The Moment of Truth

According to a new article in The Economist, in many parts of the world, the right to change one's beliefs is under threat. Debate: If a religion (or country) is to be taken seriously, should there be an option to opt out or convert without fear of death, imprisonment, loss of job, etc.?

http://www.economist.com/world/international/displaystory.cfm?story_id=11784873

Originally posted by der schwarze Ritter
According to a new article in The Economist, in many parts of the world, the right to change one's beliefs is under threat. Debate: If a religion (or country) is to be taken seriously, should there be an option to opt out or convert without fear of death, imprisonment, loss of job, etc.?

http://www.economist.com/world/international/displaystory.cfm?story_id=11784873

Originally posted by der schwarze Ritter
Debate: If a religion (or country) is to be taken seriously, should there be an option to opt out or convert without fear of death, imprisonment, loss of job, etc.?

Originally posted by DoctorScribbles
I have formulated a compromise between the Muslim propensity to dismember people, treat infidelity as a capital crime and generally take an abhorrent approach to criminal justice, and the Christian doctrine of repeated forgiveness. Malaysia should adopt the following system:

1) Each person is born into a particular religion, and is also born wit ...[text shortened]... instrument in a public ceremony, and his family shall be forgiven for his crimes of infidelity.

Originally posted by der schwarze Ritter
According to a new article in The Economist, in many parts of the world, the right to change one's beliefs is under threat. Debate: If a religion (or country) is to be taken seriously, should there be an option to opt out or convert without fear of death, imprisonment, loss of job, etc.?

http://www.economist.com/world/international/displaystory.cfm?story_id=11784873

Originally posted by scherzo
Would you look at that. DSR's in Spirituality too. 😠

No country can be taken seriously that forces its beliefs onto others. Which is why the US is ridiculous.

Originally posted by daniel58
No the U.S does NOT force it's beliefs on other people that's what's good about it.

Originally posted by SwissGambit
So, we didn't just force 'democracy' on Iraq and Afghanistan?

Originally posted by PsychoPawn
You could tell they wanted it from their body language and the "come hither" looks that they were giving us.

Originally posted by daniel58
Right so if they come and bomb us and threaten us then that's good to help them create a stable government.

Originally posted by SwissGambit
1) Iraq didn't.
2) Afghanistan didn't really do it, either. The perps were mostly Saudis.
3) LOL at the word 'help' - I guess dropping tons of bombs on a country is now considered 'helpful' for the Christian Right nowadays.

[b]bizarro-help verb
1. The act of assisting people after first bombing the crap out of them.[/b]

1. I'm talking about terrorists in general.

2. We had to take it over first before we controlled it.

Originally posted by daniel58
1. I'm talking about terrorists in general.

2. We had to take it over first before we controlled it.

Originally posted by karoly aczel
now you are showing more of your true colours ,Daniel. If you are going to be serious about this spirituality thing,(as indeed you seem to be), You are going to have to leave that 'controlling' attitude behind. Better to be killed for the right reasons than die trying to fight for the wromg ones!

Originally posted by daniel58
AMERICA CONTROLS IRAQ, I didn't say I controlled anything, or anybody with no "controlling attitude".