This whole mess has been going on since the foundation of Islam.
One of the first warlike action of the Islamists was an attack on a
Jewish village where Muhammad led the attack on the Quraysh and was
assured by Allah of victory.
Muhammad attacked a Jewish village with much savagery.
That villages name is now used as a curse on all Jews.
It was from here that the tradition of killing Islams enemies began.
Later the Islamic armies surged out of Arabia and applied the same
principle. They captured Jerusalem and occupied the area we call
Israel so that us why they believe Palistinian Arabs are the rightful
owners of the land.
Just because someone else captured it back from them
does not mean it is not their land.
Right from the beginning Islam has had a hatred of Jews and has caused
all this trouble for the rest of us.
It used to go on without affecting us very much but it has now got to
the point where the rest of us will have to do something about it.

So don't think that the UN or anyone can stop the principle that all
Jews MUST be killed or submit to Islam. It has been going on since
the 6th century.

Dear Critic,

«(no offense intended, is 'believers' a better term?)»

No. That term is one of the factors that confuse the understanding of religion.

Yes, belief, when correctly applied, can be used as a religious method.
But when applied incorrectly or blindly, it can even create an obstacle on the path of religion.
And belief is not strictly a requisite for religion.
"Faith" is more appropriate for supporting religion than "belief",
but even "Faith" is not an accurate term.

Hinduism has the concept of 'Shraddha' (not to be confused with the ritual for the deceased under the same name), which is commonly translated as "Faith", but is much more than that - http://www.hinduwebsite.com/hinduism/h_faith.asp

The following paragraph from the above reference answers your question:
"Some beliefs are good and help you, but some can be problematic and a major source of afflictions and conflicts, especially if they are caused by the impurities of your mind such as egoism, evil thoughts and intentions, attachments, ignorance and delusion. One must use commonsense in matters of faith and act reasonably and moderately, avoiding the extremes or causing harm or disturbance to others."

Dear Critic,

«It's funny how I have no real solid support for either the left or the right.»

I think it's funny, yet sad, when people stick to either.
They seem to behave like football fans, they are for their team through thick and thin, right or wrong, often because that passes in the family. It makes "democracy" laughable.

«And sometimes I go my own way and support neither,
- If both parties are bi-partisan and hold a position on a particular issue I don't support.»

For me this is the rule, not the exception.

«Do any of you think that's strange?»

I think that's healthy and mature.

«Do many people support their parties stance on all issues?»

I don't have "my" party to begin with.

«Do people often switch sides in their voting or generally stick with their preferred side?»

Come elections, I read the policies of all parties, big or small, give each a score accordingly (from -10 to +10), then order the list and mark my preferences accordingly.

«Is it ok to have my own ideas and opinions on things?»

Not just OK, it is a virtue as well as your duty to use your gifts if you have them.

«Is it good to not be constrained by loyalty to any particular group?»

Of course. When one is constrained by some misplaced loyalty to political parties, they are being disloyal to the ordinary folks they live among.

«Is it ok to be an individual in 2023?»

You ARE an individual at all times.
This cannot be changed even if you try to suppress it.
And it is your duty to express this individuality of yours.

Hi AC,

"Do any of you think that's strange? "No, not in the slightest, you're a thinker on all issues and draw your own conclusions, that's good thinking.

I'v been a member of the Greens for over 20 years, ALP before that, do I support every policy, No, eg. I thought the Greens were wrong on opposing Labor's housing policy, I was reassured there would be a satisfactory outcome, from those who actually had a vote on the matter. I'm even a little pro atomic energy given the right undertakings at the time. Do I support the bipolar agreement on AUKUS crap, Hell No! Do I agree with Labor's new approach to China, Yes. I can't say anything about the Noalition and Dutton, they are bereft of policy in all areas, excluding where they agree with Labor. The Greens actually have policy and its articulated and clearly defined, not agreed with by all, that's for sure. The Noalition and their crap, "we'll release policy before the next execution" Not good enough!

I'm very concerned about Old Joe Biden, if he doesn't get his mug of warm coco every night he might keel over for good. I'm even more concerned about The Dangerous Doctor Donald stepping into Old Joe's place, with Horny Star or whatever her name is in the Whitehouse cot. At least Donald's entertaining, dangerous, but entertaining never the less.

Fester,

I don't understand what the point is that you're trying to make.

Are you saying that the deranged and horrific actions of some
seriously mentally disturbed people justifies the actions of
the Israelis in Gaza

Foxy, I do not know where you live, but imagine if a hundred lunatics with high powered rifles entered your area and murdered 1,400 civilians and injured 6,000 0thers all unarmed women and children and took captive 212 young children and girls. Would you be sitting on the fence, telling the Police not to track them down because others might be killed in the cross fire?