Yuyutsu,

I agree some atheists were hurt in the past by either what they took as religion, or by religion directly - so these people can be upset. If these people do have any (direct) issues, these should taken up with a relevant authority, within any religion as much as possible.

Any hurt of the past really should not be used simplistically to blame or downgrade others (of a particular religion or those with religious principles), particularly if these people had no involvement in any hurtful activity.

Some would argue (like myself) (religious people or groups) are a dying species, like rare native plants or animals, and need some type of basic protection (or reference) in conjunction with others, and not just be put into general line of very basic, simplistic or populist values that will continue to exist in 2015 and beyond.

Many atheists don't like their opinions being questioned or being given preference over others - but even some people (including those who are religious) will take a similar attitude, not show basic respect to values, views and beliefs of others - so a balanced element, re any document (in terms of text) is needed to include references to basic principles, and see some level of equality.

So this issue, is more than a piece of paper, because if people of any nature don't respect others, nothing will improve and people will find others environments to "push their argument".

Dear Nathan,

Religion is not a dying species, it is strong as ever and keeps renewing its methods, so we don't need to be taken pity of like rare native plants or animals.

Some methods of religion are outdated and already served their purpose, perhaps the Abrahamic traditions are such and if so, then they will be replaced by other methods that better suit our current times and environment. But notice that even the Abrahamic traditions keep producing fresh shoots such as the Baha'i religion.

Obviously people need to respect others, but you seem to suggest that a piece of paper can do it. How?

Even under the unlikely assumption that this piece of paper is going to be respected and followed by all and that it will say something along the lines of "slap the wrist of s/he who disrespects religious people", how are we to know who is religious and who isn't?

Who has such skills to look into other people's heart-of-hearts and know for certain, on the one hand who is sincere and who fakes their religion and on the other hand, who simply and innocently doesn't recognise themselves to be religious, but is? I believe that it takes the skills of a prophet or a seer to know that - and there aren't too many of those around.

So I agree with the author of this article, that it's far better not to mention the word "religion" on formal documents, but instead simply state: "Respect everyone!" - this will necessarily include all religious people, thus the purpose is achieved.

Yuyutsu, "Respect everyone"? Really. Paedophiles, murderers, Mormons?
Really? I just cannot let you get away with that. I do not want to harm these people but I certainly want to contain them so they do not harm me or mine.
All very nice being respectful but then along comes islam they demand respect until they are the majority and then all bets are off and its on for anyone but them.
I cannot respect any religion to be honest and think we should write our constitution accordingly. Then if you come here you take your chances. Under age sex charged as such. FGM jailing of the parents and removal of the children. Immams letting mosques be used for radicalisation will get the mosque torn down and the Immam charged with incitement. Same for any religion and all services have to be public no behind closed doors rubbish.

Dear JBowyer,

I really like and agree with your statement: "I do not want to harm these people but I certainly want to contain them so they do not harm me or mine."

(though I cannot see how it applies to Mormons)

This is why I cannot and will not ask you to respect any religion - but only to respect all people.

To begin with, you cannot tell whether the people you disagree with or who seem to cause you troubles are in fact religious. They may say that they are, but why should you even believe them? If you think that the Muslims you describe are religious, then they managed to score against you, 1:0 for them!

While you should even respect those who threaten you, it should not preclude you from pulling the trigger on them as a matter of necessity for your own protection, but keep respecting them while you pull it.

As for what others do among themselves, within their own families, so long as it does not affect or threaten yourself, your family and your own community, it is none of your business so you should ignore it. Once threatened, however, go ahead and do what you need to do... but keep respecting your enemies as well.

I agree with Yuyutsu. Everyone including paedophiles, murderers and religious fanatics should be treated with respect. Respect does not mean agreeing with them or accepting their acts. It means being civil to them, treating them with kindness if they are in custody and giving them the courtesy one should give to all human beings. The fact that they might not respect me does not allow me not to respect them.

I disagree with Yuyutsu's definition of religion. However, it is unnecessary to agree on that point to respect all people.

It is difficult to be kind and respect someone who does bad things, is in your opinion speaking rubbish and does not treat you kindly, but in my opinion one should still be kind and respect such a person.

In my opinion all religion is rubbish. However, I think I must respect a religious person and a non-religious person equally.

'In my opinion all religion is rubbish. However, I think I must respect a religious person and a non-religious person equally.'

Yep David f even you were made in God's image though you behave far from it.