@zisissgoot Said
But this is my point. Religion justifies and enables delusional volatility.
Is it ok for people to picket with signs calling people fags and insisting that these people will burn in eternal hell fire because of their sexuality?
Is it ok for people to issue statements that will one way or the other condemn millions to death from a preventable disease?
Is it ok for people to brutally kill others because they don't share the same views?
If a non religious person did any of this it would be seen as disgraceful and mentally disturbed at the very least. But put it under the umbrella of religion and somehow it's just unfortunate or intolerant or whatever other apologetic word one would care to use.
Hmm...
You ask:
Is it ok for people to picket with signs calling people fags and insisting that these people will burn in eternal hell fire because of their sexuality?
I ask:
Is it okay for other people to tell them that they cannot? (usually the "God hates fags" sign holders are just plants to make the croud look bad.)
You ask:
Is it ok for people to issue statements that will one way or the other condemn millions to death from a preventable disease?
I ask:
Is it okay to take other people's money to pay for aborting birth control malfunctions.
You ask:
Is it ok for people to brutally kill others because they don't share the same views?
I ask:
Is the "others" view that he be given that which rightfully belongs to the one the doing the killing. (all war is ultimatly over land or resources)
You ask:
If a non religious person did any of this it would be seen as disgraceful and mentally disturbed at the very least. But put it under the umbrella of religion and somehow it's just unfortunate or intolerant or whatever other apologetic word one would care to use.
I ask:
Do they label non-religious people who brutally maim and kill their own children as mentally disturbed? Or is it "reclassified" just because the baby has not taken it's first breath?