Koran encourages Hate of Jews as did the Roman Catholic Church to which Hitler belonged.
ttp://jcpa.org/article/verses-and-reality-what-the-koran-really-says-about-jews/
http://forward.com/opinion/564190/hamas-charter-truth/

Josephus,

An eye for an eye will make the whole world blind.
(Gandhi).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisemitism_in_Christianity

I always took a more simple view of things.
Many Christians seemed to have this 'turn the other cheek' mentality;
(although my father and stepmum didn't mind regularly implying my attitude and the music I listened to in my early teens was 'a work of the devil')
Pretty much anything that didn't fit with their religious views was frowned upon and criticised sooner or later.

I guess this is a part of the reason why I eventually became more 'ethical' in my world view, rather than 'religious'.

But going back to the simpler view of things...

I argued that IF (remember I'm agnostic) man is God's creation, and someone wishes to do 'Gods creation' harm, then they have every right to defend themselves 'Gods creation', and other 'so-called' religious people should too, not just 'turn the other cheek'.

I also argued that Christians only see people as being 'believers' or 'unbelievers', and that I argued for a third 'I don't know' category.
And that a person in this category, well they are completely different than either the 'believers' and the 'unbelievers' and for all intense purposes they may as well be in the same category as compared to the 'I don't know' category, because both the believers and the unbelievers claim to 'know' where as the agnostic freely admits 'they don't know'.
Then you have the 'thou shalt not bear false witness' thing, which sort of leaves me no alternative except to sit on the fence.

Regards Catholicism and Jewry...
I think up until about 60 years ago the Catholic church did not recognise Israel or the Jews, because they did not recognise Jesus.
I cant remember all the facts, but it was something like that.

Dear Critic,

There has been so much confusion and misunderstanding about religion, that I am not surprised that your friend is not comfortable being called "religious".

The term 'religion' did not spring out of nowhere: it has a definite, positive and almost objective meaning, yet instead people are ignorant and confused, which ends up in often calling the irreligious religious and the religious irreligious.

So for example, reading the Bible and attending church do not automatically imply that one is religious; and being agnostic does not automatically imply that one is not religious.

In the West, atheism is commonly confused to be an antonym of religion.
Not so in the East:
The closest term to 'atheist' in Hinduism is 'naastika', but they are not quite the same.
This does not refer to belief in God's existence or otherwise: a naastika is someone who does not accept the authority of the Vedas.
This also includes Buddhists and Jains, Jews, Christians and Muslims.
- And it does not mean that the above are necessarily irreligious.

So while in Western terms I could be considered an atheist, just because [though I love God] I consider God's existence impossible, in Hindu terms I am not a naastika.

Sorry to hear how you, like many others, had to imbibe that confusion as an innocent child.
You could possibly be at least as religious as your friend and your stepmum's family!

Compare: is this Love your unbelieving Neighbour?

Koran chapter 9:7. How can there be a treaty with the polytheists on the part of God and His Messenger, except for those with whom you made a treaty at the Sacred Mosque? As long as they are upright with you, be upright with them. God loves the pious.

8. How? Whenever they overcome you, they respect neither kinship nor treaty with you. They satisfy you with lip service, but their hearts refuse, and most of them are immoral.

9. They traded away God's revelations for a cheap price, so they barred others from His path. How evil is what they did.

10. Towards a believer they respect neither kinship nor treaty. These are the transgressors.

11. But if they repent, and perform the prayers, and give the obligatory charity, then they are your brethren in faith. We detail the revelations for a people who know.

12. But if they violate their oaths after their pledge, and attack your religion, then fight the leaders of disbelief—they have no faith—so that they may desist.

13. Will you not fight a people who violated their oaths, and planned to exile the Messenger, and initiated hostilities against you? Do you fear them? It is God you should fear, if you are believers.

14. Fight them. God will punish them at your hands, and humiliate them, and help you against them, and heal the hearts of a believing people.

15. And He will remove the anger of their hearts. God redeems whomever He wills. God is Knowledgeable and Wise.

16. Or do you think that you will be left alone, without God identifying which of you will strive, and take no supporters apart from God, His Messenger, and the believers? God is well Aware of what you do.

It's OK for Palestinian mobs in Australia to support Hamas terrorists and chant 'f..k the Jews' and 'gas the Jews', but it is "shocking" for "fundamentalist Christian" to support Israelis.

What is a fundamentalist Christian by the way?

And what has the influence of these fcs on the US Republican party got to do with Israel or anything at all? Nothing. Just another brainstorm from Nathan, who seems to be a very naive young man, surprised at the idea that anyone at all is entitled to support anyone or anything they chose to support, including Palestinian mobs in Australia supporting terrorists where it is supposed to be illegal to do so.

I, for instance, am on the side of Israel, and hope that they stop pussyfooting around and do to Gaza what Hamas and Iran want to do to Israel. I also support what mhaze, the author of the only sensible post here before mine, says about this half-arsed, juvenile thread.