Ah, the beautiful thing about religion is, that it can be anything you want it to be. So if your doctrine is that people can *only* be persuaded by force, then that's your doctrine. If your doctrine is that everyone else is a heretic who must be destroyed, there it is. If your doctrine is that coming into contact with sin corrupts you, then you can't be exposed to sin. It doesn't have to follow any kind of logic.
There will be some religious groups that can function in a society of multiple religions, and there are some that just can't. That's why it's vital that the state at least is secular - you can't be killing people, for example, even if it's in the name of God, and if your doctrine demands it, well that's just to bad. That's why the merging of the church and state is so scary. -_-
Usually shifts in religion come about because of social problems - what's causing this one? Is it really the reaction of confused peole who can't understand progress? If so, how do we frame progressive chance as non-threatening? I realize that there has to be compromise, but it's a depressing sort of impasse. They've got this massive, if slightly warped, theological infrastructure - we've got, "hey, let's be nice"? It's not like *we're* about to convert to their way of thinking. Where's middle ground?
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2004-11-04 08:24 am (UTC)There will be some religious groups that can function in a society of multiple religions, and there are some that just can't. That's why it's vital that the state at least is secular - you can't be killing people, for example, even if it's in the name of God, and if your doctrine demands it, well that's just to bad. That's why the merging of the church and state is so scary. -_-
Usually shifts in religion come about because of social problems - what's causing this one? Is it really the reaction of confused peole who can't understand progress? If so, how do we frame progressive chance as non-threatening? I realize that there has to be compromise, but it's a depressing sort of impasse. They've got this massive, if slightly warped, theological infrastructure - we've got, "hey, let's be nice"? It's not like *we're* about to convert to their way of thinking. Where's middle ground?
Feh. Sorry to blab on about this AGAIN...