Who's being non-inclusive?

Submitted by Pat (United States), Nov 2, 2006 at 19:59

An atheist killed six million Jews. Is atheism preferable? Is atheism any less absurd?

Would you shudder at the idea of an atheist in the White House?

As for being non-inclusive, what about you? You seem intolerant of others who don't believe as you do. George Bush is not trying to wipe out other faiths. He respects our Constitution.

Most religions are inclusive. They will accept new converts. You're comparing apples and oranges. You're free to practice whatever religion you choose. You may be offended by Christian beliefs but so what? Live your life and deal with heaven when you're dead. Churches aren't denying you access. They aren't selling tickets. They have no say over who gets in. None of us do.

The verse you quoted refers to the afterlife, not to this one. It has nothing to do with the laws we live under. Why do you care what someone thinks will happen to him (or you) after death? George Bush's evangelical beliefs have not led him to even suggest wiping out other religions and forcing the world to live under his religious precepts. He has a lot more respect for others and their freedom to make their own choices than you have shown here.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".