History Buff - I associate Christianity with more than attending church - basically, it's the exclusivity, and militant disrespect for any other position that seems to be an intrinsic part of institutional religion that I think has to be constantly challenged, because it's dangerous to human well-being.

At university I studied a philosopher called Emmanual Levinas. He wrote about the need to respect the other simply because the other is human, and that from this initial respect, all other ethics will flow. Hospitality, he argues, is the first ethical act, hospitality in its broadest sense as in welcoming the other into encounter and dialogue.

It is possible to respect the other and disagree with their position, and that is where so many Christian institutions seem to be unable to go.In this respect they are little different from any other militant religions.

I am unable to accept that it is an act of love to condemn the other on the basis of a difference of belief. I note that none of the Christian arguments that have appeared in OLO lately ever mention love. They are doctrinaire, and militant, and threatening, in the sense of expressing their belief than non Christians will somehow suffer horribly for their error in judgement.

I have a visceral distaste for threats, and want nothing to do with any institution that relies on them, be it Christian, Muslim or anything else.

But I do still believe that the nuns taught me - that god is love, and I wonder why these Christian writers don't ever mention that?

God is love, eh, Briar!

I have seen many times Christian American soldiers praying before they go out on patrol where they will try to kill as many Muslims as they can.

And, of course, many Muslims, who also believe in a god of love, are waiting for the invading Americans and will kill as many of them as they can.

God and love would seem to be a contradiction in terms!

I think that is exactly my point, David.

God and love are not contradictory terms, but the ways in which much religion is lived out have made them exactly that. Your examples demonstrate clearly just what I mean.

DavidG writes

'I have seen many times Christian American soldiers praying before they go out on patrol where they will try to kill as many Muslims as they can.'

He obviously ignores in peace time the tens of thousands of Secularist ignoring their conscience before killing the unborn for the sake convenience. This is a lot more straight forward than the complex moral arguements about war. Stalin and Mao also show how the blind dogma of secularism shows little value for life.

I think you're all getting confused between people and faiths.

@ runner - good of you to acknowledge secularists have a conscience. Yep, need to do more to promote contraception to reduced that abortion rate, as it is clear abstinence doesn't work (even for those professing it)

Don't forget Stalin used his religious piety (partly due to his Seminary training) to open churches, theological schools and bring back the priests and holy icon 'Our Lady of Kazan' in Leningrad during WW2.

Mao was fed up with imperialism fawned by evangelising.