in the flag of faith doesn't mean that they are a spiritual person -- people will say anything for power...)

Ultimately the point of my post was that it's unfair to judge religion more harshly than non-religion. As I said, we are evenly merciless...

Take care

Alan