BobfromSydney wrote:What you said makes a lot of sense.
I think a lot of religious people would make a counter-argument by quoting parts of their own teachings that promote peace.
But as I said, they don't practice what they preach. Just about all religions lay claim to a message of peace and love, but they all seem to find "sinners" to hate, and they constantly inject their agenda into politics. The rank and file believers, most of whom would be naturally inclined toward kindness and peace, take their direction from the leaders, who are all about power.
BobfromSydney wrote:What you seem to be arguing is that historically and socio-politically religions are a destabilising factor that catalyse conflicts and persecution of 'non-conformists/infidels'.
The elimination of religions in our lifetimes (or within any realistically useful timeframe, if we are to be honest) isn't possible. I feel that those who are scientifically/humanistically minded need to engage with religious people in a constructive manner to minimise harm and build a consensus for working for the common good.
That's exactly what I'm arguing. Religion as a tool to power. But I am not arguing for its "elimination" by any direct action. Instead, I advocate a complete and total separation of church and state, and education in logic (so kids can learn why religion has no valid basis) and nonsectarian ethics (so we can have a "moral compass" that does not rely on the revelations of an imaginary deity).
BobfromSydney wrote:I will restate my question. Rather than ask whether Islam can be a religion of peace, I suppose it's better to ask whether Islam can be a religion that is compatible with modern democratic institutions. I will point out that I'm not sure at this point whether Christianity meets that criteria either (based on the behaviour of the most politically vocal/violent Christians).
There are plenty of people in modern democratic states who practice Islam without wanting to enforce it on the entire world. Same goes for other religions. The problem comes when religions try to expand their ranks by any means other than persuasion of individuals. Some religions are used as an excuse for violence, some try to get their own tenets written into law, which is complex because many modern law codes came into being when religions were de facto governments. We don't need a holy book to tell us that we shouldn't rob, rape and murder our neighbors, but because those ideas were in those holy books, religions claim law as their own intellectual property, and assume the right to add in the rest of their requirements and restrictions. That's how you wind up with ritual beheadings and mutilation of infants' genitals and people waving "GOD HATES FAGS" placards at the funerals of soldiers killed in action.
So long as religion provides an arbitrary, unfounded excuse to claim superiority and force itself on others, there will be no peace.
