Replies

""If Jews, Moslems or people of other religions don't like that: GET OVER IT. IT'S CALLED TOLLERANCE!""

"I love it! If you don't like potatoes, you are still going to eat nothing but potatoes for the rest of the year --- get over it!

What do you mean, why? 'Cause I said so! Don't you know, this is a democracy, damn it! Seargant, take out this man and shoot him: we don't want him to spoil this democracy of ours.

HELP!"

You gave an incomplete quote of me, and your "logic" is just not there.

Religious tollerance is not watering down your religious expression so as not to offend anyone...its mainly, choosing not to be offended by the closely held religious beliefs of others--even if they are publically expressed.

A Christian who reflects and follows the teachings of Jesus IS OFFENDED by prayers that do not obey those teachings... Does that mean they walk out when the Rabbi or Imam gets up to pray? NO, we grin and bear it, respectfully bow our heads, and silently pray for the man, that he may come to a better understanding of truth.

It's a rightful request for tollerance to expect the same respect from them, when a Christian gets up and prays.

Nobody's asking anyone to eat potatos for a year...or is about shooting anyone.

You sound like a typical liberal putting words into peoples mouths when you can't form a solid argument in response to them.

Religious tollerance is not watering down your religious expression so as not to offend anyone...its mainly, choosing not to be offended by the closely held religious beliefs of others--even if they are publically expressed.

It is absolutely correct and well-stated. It is the application of this truism that is a problem.

There is no recipe here for all occasions, and this is a root of the problem for many on this thread. If I see you pray in the street or in your house, I think I am morally wrong to be offended. If you invited me to dinner and pray in whatever way is your custom, I am not only tolerant --- I respect your beliefs, although they are not mine.

There is a difference, however, if you ask me to join. I've been in this situation many times. When my Christian host says in the middle of the prayer something to the effect, "we bow to Jesus" (sorry I Do not recall the exact wording), my wife and I do not bow. I go as far as I can without crossing what is proscribed by my religion. No firend of mine ever took offense. Naturally, it did not even occur to me to be offended by their prayer; I only respect them for their convictions.

This is what many on this thread confuse and argue against a strawman: if you assume that I am against a public expression of your beliefs, then you are RIGHT in being offended. Except the assumption is wrong.

Express your beliefs but do not invite me to join. That is what the words "In Jesus name" mean. I cannot join you here. You can say, "As Jesus said..." or "as Jesus taught" ---- anything of that does not compel my commitment. I will stand there, praying silently with you. But when you tell me that have to do anything "in the name of Jesus," I cannot --- just as you cannot do that in the name of Mohammed.

IT's not about purity of belief, thefore: it's about an action of a human compelling another human to do/accept something. It has nothing whatever to do with the relation of either of these individuals with divinity.

Makes sense to me. I had 2 thoughts to reading this article:

The first was, let'um walk out. So what? If their conscience is bothered by being in attendance while someone prays to Jesus, then by all means, they should vacate the premises. I suspect it had less to do with their conscience though, and more to do with wanting to get in a zinger against Christians.

My second thought was that for those who advocate the Christian minister dropping the Jesus reference, out of respect for those who were in attendance -- would they also encourage a Muslim or Jewish religious leader to INCLUDE a reference to Jesus, out of respect for those Christians in attendance? Of course not. So whereas this particular Christian minister felt a moral obligation to "pray in Jesus' name", per his own faith, he is forced to abdicate that, against his own conscience --- however, others of differing faiths are not held to the same standard.

What it boils down to is the same old tired practice that has become fashionable in America -- when it doubt, stick it to the Christians.

"A Christian who reflects and follows the teachings of Jesus IS OFFENDED by prayers that do not obey those teachings... Does that mean they walk out when the Rabbi or Imam gets up to pray? NO, we grin and bear it, respectfully bow our heads, and silently pray for the man, that he may come to a better understanding of truth."

This one paragraph is what I tried to say on the whole thread. You did a much better job. Thank you.