Is freedom of religion a fundamentally atheistic ideal?
The only way you can guarantee the free practice of all religions is if you believe that none of them have a special monopoly on the truth. If you believe that Christianity is the truth, or Islam is the truth, or Hinduism is the truth, shouldn't you want to promote that religion, that truth, over the others? Promoting the equality of all religions is the same as declaring all religions invalid. Am I wrong?
This was actually a Danish Government philosophy for a while.
Religious freedom is atheism.
I don't speak enough danish though to find the names and texts you want.
From the looks of it those people were spot on about religious freedom .
No. If you believe that only God can pass judgement than you have no power to tell others to believe in things they don't want to. That's a part of Christianity and Islam from what I've read. People obviously just ignore things they don't like.
>>1318299
From a Christian perspective there isn't anything wrong with freedom of religion, there is no political mandate to enforce Christianity as the state religion anywhere in the New Testament. I think a Christian theocracy would be the ideal for a true Christian, but a state which allows freedom of religion is committing no sin, nor is a politician who believes all people ought to at least have the right to associate with whatever religion they wish to associate with. Christianity is almost entirely apolitical sans a few things that have to do with usury. A Christian can, by political persuasion, disallow freedom of religion, but does not have to.
This is in stark contrast to Islam which demands that all believers seek to instate Shariah. Not obeying Shariah is a sin to a Muslim, as is failing to enforce it, so they can not and will never tolerate freedom of religion in their nations because that is not a part of Shariah. At the very least non-Muslims must pay a special tax and are afforded fewer rights than Muslims.
Freedom of religion is a secular ideal, but is perfectly compatible with Christianity, and not compatible at all with Islam.
>>1318325
>Christianity is almost entirely apolitical
What the fuck am I reading
>>1318325
In lots of Muslim controlled areas in the past the Christian and Jewish population were subject to Christian and Jewish law. Most famously in the Ottoman Empire.
>>1318350
Last I heard muslim majority countries have started to ban christmas.
>>1318695
You can't believe everything you hear on Fox news.
it's to prevent religion from becoming tied to the state
>>1318703
yeah but given the totalitarian mindset of religious fundamentalists I don't think that's unlikely if the right imams fall behind it
By your logic, freedom of religious is more of a syncretic idea. The notion that all religions are a path to the truth. You have to take an anti-literalist stance, but it works. In truth, it's more of a compromise than an ideal. You accept that other people disagree with you and get on with life.
>>1318299
All truth claims by their nature are exclusive.
Saying that mutually exclusive things are all true is a bastardization of the meaning of the word "truth".
>>1318299
Dutch republic had a certain tolerance or freedom since the 16th century.
The idea being that people don't have free will anyways so those of other religions are going to straight to hell anyways.
