There's a pretty significant difference between pandering to religious types and using religion to influence your laws, policy, and decision-making. There was nothing "Christian" about what the Nazis did. Recall that these same Nazis persecuted Catholics in Germany.
It's not boiling down the argument -- it's cherry picking. Christianity did not cause WWII. Christian doctrine did not justify Hitler's actions and decisions, just like Buddhist doctrine did not dictate Japan's actions in WWII (although the majority religion at the time in Japan was Shintoism, contrary to the paper's claims that it was Buddhism).
Meanwhile, religious doctrine in Islam absolutely dictates cultural and societal norms in majority Islam countries, including beliefs that:
-women are lesser than men
-that women (property of their guardian/husband) be covered/veiled
-that homosexuals should be killed
-
that spousal abuse is a-ok
Given your source, it's frankly hilarious that you would even cit it. It would be like me citing the Pope on the evils of other religions.
I don't know how to multiquote the same post, so i'mma just go after this whole thing all in one in my own way, so here we go:
"There's a pretty significant difference between pandering to religious types and using religion to influence your laws, policy, and decision-making. There was nothing "Christian" about what the Nazis did. Recall that these same Nazis persecuted Catholics in Germany."
Are you talking the persecution of Catholics and Protestants? The same thing that happens this day and age? Sure, boiled down, they're christians, but vanilla christians view them as evil entities all the same and have cause conflict with them for decades, centuries, even. The treatment and persecution of catholics by the english in Ireland comes to mind.
"It's not boiling down the argument -- it's cherry picking. Christianity did not cause WWII. Christian doctrine did not justify Hitler's actions and decisions, just like Buddhist doctrine did not dictate Japan's actions in WWII (although the majority religion at the time in Japan was Shintoism, contrary to the paper's claims that it was Buddhism)."
This argument is laughable. You literally state the Japanese followed buddhist doctrine to make decisions during WWII and then turn around and say the Japaneses don't follow Buddhism but send no sources saying so. I understand shintoism is the majority religion in japan today, but a lot of people follow buddhist beliefs as well, and I will honestly need a source to show that it was the shinto beliefs leading/not leading the Japanese entrance into the war, or a source saying it was buddhist doctrine.
"Meanwhile, religious doctrine in Islam absolutely dictates cultural and societal norms in majority Islam countries, including beliefs that:
-women are lesser than men
-that women (property of their guardian/husband) be covered/veiled
-that homosexuals should be killed
-
that spousal abuse is a-ok"
Man, you've literally quoted over the christian beliefs of today with this.
-women are lesser than men
-women are to be covered/veiled
Recall, the existence of Nuns? Sure this isn't the major point, but I do find it laughable that people arguing against islam forget that christianity also requires women of belief to be fully covered. Yes, this is a part of the modernization of christianity, but still, there is always laws getting passed allowing women to reveal parts of their body. Washington state, in the US, for example, tried to force through an ordinance requiring women wear a certain amount of clothing depending on the job as recently as 2017.
-that homosexuals should be killed
Red states in the US are literally trying to pass these laws through to this day and there have been court cases where people have walked free because they killed a homosexual in "self-defense."
-
that spousal abuse is a-ok"
Recall an American TV sitcom where a man threaten to beat his wife "Straight to the moon, Alice! To the moon!" The Handmaid's Tale was literally a criticism of christianty treatment of women!
I feel a little trolly so I'm gonna send this one:
"Given your source, it's frankly hilarious that you would even cit it. It would be like me citing the Pope on the evils of other religions."
Just because the Pope's religion believes and defends the molestation of children doesn't mean he's wrong for calling out christian sects for being evil and support the death and suppression of women, homosexuals, etc.
