(no subject)

[sophiaserpentia]

I'm going to resolve not to make references anymore to "radical Islam" or "fundamentalist Christianity." Radical Islam is not 'radical' in that it doesn't represent the root of Islamic belief; Fundamentalist Christianity is not 'fundamental' in that it doesn't represent the core of Christian belief.

Both movements want people to believe that fundamentalism is what it looks like when you are more fervently religious. That is, they want the rest of us to buy into their position that theirs is the only way to be fervently, devoutly, deeply religious. The mass media, of course, eats this up and serves it back to us as a tasty second harvest.

These movements are at war with me and i refuse to dignify them any longer by utilizing their terminology, along with the implications they carry. Instead i am going to, from now on, refer to both as "reactionary Islam" or "reactionary Christianity."

Comments

[alobar.livejournal.com]

I don't know much about Muslim beliefs. New Age Sufis are quite tolerant of other mainstream religions, but less so of paganism, psychedelic use, etc. From I have observed about Christianity, Christians have been intolerant murdering bigots since the fall of Rome. Before that they had no power to be bastards. Intolerance may not be Christ's message, but it sure seems a keystone to organized Christian religion. Witch trials, destroying the Albigensians, the Crusades, shunning those who leave their religion.

[frahulettaes.livejournal.com]

word. wordy mcwordyson. I like to look at the results of a belief. the results I see of christianity and mohamidism are not tolerant, peaceful or loving.
At least not in my experience. And I'm not very inclined to accept one or two positive believers in the face of centuries of bloodshed.

What's interesting is, if you work at taking each person as you find them, regardless of their religion, it IS more work. and worth it every time.