Would your country be better if it was a "Buddhist-free zone"?

Uh, if "this particular heaven has no openings for Hindus", then, uh, it's followers are utterly immoral for not saying "whoa, hold on a sec, why is our god such an intolerant selfish racist pig...whoa, Modern Secular Humanism is looking better all the time."

 

I hear you, but on the face of it your "religion-free zone" sounds just as intolerant as Jesus/Allah's Buddhist-free "heaven" is.
The best way sounds like being more tolerant than Jesus/Allah (of course!), but also being tolerant of religious people and also trying to show them that there is a better and more loving way than any religion that has a torturous "hell" for people who simply don't believe in their particular unique illogical, immoral, and evidence-less "god".

 

I'd rather roast with Gandhi than face the guilt I'd feel in "heaven" hanging out with Jesus. I'd feel too guilty basking in paradise while I know that people who are better than I am (Gandhi, Einstein, etc.) are screaming out in agonizing pain because the President of Heaven is such a prick that he wants to keep those that are different (not unethical, just different) out, allowing no immigration from that group. Hmmmm, sounds kinda like this orange-looking guy I see in the news everyday....

 

Why do you care what anyone believes? Beliefs are in your head. You got a problem with someone's behavior say something but what people do between their ears is their business

 

Sure, uh, in 1937 I'm sure that you'd have said the same things about the beliefs of some folks in Germany (their belief was that they were superior to everybody - a master race, and their belief was that Jews were evil.) Their behavior wasn't so bad at the time, really.

 

Belief never hurt anyone. Ever

 

"I believe that I"m going to get 72 virgins if I kill Infidels...."

 

Should we create a thought police and lock people up for beliefs?

 

Jesus does - they are tossed into "hell" in his barbaric scheme, just for their beliefs (Hindus, sorry, but you don't "believe" in Jesus, so Jesus is such a prick that he won't change his barbaric scheme - Hitler wouldn't have even roasted all Hindus!)
I'm obviously far more ethical than Jesus, so no, we shouldn't lock people up for only their beliefs, but we need to roundly condemn those beliefs that are not what's best for the world (Christianity, Nazism, Islam, etc.)

Pop quiz, hot shot: was it Jesus or Hitler who said this? "If you do not remain in me, you are like a branch that is thrown away and withers; such branches are picked up, thrown into the fire and burned."

 

Uh....that's nice. We are talking about people today. Are you asking questions again without answering them?

 

People of today believe that Jesus (or Mohammad) is the best role model for all time, because the all-knowing creator of the entire universe said so.

 

Uh...that's nice. I am not concerned with their beliefs. Just their actions.

 

You can't condemn Jesus for saying that people who don't follow him (note that it was about HIM, and not about morality) are "thrown into the fire and burned", can you?

The belief in Islam will lead to their actions of teaching their children that the Qur'an is correct, and from god no less(!) - and the Qur'an has over 100 verses that exhort the faithful to fight holy war against those who stand in the way of God's Laws.

 

And yet it does not for over a billion people on this planet. Your theory is crumbling

 

Most all Muslims, even when asked (I've asked them), will not say that Allah got it wrong when it comes to Jihad - yes, they believe that Allah was correct when he said that people get into paradise when they wage holy war against non-believers: "And fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief and polytheism: i.e. worshipping others besides Allah) and the religion (worship) will all be for Allah Alone [in the whole of the world]. But if they cease (worshipping others besides Allah), then certainly, Allah is All-Seer of what they do." Mohsin Khan translation.

 

You don't seem to be as compassionate as I am, because you can't condemn beliefs that lead to violent Jihad, and to FGM, and to misogyny (Q2:282, etc.), and to pedophilia (Mohammad being a role model - so men have sex with 9 year-old girls.) Some day I think you'll find compassion and love and be willing to say that Islam is not what's best for humanity.

 

Just because NOT ALL Muslims have been involved, SO FAR, in Jihad, the 30,000+ Jihad attacks (since 9/11 alone) are enough for ethical people to say that Modern Secular Humanism is better for the world than Islam is.

 

My post stands. A billion people living in peace

 

I have great compassion. A billion people living in peace. Isn't that beautiful

 

And yet they mostly live in peace

 

If I asked a sane person "how many terrorist attacks would a religion have to commit for you to care enough about humanity to condemn that religion?", most sane people would say "50, maybe 100 tops, absolute tops". You don't appear to even HAVE a number. If you went into a coma and woke up and you learned it was 1,000,000 Jihad attacks I guarantee that you STILL wouldn't condemn Islam. Your tolerance of intolerance seems quite intolerant of you.

 

Most Nazis did not commit the Holocaust, either.

 

I would say one. But a religion has never committed a terrorist attack. That is impossible

 

And many were horrified when they found out about it

 

Today a lot do, yes. But as this war heats up, and they are basically "forced" to choose sides.....well.....then you'll be signing a different tune. I'm looking at your unborn grandchildren's generation too, not just today's situation.