Yes, and this very intolerance is underlining something we all know!
We are approaching a time, when and where there will be no other choice than take up arms in defense of freedom.
Hopefully for the last time, and as eventual victors. No other outcome would be at all tolerable!
Talk is only for those who listen, action against those who will not!
Those are the only two choices!
Pick a side or option, and then live or die by that decision.
Christians can die on their knees begging for mercy; or live on their feet fighting for what they believe in!
Fortunately they have for the present, all the technological advantages and little other choice but use it now in defense of freedom; or lose it sooner or later to the enslavers and persecutors!
Rhrosty

The relatively poor response to this article might well be due to the fundamental confusion that it shows between persecution of the practitioners of one religion by another -- which is vile, pernicious and should be stopped -- and the policy of secular states to keep church and state separate -- which is desirable and should be wholeheartedly promoted.

History tells us that the way to get rid of religious persecution is to get rid of religion -- or at least to water it down and limit its influence to the point where it is no longer capable of interfering with rational decision-making. But somehow I think that's not what the author wants to hear.

the lack of response is more likely that it is not 'wicked ' Israel protecting its citizens from muslim terrorist. Secularism has a very poor record when it comes to persecution. Whether its the murder of the unborn or the demonisation of anyone challenging their failed dogmas the secularist hit out. Usually secularist are more Christophobic than Islamophoic because as death cults they have much in common with Islam.

Jon J, I think the lack of responses is because this article is uncontroversial and comprehensive, so there's not much else worth saying.

But where did you get the crazy idea that "History tells us that the way to get rid of religious persecution is to get rid of religion"? If anything, history tells us the exact opposite! Those who try to get rid of religion invariably persecute those of all religions, and usually end up persecuting those of no religion too. Yet there have been plenty of historical examples with religion but without religious persecution.

I agree with you Aiden. Jon J is in dreamland. He suggests that the way "to get rid of religious persecution is to get rid of religion." He sounds like Chairman Mao or some other 20th Century despot.

Since the First Fleet, Australia has always had a strong an influential Christian presence, and (consequently) as a nation we have always enjoyed high levels of religious freedom.

Also, I've often noticed that the relationship between the quality of an OLO article and the weight of response on the discussions page can be quite independent.