Replies

"The US has the first amendment. This allows you to say whatever you want and allows the target to expose the speaker's ignorance.
It's a difficult concept, but permitting free speech is not a demonstration of national intolerance.
Of course, if you'd rather have dissenters killed..."

Tell me how much abuse of free speech tolerable for you? Dont you believe that men of faith have a greater social responsibility as regarding what they should or shouldn't say at least in public? And if such responsibility is regularly abused then what do you think should be the role of society? Should thay allow this kind of hate speech in the name of free speech? The temple vandalization is not just one stray incident but the perpetrators were 19 years old kids who probably have no idea what Hinduism is except for what they probably hear from the Pastors. Who do you think is responsible for the temple vandalization ? The Pastors who spew hatred? The society that allowed the calumny in the name of free speech or the 19 years old kids?

Sadly here the Hindus and Sikhs have to not only bear the brunt of physical attacks also have to hear the hate spew against their religion and they dont even have a voice.

Tell me how much abuse of free speech tolerable for you?

Then they have to suffer scorn and ridicule. That's how free speech works.

Should thay allow this kind of hate speech in the name of free speech?

You really don't understand free speech, do you?

The temple vandalization is not just one stray incident but the perpetrators were 19 years old kids who probably have no idea what Hinduism is except for what they probably hear from the Pastors.

Just like the 10 churches in Phoenix that were burned this month?

they dont even have a voice.

They have the same voice that everybody else does. In fact, people are much more likely to listen because Hindus and Sikhs have different life experiences than the larger population. It's why people still listen to CAIR, for example.

You wrote: "The temple vandalization is not just one stray incident but the perpetrators were 19 years old kids who probably have no idea what Hinduism is except for what they probably hear from the Pastors. Who do you think is responsible for the temple vandalization ? The Pastors who spew hatred?"

Please go back and read what you said. They "probably" had no idea what is Hinduism except what they "probably" heard from their Pastors. This is pure speculation on your part --- and then (on the basis of your own fantasy scenario) you continue on the assumption that their Pastors spew hatred!

You don't even know if the perps HAVE pastors! You don't even know if they go to church!

Your argument would be stronger, my friend, if it did not rely on the formula of Loose Hypothesis + Negative stereotype of pastors = Gotcha.

Our US Constitution and law are different on the matter of preaching, because such activity involved severe and large scale violence here. Instituting a right to free expression here was enough to prevent older European-style violence (some examples being the English Civil War and many pogroms against Jewish communities before that) from occurring.

India, on the other hand, has already suffered large insurgencies of radical Islam (resulting in large wars) and disrespect, condescensions and more pressure from some Christian groups and nations. Maybe India will someday (without influence from political organizations in other nations) find more religious expression to be safer.

But IMO, it seems that commentaries from the conquering/preaching style religions would more honestly be aimed at Islamist countries like Iran for now.