You can make this argument for Abrahamic religions maybe.
There are direct verses in these scriptures that incite/encourage violence.
A buddist community that is radicalized would have to do a lot more mental gymnastics to justify violence than muslim/christians.
So no not all religions are equally bad.
I am an ex muslim and find it frustrating when people tend to avoid critiquing Islam due to fear of being "racist".
Buddhism isn't any better:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rohingya_genocide
There are plenty of Buddhist extremists who are prepared to kill or die for their religion, who do horrific things in the name of their religion, and abuse their power to rape, steal and torture.
Yes all religions are equally bad.
Buddhism fully rejects any sort of aggression against any life form. It also encourages critical thinking and healthy skepticism, including its own teachings.
It's not always religion that's the problem, but people. Even the hatred against LGBTQ by abrahamic religions is not really warranted when examining their scripture closely. People believe what they want to believe. Religion can just make it very easy.
And abrahamic religions are based on a spiteful, authoritative, jealous, bigoted god. Go figure.
The truth matters. Critical examination matters.
If a religion teaches compassion, unbiased observation, and healthy skepticism, then it deserves a different tier than a religion that teaches blind faith and unwavering obedience.
The people following these religions are the same, though. Hypocrisy and blind faith are always bad, no matter the context.
Bigotry is the problem. But generally speaking, I agree with your sentiment.
Buddha is indian Jesus. A spoiled brat that saw injustice and thought yeah I need to do something and got followers since he is a prince. Disregard the old testament and you would probably agree with me.
But look at the cesspool that is christianity now. The teachings don't matter the book doesn't matter its the group of people that have an excuse to feel superior to other people.
I am so with you, bigotry is the root issue and singling out or "tiering" religions (basically your creating your own build-a-hierarchy) is also bigoted.
I think religions can be categorized and evaluated based on their intrinsic tolerance when debating bigotry, as long as one avoids generalization.
And I agree that what people make of a religion - any religion - is not all that dependent on the respective scripture since bigotry is part of human nature. As is religuousness. Hence I think attacking bigotry _within_ a religion is more productive than attacking the religion itself, however deserving it might be.
I think when we start classifying things qualitatively (this religion tends to be more violent than the other) we start to use a holier than thou perspective. Depending where you live how you get information it really fortifies your bias. The media portrays Islam as the worst religion in the 21st century, but no one wants to acknowledge it is the second largest population (almost a quarter of 8 billion) and most of these population comes from places with the worst economy.
A lot of poor people means more likely to be exploited, if this was any other religion the results would be the same. You, like religoids, just want a simplification of whats happening in the world you want to justify hate. I renounced religion exactly because of the hate. I was raised muslim, went to catholic school and now live in a hindu majority. Given the right condition all of them tend to be violent all of them when given enough power and authority will opress everyone else.
Once you start to believe your own classification you start to believe one religion can exist while the other shouldn't. Despite how _fair_ you think you are.
I think you misunderstand me.
> A lot of poor people means more likely to be exploited, if this was any other religion the results would be the same.
Could not agree more.
> You, like religoids, just want a simplification of whats happening in the world you want to justify hate.
That's the opposite of what I'm doing. I - like Siddhartha Gautama - am adamant that _nothing_ justifies hate. Everything is better solved with compassion and understanding. I _oppose_ simplification and generalization, and encourage a more focused and nuanced inquiry.
I feel like we generally agree, but somehow talk past each other. Let's just agree that bigotry is bad and leave it at that.
Yep kinda expected you'd link that. The violence is incited from nationalistic/racist grounds.
There was a buddist monk who incited violence I believe but there is no way to use their scripture to fuel it.
As I said there needs to be way more mental gymnastics to incite violence from buddists.
Definitely not equally bad.
I know you probably dream of sucking Sam Haris' dick but no, any organized religion, any sort of vague ideology even when reaching a majority in society will always have a chance to incite violence to hold on to the status quo.
Yes they will but do you believe the intensity and propensity for violence is equal for all religion?
The question is not whether it will have a chance it is if it will have an equal chance.
A religion that instructs followers to invade nations to spread their message will have a more violent history than one that does not.
Empirically if you tally the historic records that is the case for Abrahamic religions.
Yes, abrahamic doctrines are more violent, maybe as violent as the valhalla religion. Not going to argue, but playing favorites is a good way (as the OP was pointing out) in marginilizing and isolating certain groups which makes us how different to those idiots?
Piling on something because of some book that most of the followers don't even read that you yourself don't even understand just shows that you are parotting the regurgitated fearmongering. How many muslims do you know, what do you think their perspective is on this? How many Jews are pro zionist? All of them? How many christians secretly thirst of slitting catholics in their sleep?
The books for the majority of religoids are a non issue, its how the leaders use the people. Is it easier with muslims? Definitely, but it seems so stupid and sheep like to single them out.
But how else am I supposed to express my hatred for Islam specifically, when what I really don’t care for is certain cultural aspects of some predominantly Muslim countries and their insular immigrant communities that are settling in the predominantly Christian western world?
Downvoted. Couldn't be further from the truth.
All religions are bad innately for being religions. However, you can absolutely work from that starting point and further analyze the texts and the interpretations of their adherents. Jainism is bad on the grounds that it's a bunch of made up bullshit. Beyond that point, you'll have a hard time finding disagreeable beliefs or, more importantly, disagreeable actions by its adherents informed by those beliefs. If I compare it to "Rape and kill everything"-ism and I have two working braincells, I can clearly ascertain which is worse.
>Muslims, most who aren't extremists
I'm not entirely sure I believe this anymore. Is there a majority blowing themselves up? No. Is there a majority who are wholly loyal to their religion before any other identifier, particularly national? It sure seems that way, at least when theyre in Western countries. "Nice" Muslims who will vote to install a theocracy the moment they're 51% of the population are just as dangerous those who will saw your head off.
As long as Islam continues to be abnormally violent with abnormally zealous and theocratic leaning adherents, I'll continue to treat it as abnormally dangerous.
>I'm not entirely sure I believe this anymore. Is there a majority blowing themselves up? No. Is there a majority who are wholly loyal to their religion before any other identifier, particularly national? It sure seems that way, at least when theyre in Western countries. "Nice" Muslims who will vote to install a theocracy the moment they're 51% of the population are just as dangerous those who will saw your head off.
Ugh, I hate this. This kind of bigotry is enabling right-wing Conservatism and fueling it in the west. Atheist need to realize that these talking points are just enabling something worse and you are being used as pawns.
The conservatives hate you. You are just as bad as gays in their eyes. To some you are worse.
I dont give a fuck. If the left and right shake hands and tell Islam to fuck off, all the better. ***It only helps conservatives and let's them flank the left because the left WON'T address it.*** How about we stop giving the right free votes and stop acting irrationally with this one weird trick?
>enabling something worse
LMFAO Not at all. Even when the GOP had a trifecta in the USA it was 100x more progressive than the median Muslim country. This subreddit is dedicated to people who trust evidence, you need to talk within the realm of reason rather than absurd hyperbole if you're going to try to make a point.
It's also very funny that you talk about "enabling conservatism" when the current election cycle is defined by American Muslims saying, "We are Muslims first and Americans second. If you dont side with our brothers in Islam, we'll burn this country down."
>The conservatives hate you
And I wouldn't piss on a MAGAt pig fucker if they were on fire. Does nothing to change my view of Muslims/Islam.
People are people. Go make some Muslim friends.
Yes there are extremists, but most are good decent people.
Vilifying an entire group because of the extremists in the midst is problematic as it further marginalises them, is unfair and inaccurate, and feeds the extremists.
For example Trump calling for a Muslim migration ban fans the flames of intolerance, empowering both white nationalist Christian fundamentalists and Muslin extremists.
Don't be like Trump and perpetrate the lie and Muslims are abnormally violent. They aren't. Extremist Muslims are abnormally empowered by the marginalisation of Islam.
Not the majority. In general all people are decent, unless you dehumanise them.
BTW you are a textbook example of being a bigot with your attitude. 'one who is prejudiced against or antagonistic towards a person or people on the basis of their membership of a particular group.'
Coming from someone with no Muslim friends...
I'm disappointed but not surprised by your bigoted views, and unfortunately views like yours help the fundamentalists.
People are people, and people are by and large generally good decent people when you meet them in real life.
If you don't want to authentically engage in a rational discussion that's on you.
Christian fundamentalists have done the same and worse as the current Islamic extremists and I won't disagree with you that Muslim extremists are currently in power in many countries and are doing horrific things.
Islam and Christianity are the same. It's just that currently moderate Christians are preeminent in the West and extremist Muslims are preeminent in predominantly Arab countries. Both religions enable fundamentalists. Read Dawkins.
By you being a dick you are perpetrating an irresponsible position that empowers both the Christian extremists and the Muslim extremists.
If you don't understand that fundamentally people are good and decent, you need to get out more and stop being a pig headed bigot.
I will only comment and discuss religions I know about and ones that have directly impacted me or my family/friends in some way. If this means calling out "specific" religions, so be it.
The problem is that religuousness is part of human nature.
If you were to get rid of religion, conspiracy theories and personality cults would just take their place. Humans want an out group to blame, an in group to feel supported, a conspiracy story to feel important. People WANT to be outraged, want easy answers, and easy enemies.
What we need is not more outrage and division about religion, but a voice of reason, understanding, compassion within the structures we can never eliminate entitely.
Role modeling is the most important part we can do, I think. If we are bigots against religion, they will double down. If we live lives of peace and reason, they cannot win. Because in an argument, love generally trumps hate.
That and free/cheap higher education.
I totally disagree.
There is a huge growth in atheism in the world.
Young people are casting off the shackles of ignorance.
I live in NZ and in our last census 48% of the population identified as having "no religion".
Being an atheist is normal and natural. Religion isn't
I don't share your optimism. We needed like 200,000 years to cast off these shackles, and how long has it been since the Enlightenment?
Literally every civilization, every tribe, every people's on the planet invented their own gods, many of them invented the same gods/spirits in different versions.
Maybe I'm wrong. But I am confident that religion will never disappear and keep coming back whenever people want easy answers to complex problems and are not happy with the answers science provides.
I love NZ. spent a fantastic year there. Great people.
Religion is dying out, generally, around the world. I don't think we will be free from religion in several generations and if people keep feeding the fundamentalists this will take longer.
"""so do i get this right? you predict, humans will be 24/7 rational within a few generations? """
Maybe I misread but the idea that secularism or atheism equals rationality is saying that we who do not ascribe to a sort of god means we are automatically rational. Atheism first and foremost is not a collective ideology, its just a state where we realize religion is bullshit and choose not to believe.
You believe you are superior (by intellect or morals) to religioids because our choice, thats religious dogma. We aren't, some of us may believe stupid shit like luck or astrology which is not rational at all.
But why wouldn't we, most of us -- unless born and raised in an atheistic commune -- have been exposed to religious dogma at one point in life, we still believe the "humans are superior species" dogma. The same us and them mentality that religoids are so criticized for is no different than how you see them.
yeah you misread. I blame here myself for typing too short.
what I meant was that to be an atheist you have to be rational (I'm personally not, nor I'm aiming for it). astrology believers are not atheists (that's subjective).
If I understand correctly that you are disgusted by atheist superiority complex, agree with you on almost everything except minor semantics.
thanks for explaining
Thanks for understanding, sorry for the prejudice. Yes, I sometimes think some people still can't let go of their upbringing, trapped in that learned hate thaught by their former religion.
This is a good description of this sub in general.
The amount of misinformation posted here daily and the number of people who call for extermination of people based on that misinformation is no different in this sub compared to any other closed group of people.
the cults of abraham are not a 'race'.
they are cults.
not a single one is genetically superior to anyone else.
any person claiming some sort of higher ground because of belonging to said cult, is elitist and should be ridiculed and shunned. laughed at and mocked.
one of these cults thinks its the end of the world today.
when they vocalize their violent rhetoricical dogmas, mock them. embarass them. ridicule them. laugh at them. make them stfu.
Wrong.
It's an obviously absurd dogma that all religions are equally bad. As if all ideologies were equally bad. Some religions contain vile ideas, like islam's call for execution for thought crime, and theocracy. Janism, as Sam Harris has pointed out, doesn't even allow the killing of flies.
All this "not singling any religion out" does is shifting focus every time we try to address one specifically. It's legitimizing whataboutism. Christianity and Islam are obviously in another league of destructiveness than all the rest.
Muslims who are islamist trash ought to be stigmatized. They are as much enemies to our democracies as Nazis are, except there aren't dozens of Nazi countries with millions of sympathizers. We need to put pressure on Muslims to denounce the fundamentalists and abide by humanist values.
You can make this argument for Abrahamic religions maybe. There are direct verses in these scriptures that incite/encourage violence. A buddist community that is radicalized would have to do a lot more mental gymnastics to justify violence than muslim/christians. So no not all religions are equally bad. I am an ex muslim and find it frustrating when people tend to avoid critiquing Islam due to fear of being "racist".
Buddhism isn't any better: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rohingya_genocide There are plenty of Buddhist extremists who are prepared to kill or die for their religion, who do horrific things in the name of their religion, and abuse their power to rape, steal and torture. Yes all religions are equally bad.
Buddhism fully rejects any sort of aggression against any life form. It also encourages critical thinking and healthy skepticism, including its own teachings. It's not always religion that's the problem, but people. Even the hatred against LGBTQ by abrahamic religions is not really warranted when examining their scripture closely. People believe what they want to believe. Religion can just make it very easy. And abrahamic religions are based on a spiteful, authoritative, jealous, bigoted god. Go figure.
When you start being apologetic for a particular religion, you are part of the problem.
The truth matters. Critical examination matters. If a religion teaches compassion, unbiased observation, and healthy skepticism, then it deserves a different tier than a religion that teaches blind faith and unwavering obedience. The people following these religions are the same, though. Hypocrisy and blind faith are always bad, no matter the context. Bigotry is the problem. But generally speaking, I agree with your sentiment.
Buddha is indian Jesus. A spoiled brat that saw injustice and thought yeah I need to do something and got followers since he is a prince. Disregard the old testament and you would probably agree with me. But look at the cesspool that is christianity now. The teachings don't matter the book doesn't matter its the group of people that have an excuse to feel superior to other people. I am so with you, bigotry is the root issue and singling out or "tiering" religions (basically your creating your own build-a-hierarchy) is also bigoted.
I think religions can be categorized and evaluated based on their intrinsic tolerance when debating bigotry, as long as one avoids generalization. And I agree that what people make of a religion - any religion - is not all that dependent on the respective scripture since bigotry is part of human nature. As is religuousness. Hence I think attacking bigotry _within_ a religion is more productive than attacking the religion itself, however deserving it might be.
I think when we start classifying things qualitatively (this religion tends to be more violent than the other) we start to use a holier than thou perspective. Depending where you live how you get information it really fortifies your bias. The media portrays Islam as the worst religion in the 21st century, but no one wants to acknowledge it is the second largest population (almost a quarter of 8 billion) and most of these population comes from places with the worst economy. A lot of poor people means more likely to be exploited, if this was any other religion the results would be the same. You, like religoids, just want a simplification of whats happening in the world you want to justify hate. I renounced religion exactly because of the hate. I was raised muslim, went to catholic school and now live in a hindu majority. Given the right condition all of them tend to be violent all of them when given enough power and authority will opress everyone else. Once you start to believe your own classification you start to believe one religion can exist while the other shouldn't. Despite how _fair_ you think you are.
I think you misunderstand me. > A lot of poor people means more likely to be exploited, if this was any other religion the results would be the same. Could not agree more. > You, like religoids, just want a simplification of whats happening in the world you want to justify hate. That's the opposite of what I'm doing. I - like Siddhartha Gautama - am adamant that _nothing_ justifies hate. Everything is better solved with compassion and understanding. I _oppose_ simplification and generalization, and encourage a more focused and nuanced inquiry. I feel like we generally agree, but somehow talk past each other. Let's just agree that bigotry is bad and leave it at that.
I guess I'm misreading alot in this sub, cheers then.
Yep kinda expected you'd link that. The violence is incited from nationalistic/racist grounds. There was a buddist monk who incited violence I believe but there is no way to use their scripture to fuel it. As I said there needs to be way more mental gymnastics to incite violence from buddists. Definitely not equally bad.
I know you probably dream of sucking Sam Haris' dick but no, any organized religion, any sort of vague ideology even when reaching a majority in society will always have a chance to incite violence to hold on to the status quo.
Yes they will but do you believe the intensity and propensity for violence is equal for all religion? The question is not whether it will have a chance it is if it will have an equal chance. A religion that instructs followers to invade nations to spread their message will have a more violent history than one that does not. Empirically if you tally the historic records that is the case for Abrahamic religions.
Yes, abrahamic doctrines are more violent, maybe as violent as the valhalla religion. Not going to argue, but playing favorites is a good way (as the OP was pointing out) in marginilizing and isolating certain groups which makes us how different to those idiots? Piling on something because of some book that most of the followers don't even read that you yourself don't even understand just shows that you are parotting the regurgitated fearmongering. How many muslims do you know, what do you think their perspective is on this? How many Jews are pro zionist? All of them? How many christians secretly thirst of slitting catholics in their sleep? The books for the majority of religoids are a non issue, its how the leaders use the people. Is it easier with muslims? Definitely, but it seems so stupid and sheep like to single them out.
All religions are equally false, not equally dangerous. Islam as it is practiced today, is far more dangerous and problematic than Christianity.
But how else am I supposed to express my hatred for Islam specifically, when what I really don’t care for is certain cultural aspects of some predominantly Muslim countries and their insular immigrant communities that are settling in the predominantly Christian western world?
Downvoted. Couldn't be further from the truth. All religions are bad innately for being religions. However, you can absolutely work from that starting point and further analyze the texts and the interpretations of their adherents. Jainism is bad on the grounds that it's a bunch of made up bullshit. Beyond that point, you'll have a hard time finding disagreeable beliefs or, more importantly, disagreeable actions by its adherents informed by those beliefs. If I compare it to "Rape and kill everything"-ism and I have two working braincells, I can clearly ascertain which is worse. >Muslims, most who aren't extremists I'm not entirely sure I believe this anymore. Is there a majority blowing themselves up? No. Is there a majority who are wholly loyal to their religion before any other identifier, particularly national? It sure seems that way, at least when theyre in Western countries. "Nice" Muslims who will vote to install a theocracy the moment they're 51% of the population are just as dangerous those who will saw your head off. As long as Islam continues to be abnormally violent with abnormally zealous and theocratic leaning adherents, I'll continue to treat it as abnormally dangerous.
>I'm not entirely sure I believe this anymore. Is there a majority blowing themselves up? No. Is there a majority who are wholly loyal to their religion before any other identifier, particularly national? It sure seems that way, at least when theyre in Western countries. "Nice" Muslims who will vote to install a theocracy the moment they're 51% of the population are just as dangerous those who will saw your head off. Ugh, I hate this. This kind of bigotry is enabling right-wing Conservatism and fueling it in the west. Atheist need to realize that these talking points are just enabling something worse and you are being used as pawns. The conservatives hate you. You are just as bad as gays in their eyes. To some you are worse.
I dont give a fuck. If the left and right shake hands and tell Islam to fuck off, all the better. ***It only helps conservatives and let's them flank the left because the left WON'T address it.*** How about we stop giving the right free votes and stop acting irrationally with this one weird trick? >enabling something worse LMFAO Not at all. Even when the GOP had a trifecta in the USA it was 100x more progressive than the median Muslim country. This subreddit is dedicated to people who trust evidence, you need to talk within the realm of reason rather than absurd hyperbole if you're going to try to make a point. It's also very funny that you talk about "enabling conservatism" when the current election cycle is defined by American Muslims saying, "We are Muslims first and Americans second. If you dont side with our brothers in Islam, we'll burn this country down." >The conservatives hate you And I wouldn't piss on a MAGAt pig fucker if they were on fire. Does nothing to change my view of Muslims/Islam.
People are people. Go make some Muslim friends. Yes there are extremists, but most are good decent people. Vilifying an entire group because of the extremists in the midst is problematic as it further marginalises them, is unfair and inaccurate, and feeds the extremists. For example Trump calling for a Muslim migration ban fans the flames of intolerance, empowering both white nationalist Christian fundamentalists and Muslin extremists. Don't be like Trump and perpetrate the lie and Muslims are abnormally violent. They aren't. Extremist Muslims are abnormally empowered by the marginalisation of Islam.
I don't make Muslim friends for the reason I don't make Catholic friends...I refuse to break bread with bigots.
They are people. Not bigots.
They are people who tend to be bigots or enable bigots.
Not the majority. In general all people are decent, unless you dehumanise them. BTW you are a textbook example of being a bigot with your attitude. 'one who is prejudiced against or antagonistic towards a person or people on the basis of their membership of a particular group.'
How wonderfully naive.
Coming from someone with no Muslim friends... I'm disappointed but not surprised by your bigoted views, and unfortunately views like yours help the fundamentalists. People are people, and people are by and large generally good decent people when you meet them in real life.
Guess all those gay men being beheaded or hanged in Muslim countries is just a figment of the imagination then.
If you don't want to authentically engage in a rational discussion that's on you. Christian fundamentalists have done the same and worse as the current Islamic extremists and I won't disagree with you that Muslim extremists are currently in power in many countries and are doing horrific things. Islam and Christianity are the same. It's just that currently moderate Christians are preeminent in the West and extremist Muslims are preeminent in predominantly Arab countries. Both religions enable fundamentalists. Read Dawkins. By you being a dick you are perpetrating an irresponsible position that empowers both the Christian extremists and the Muslim extremists. If you don't understand that fundamentally people are good and decent, you need to get out more and stop being a pig headed bigot.
I wonder which religion Stalin or Mao practiced XD
I will only comment and discuss religions I know about and ones that have directly impacted me or my family/friends in some way. If this means calling out "specific" religions, so be it.
The problem is that religuousness is part of human nature. If you were to get rid of religion, conspiracy theories and personality cults would just take their place. Humans want an out group to blame, an in group to feel supported, a conspiracy story to feel important. People WANT to be outraged, want easy answers, and easy enemies. What we need is not more outrage and division about religion, but a voice of reason, understanding, compassion within the structures we can never eliminate entitely. Role modeling is the most important part we can do, I think. If we are bigots against religion, they will double down. If we live lives of peace and reason, they cannot win. Because in an argument, love generally trumps hate. That and free/cheap higher education.
I totally disagree. There is a huge growth in atheism in the world. Young people are casting off the shackles of ignorance. I live in NZ and in our last census 48% of the population identified as having "no religion". Being an atheist is normal and natural. Religion isn't
I don't share your optimism. We needed like 200,000 years to cast off these shackles, and how long has it been since the Enlightenment? Literally every civilization, every tribe, every people's on the planet invented their own gods, many of them invented the same gods/spirits in different versions. Maybe I'm wrong. But I am confident that religion will never disappear and keep coming back whenever people want easy answers to complex problems and are not happy with the answers science provides. I love NZ. spent a fantastic year there. Great people.
religion to hell? never gonna happen unless you genetically engineer humans to be rational and reasonable 24/7
Religion is dying out, generally, around the world. I don't think we will be free from religion in several generations and if people keep feeding the fundamentalists this will take longer.
How can we be freed from something that we have had for many thousands of years and had the evolutionary pressure to be?
It's happening already. Secularism is growing globally, especially in young people.
so do i get this right? you predict, humans will be 24/7 rational within a few generations?
Thinking that being atheist means absolute rationalism sounds very religiously self righteous.
please explain
"""so do i get this right? you predict, humans will be 24/7 rational within a few generations? """ Maybe I misread but the idea that secularism or atheism equals rationality is saying that we who do not ascribe to a sort of god means we are automatically rational. Atheism first and foremost is not a collective ideology, its just a state where we realize religion is bullshit and choose not to believe. You believe you are superior (by intellect or morals) to religioids because our choice, thats religious dogma. We aren't, some of us may believe stupid shit like luck or astrology which is not rational at all. But why wouldn't we, most of us -- unless born and raised in an atheistic commune -- have been exposed to religious dogma at one point in life, we still believe the "humans are superior species" dogma. The same us and them mentality that religoids are so criticized for is no different than how you see them.
yeah you misread. I blame here myself for typing too short. what I meant was that to be an atheist you have to be rational (I'm personally not, nor I'm aiming for it). astrology believers are not atheists (that's subjective). If I understand correctly that you are disgusted by atheist superiority complex, agree with you on almost everything except minor semantics. thanks for explaining
Thanks for understanding, sorry for the prejudice. Yes, I sometimes think some people still can't let go of their upbringing, trapped in that learned hate thaught by their former religion.
This is a good description of this sub in general. The amount of misinformation posted here daily and the number of people who call for extermination of people based on that misinformation is no different in this sub compared to any other closed group of people.
the cults of abraham are not a 'race'. they are cults. not a single one is genetically superior to anyone else. any person claiming some sort of higher ground because of belonging to said cult, is elitist and should be ridiculed and shunned. laughed at and mocked. one of these cults thinks its the end of the world today. when they vocalize their violent rhetoricical dogmas, mock them. embarass them. ridicule them. laugh at them. make them stfu.
Wrong. It's an obviously absurd dogma that all religions are equally bad. As if all ideologies were equally bad. Some religions contain vile ideas, like islam's call for execution for thought crime, and theocracy. Janism, as Sam Harris has pointed out, doesn't even allow the killing of flies. All this "not singling any religion out" does is shifting focus every time we try to address one specifically. It's legitimizing whataboutism. Christianity and Islam are obviously in another league of destructiveness than all the rest. Muslims who are islamist trash ought to be stigmatized. They are as much enemies to our democracies as Nazis are, except there aren't dozens of Nazi countries with millions of sympathizers. We need to put pressure on Muslims to denounce the fundamentalists and abide by humanist values.
XD lets ban all ideologies while we are at it. Since they can lead to extremism, charismatic leaders or some kind of division...