"What I don't like about bible thumpers, or any cult for that matter, is the arrogance exhibited with impunity by them as they perform their socially accepted public displays of schizophrenic indulgence with the goal of influencing weak-minded individuals, mostly young impressionable children, to join in activities that brainwash them into thinking a certain way so as to restrict their ability to freely reason, to police their own thoughts and become willing slaves, to not take responsibility for their own actions, and to be unquestioningly subservient to the will of a silent invisible entity whose thoughts and wishes are supposedly passed down through the overly exaggerated, un-provable, inconsistent, babblings of an old book that can only be deciphered correctly by someone who claims to be in direct contact with this entity, and who is undoubtedly either the most schizophrenic, or the most deviant member of the group. I see religion, all religion, as evil, and its minions as zombies." .......... Steve Pinkston
RE:TO KK
by Rupakshi on Apr 03, 2008 05:26 PM Permalink
Imram is point out mistakes in the religions which bash other religions. The religion practiced in way brings law and order and peace to the society. Another way breeds cruelty, murder and plunder. Middle eastern based religion have both components. Eastern based religions, at end of each ritual end with words peace (shanti). Eastern based religions like Buddhism do not have to revolve around a God, which gives more flexibility. The Hindu religion which is called a way of life etc. believes in one God too, but believes in His ability to come in infinite forms. On one side one cannot picture a almighty with infinite powers and on the other limit his ability to take any shape or form. Does a Hindu need to believe in a Super human above? Not necessary. But what ever way one prays, is't it totally illogical for that infinite power to send some one to be killed and His death is for human benefit? Is't it also illogical for Him to send a messenger or a Prophet who advocates imposition of ideas with terror and violence? Why does He not come himself, if has something to convey. In that respect, may be a Hindu is right when they say, He himself took a human form to advocate a principle.
