Religious Intolerance And The Religion Essay

Almost all organized religions, (related to thinking about how people think) systems, and (not part of the church) systems of sense of right and wrong include such an ethic. It is normally meant to apply to the whole human race. (what a shame), it is too often given by some people only to believers in the same religion or even to others in the same (religious group/category of paper money), of the same (male/female status), the same sexual (inborn pattern of romantic and sexual interest and identity), etc. religious intolerance is defined as any action or call for action which badly mistreats or unfairly treats people on the ground of their (related to religion or the soul) faith. The important word here is natural process. The Bible contains many references to religious intolerance in passages that (help increase/show in a good way) bad mistreatment, mass murder and mass murder against people of other religions.

The fruits of religious freedom depend on the constant hard work of communities in kind and giving/taking good care of kindness, respect and back–and–forth exchange the two–way street of (kindness that helps others). Sustaining religious freedom is part of a just and free (community of people/all good people in the world). This back and forth/equal between people (responsibility/duty) is founded on the built–in worth and value of each person and the moral sense of right and wrong that guides human (service business/government unit/power/functioning). Going on

Teens today are bombarded with multiple types of external and internal conflicts. AIDS and other STD's impact the way they live externally; depression and suicide can govern their internal lives. However, religious tolerance grabs at both their internal and external lives. The biased media always attempts to push teens' beliefs one way or another, yet it is the choice of the individual to which counts in the end. ApologeticsIndex.org defines religious tolerance as "Acknowledging and supporting that individuals have the right and freedom to their own beliefs and related legitimate practices, without necessarily validating those beliefs or practices." It also defines religious intolerance as "a)

Refusing to acknowledge and support the right...show more content...

The first is where there is an extreme reluctance to change (e.g. Islam in the Middle East). The other comes in a form where change has happened all too rapidly. For example, secular countries like America and others in Europe have gone from origins inreligion, to actually putting down religion (mainly through the media; Bernard Goldberg, Bias: A CBS Insider Exposes How the Media Distort the News). Saying that religious intolerance is a problem is a massive understatement and the numbers certainly do not lie.

In a study by the University of North Carolina, a poll was taken of seniors in high school about organized religion. An astonishing one third of seniors felt alienated by organized religion. Of these numbers, half the students felt hostile towards organized religion and another half felt no emotions towards it. One third is not a majority, but a whole third of the adult population is an alarming number. In this trend, it is to be expected that nearly 50% of youth will feel threatened by organized religion in little more than a decade (The Empty Church : Does Organized Religion Matter Anymore by Thomas C. Reeves). In a Youth Gallup Poll (ages 13–17), 40% of youth who are identified as "non–churchgoers" agree that "most Muslims around the world are accepting of other religions." This number compares to only 27% of "churchgoers" who believe Muslims are religiously tolerant. This is a stark contrast. Are

Get more content

The essay, America's True History of Religious Tolerance, written by Kenneth Davis, made me realize how non–free America actually is towards religion and how people choose to practice it. It also opened my eyes on how to deal with most situations of this nature, if every arose to mo or towards any one else around me, as an American citizen

In Mr. Davis' essay he mentions a quote from one of Obama's speeches stating that "Obama declared 'This is America. And our commitment to religious freedom must be unshakeable. The principle that they will not treated differently by their government is essential to who we are.". That quote caught my eye because it shows that no matter what religion or who that religious follower is, if any religion at all,

Get

More Content

Religious tolerance wasn't established until the late 1700's. Christians were being killed just for believing in their faith. I can't even begin to comprehend how difficult that must of been. It was a convert or die type of society. Religious freedom is something that we all deserve and have the right to have. I know I personally take it for granted.

I've attended catholic school my whole life. I have never thought twice about when we pray in class. Our school has mass at least once a month were the whole school and faculty attend, we can go to spiritual direction, we have theology classes, and we even have the option to go to our school chapel to pray and reflect. Their are so many opportunities out there to express our faith. Even though I go to a catholic school their are a bunch of kids that aren't Christian but that's what makes it a melting pot. No one is scared to voice their opinion in theology class, we can debate and ask questions and you can learn a lot from that. Religious freedom is what makes the world go round right now, and we are very privileged to have these opportunities.

It is remarkable that we...show more content...

It is confirming our love for God and commitment as adults in the church. We are making that decision for ourselves, and we are able to do this through religious tolerance. I chose to be a Christian, yes my parents brought me up that way but once you get confirmed it is in your hands. We have the ability to decide in a religion. We have the ability to love and pray to whoever we want to. We have the ability to go shout it in the streets and that is a beautiful thing.

Religious freedom is more important than we think. My whole life would be turned upside down without it. I would not be at St.Mary's Ryken with the education and friends I have know. So many people have died for this cause and now we are able to live it out and share our message with

Get more content

Deism and Changes in Religious Tolerance in America

Religious conscience in America has evolved considerably since the first settlers emigrated here from Europe. Primary settlements were established by Puritans and Pilgrims who believed "their errand into the wilderness [America] was above all else a religious errand, and all institutions – town meeting, school, church, family, law–must faithfully reflect that fact" (Gaustad 61). However, as colonies grew, dissenters emerged to challenge Puritan authority; indeed, many of them left the church to join untraditional religious sects such as "the Ranters, the Seekers, the Quakers, the Antinomians, and the Familists" (Westbrook 26). Debates over softening the stance ontolerance in...show more content... Rejecting the assumption that God controls all actions on earth, "most Deists believe that God created the universe, [. . .] and then disassociated himself from his creation" (Robinson 3). This definition leads to the supposition that deistic thought was partly conceived out of scientific discovery: a Darwinian takeover theory. Perhaps the nuances of scientific knowledge manifested a directive in the argument for religious freedom. Certainly, Deist's supported what Benjamin Franklin termed, "spiritual Liberty," which asserted that "no man ought to resign his Liberty," in "mak[ing] Choice of his Minister as his Judgement and Conscience direct him" (qtd. in Walters, Franklin 138). Thomas Paine,Deism's most notable advocate, maintains this line of thinking saying, "I do not believe in the creed professed by [. . .] any church that I know of," but, "I do not mean this declaration to condemn those who believe otherwise; they have the same right to their belief as I have to mine" (22). Religious tolerance would gain many formidable voices among America's Founding Fathers, a development that poses a challenge to the harsh dogmatic attitude of early Puritan leaders.

Intolerance for opposing views in religious matters was a renowned element in Puritanical practices during the seventeenth century. Few persons had the courage to speak against church doctrine, as it would certainly pronounce their expulsion. One such person, Roger Williams, Get more content

Religious tolerance in the 16th and 17th century Europe between Catholicism and Protestantism and other religion had change for many Nation.The violence between Religions had died down with country letting protestants practice their religion but with slight restriction.

However many didn't see eye to eye with letting people of other religions have religious freedom believing their religion was the only true faith.Some country like france which was a divout catholic nation had a hard time accepting people of other fatih

Get

Religious tolerance denotes to abstain from discriminating against others who follow a different religious path. Tolerance is more arduous to maintain when you know that your religion is true and their religion is erroneous. Religious tolerance is not religious nonchalance. It consists of valuing the right of another person to hold beliefs that you know, absolutely, and without a doubt, to be erroneous. The individual believer has often been the target of oppression for thinking or speaking unorthodox thoughts, for assembling with and recruiting others, and for transmuting their religious affiliation. Typically, the aggressors have been large religious groups and governments.

Saudi and Freedom of religion

Saudi Arabia is an Islamic kingdom without legal defense for freedom of religion, in addition to such protection does not continue living in practice. Islam is the authorized religion, and all populace are Muslims. On its basis interpretation of the hadith, otherwise sayings of the Prophet Muhammad, the rule prohibits the public put into practice of non–Muslim religions. The Government is familiar with the right of non–Muslims to worship in confidential; though, the difference between public in addition to private worship is not clearly distinct, and at times the Government does not deference in practice the right to private adoration. Under Saudi Arabia 's interpretation of the religion of Islam it is considered a violation of God 's will for unrelated men and women

In what sense, and to what extent, does John Locke believe in freedom?

In his original piece on Locke's theory, John Dunn argues that Locke's conjectures in Second Treatise are rendered obsolete to the modern philosopher. {SITE} I use the term "original" for Dunn's seminal [Is it, in fact, seminal?] work on Locke, because he later retracts (or rather, shifts) his initial postulations in an insightful essay published some years later. [ GIVE AN ACCOUNT/ QUOTE AS TO HOW THIS EVOLVED AND CHANGED. SEE ESSAY ON KEATS]. Dunn's change in outlook is a telling example as to how/why Lockean poltical theory is still relevant 400 years later; his themes can be explored with varied approaches and proves equivocal. Using Dunn as an example, one can see ...show more content...

There are times in which his argument on property ownership contradicts itself. (EXPLORE THIS SOME MORE)

The Problems Of His Work

Limitations of freedom are the same as the limitations of knowledge. WE CANNOT DO WHATEVER WE WANT. DOES JUMPING OVER THE MOON MAKE US UNFREE? CALL UPON ESSAY AND SECOND TO EXPLORE THIS A BIT MORE.

CONCLUSION:

While the themes traced in this essay are in no way comprehensive of the intricacies contained within the Second Treatse, the touchstones of this paper have all been applied to the notions of freedom. By examining topics that have been the subject of scholarly debate for a long time (make this sound better, it sucks) (e.g. religion, property ownership, and nature), the limitations of Locke's philosophy do not undermine his premises for individual liberty. While Locke's religious undertones and opinions on ownership may ring obstinate and controversial to the modern reader, one cannot dismiss his philosophy for ....(MAKE THIS

Religious diversity was allowed in different degrees among the Islamic Empires. Sunni Muslims ruled the Ottoman Empire, but there was a common acceptance of other religions. Mughal rule seemed the most accepting of other religions, as it enforced the Policy of Religious toleration under Akbar the Great. Seemingly least accepting of religious diversity was the Safavid Empire with its loss of religious freedom towards its decline. Religious diversity was accepted in degrees among the Ottoman, Safavid, and Mughal Empires with certain restrictions like Jitza and Devshirme in, but also approbations like the Policy of Religious Toleration in the Mughal Empire also known as the most religiously accepting empire. Safavid and Ottoman rule were similar

Fundamentalism is a strict adherence to a set of ideas or beliefs that are conservative in nature. It is a pejorative term usually associated with religious fanaticism. Usually, this is what comes to mind when there is mention of a fundamentalist. However, in Mohsin Hamid's The Reluctant Fundamentalist starring the protagonist Changez, a Pakistani Princetonian who is a top–ranked employee at a prestigious New York valuation firm, turns out not to be an Islamic fundamentalist, but a reluctant fundamentalist of US Capitalism. Hamid challenges readers to reevaluate their preconceived notions and prejudices of people different from themselves in post 9/11 America by employing the use of motifs, aphorism, and suspense, to create a conflation...show more content...

Hamid, through his choice of names, brilliantly doubles his characters as motifs. All the significant characters have a symbolic identity and thus, he is simultaneously telling two stories, but not in the traditional sense expected of a frame story, for this is nota story within a story, but rather, a story behind a story. The frame takes Changez back to the past, but when he finishes retelling the past, the frame is no more and the reader is back in the present. Therefore, when the past is put in conjunction with the happenings in the cafe, only one story is being told. The second story is conveyed through the interaction of the motifs and requires a little intuition (not that much) on the reader's part to decipher its meaning. In using the motifs to convey a variety of messages, the relationship between Changez and Erica is especially saturated with clues of their secret identities. Erica had only one previous lover, Chris, her childhood sweetheart who died of cancer in late adolescence and whom she is never able to let go. Initially, she was severely depressed but eventually recovered from the ordeal. However, as Erica's intimacy with Changez grows, so does her feeling of nostalgia. The September 11 attacks triggers a relapse in Erica and she becomes more and more obsessed with Chris. She rejects Changez physically and is only able to have sex with him when they pretend

Get more content