Boaz... you probably won't be surprised to hear me come out in agreement with the comments of CJ Morgan indicating that fundamentalists of all stripes are really the culprits.

Your statement: "the case of Christianity the problem is not 'fundamentalism' but wrongly driven fundamentalism... hitler... so it was more him just imposing a view "on" the text of his own choosing."
(edited to save word count, posters, view original comment in case of misinterpretation)

I'm going to agree wholeheartedly with the latter statement, but draw my own interpretation here.

You say the problem is wrongly driven fundamentalism and in the second statement you draw upon a warped interpretation of christianity in Hitler's actions. No argument here.

My issue is this - defining fundamentalism. As much as religious practitioners try to tell us that religions are based on grounded principles from the get go, the nature of human interpretation means that a religion changes its core attitudes every few centuries.
For examples in Christianity see witch burnings, attitudes toward scientific research etcetera.

Now... at the time of the crusades, were the pillaging knights incorrect in their interpretation of the religion? were they on orders from the pope? was the pope's interpretation then flawed? If his interpretation is flawed, whose is accurate?

This is the question DB. Who's interpretation of Christianity is the 'right one?' Is it merely the consensus of the majority of christians? In which case, was the past attitude toward copernicus style discoveries accurate? I'd hazard a guess and say it was the majority view...

I don't think this is a question that can be answered, but I have a simpler interpretation of fundamentalists which is less subjective - those who won't tolerate other religions and aggressively proselytise.

These are the people causing problems in the world, regardless of which brand of god they adhere to.

Anti Conversion law is not new in Indian Constitution and is NOT against any religion leave alone Christainity.All it says is that converting one faith from religion A to religion B is illegal if it is done by physical aggression or by lure .Off course a person can change his faith by choice .Hindu bashing seems to have become the definition of secularism among the fanatic authors like this. They hold Hindus responsible for everything that goes wrong with them. Hindus are not even spared when they are being killed by terrorists.He talks about Dalit Christians and advocates benefits to be given by Indian Govt..Why?The basis on which "Dalit Christians" were coerced by missionaries and converted was based on of "social injustice in Hindu Society" promising social equality on becoming Christian.Now that they are Christian, they enjoy social equality.And demanding benefits on basis of social injustice would naturally become void .He says "..About 1,000 Hindu temples have been built ..".Can the author provide the list of more than 100/110 Hindu temples.Hindu temples,Hindus and Hinduism are not expansionist.Should we say same thing about missionaries in India like what he says about Hindus in USA?I am really astonished that this web site is allowing this fanatic poster to post utter lies .He is typing whatever is coming to his filthy retarded neurons.Hindus do not hate Christians. I suggest readers to visit these states personally.Hindus are only against missionaries who try to convert by unlawful means.Period.
I do not want to boast and DO NOT want to debate on Hindu vs Christian contribution to world.But the author should know contribution of Hindus in mathematics and Science was even before Christianity came into existence .If not read this:
http://www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/HistTopics/Indian_mathematics.html
One of the pet argument of fanatic Christians is to give such statements as dalit's "4,000-year-old plight " hide their nefarious designs and keep Hindus on defensive.
But before commenting on dalit's "4,000-year-old plight " why does he forget Persecution of Hindus in Goa?Read about it
any historical books or read online at:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goa_Inquisition#Persecution_of_Hindus
Lastly,Hindusium never believed in proselytizing .It is most tolerant religion in world.

Should we say same thing about missionaries in India like what he says about Hindus in USA?
should be:
Should we say same thing about Chirstians in India like what he says about Hindus in USA?

Yungnluvinit,

sorry if I mispelt your name, but no that isn't what I meant, well it is...I'll explain.

Although I attended Christian schools, I wouldn't call myself religious, but I do strongly believe in all but one of Jesus Christ's values.

I don't believe that we should turn the other cheek indefinitely, that those who are persecuted in the Islamic world, as Christians are (in their ancestral homelands too!) shouldn't put up with it.

While I see the logic in Christ's stance, he was dealing with Europeans, the Romans.

His message of forgiving those who would kill him rubbed off on them to such a degree that they took on his philosophy.

Muslims don't see it that way, their societies are all but closed to everything but Islam.

They have no thinkers, no philosophers, no one who questions things. They do, but they are quickly deemed apostates and killed, but what is worse is that leftists in the west don't support these people, they prefer to meet with the redneck Keysar Trad, who has likened us Australians to convict dregs.

So, turning the other cheek indefinitely to them will only see us wiped out, seen as weak.

It can't be tolerated.

Christians can't let their philosophy, the most advanced humans have ever come up with, to be trumped by a backward system of misoginy, racism, and inequality.

Unless you've read books on Islam by Karen Armstrong, that is.

Benjamin, you have a rather higher look of Christianity than it should have. The Christian faiths have created more harm than other faith. No religion has any right to claim to be morally and technologically superior or advanced for that would be a load of rubbish.

I suggest you go into the stores which act as supply store for Pagans and see how often Christians walk into these stores to verbally abuse the staff. One store that use to exist in Penrith(west of Sydney) was forced to close because Christians vandalised the shop front and went about on a drive to abuse the owners.

If the laws allowed them, these Christians would have dragged out the owners, employees and customers out for a good old fashioned burning.

This is for Benjamin's comment on Muslims being a backward people(etc);

Taken from a book called, "The Essentials of World History" published by Thomson Education(pages 147-148) ISBN: 0-534-62745-5

"During the centuries following the rise of the Arab Empire, it was the Islamic world that was most responsible for preserving and spreading the scientific and philosphical achievements of ancient civilisations". I will add the rest in point for you, Benjamin.

1) astronomy, they knew the world was round. 2) Linguistics. 3) Paper manufacturing(from China), etc. The Islamists gave the world, Algebra(al-jebr).

While the Islamic world preserved these and more, the Christian's were destroying everything and labelling such philospher's as heretics.