Few Ideologies and religions carry the message of live and let live. The separation of religion and state is one of the rare ones. Its message is a simple one: Believe what you choose to believe but leave me alone. Don't use government to put your religious beliefs or lack of religious beliefs on me or others.

In Australia the school chaplaincy program violates this. So does the subsidies to religious schools by taxpayer money which comes from people of all religious beliefs and none.

Unfortunately Christianity got off to a bad start. It divided humanity.

Matthew 12:30 “He who is not with me is against me, and he who does not gather with me scatters.

Jesus was intolerant. He made enemies of those who didn’t want his religion.

The Inquisition, Holocaust and other murderous activities carried out by Christians although they were not all solely Christian in inspiration were supported by Christian intolerance.

I know of no figures for the death toll due to Christian intolerance.

Islam also has ‘the truth’, and kills people.

Secular ideologies may be as unreasonable as Christianity and other missionary religions.

Nazism divided humans into Aryans and non-Aryans and thought non-Aryans should be either exterminated or serve Aryans.

11,000,000 were murdered. The 5,000,000 non-Jews contained gypsies, homosexuals, Slavs, dissenters and others who did not fit the Nazi vision.

The Communist Manifesto: “Society as a whole is more and more splitting up into two great hostile camps, into two great classes directly facing each other -- bourgeoisie and proletariat.”

Rather than merely describing a system the Manifesto has divided humanity into two classes at war. It‘s analogous to the way the Nazis divided the world into Aryan and non-Aryan and missionary religion divides the world into believers and non-believers. The result of the Marxist philosophy was about 100,000,000 murders of ‘class enemies’.

Marxism was not secular. It opposed religion.

Divide humanity into good guys and bad guys, and you may get murder. The twentieth century was a time of mass murder. Can we do better in the twenty-first century? Can we live and let live?

I'd like to think so, David. I don't know, though.

We are living in a society that is increasingly suspicious of ideologies, religions and 'isms' of all kinds. While many seem to be saddened by this, I think it is a good thing. Perhaps as a product of better education, perhaps as a result of the 'information age', people are able to develop their own worldviews. While some may hold ideals similar to those of Marx and his followers, few would call themselves 'Marxists'. While some (admittedly, like me) enjoy the spoils of free markets and the accompanying dog-eat-dog world, few would call themselves capitalists. Sure, there are the university boffins who still love to compartmentalise people, but their words have decreasing value. With such a diverse array of personal philosophies and mindsets, we need to live and let live just to survive in our world.

This is good for those who do fall into those categories, too: Christians, Muslims, socialists, etc. In order to get by, they (we) are increasingly forced to accept that others see the world in a different way. We are forced to acknowledge that our personal idea of morality, for example, is just that: personal. I am a practising Catholic. I don't believe in birth control or euthanasia. I don't believe fornication, divorce or any other 'sins' are appropriate parts of life. The reality is, though, that few of my friends see the world the same way. I don't try to convert them, and they don't encourage me to 'stray'. One of my best friends was divorced by the age of 25. I supported her through it and we remain close. We live and let live. Most people I know, Catholic or not, act in the same manner. At the end of the day, if they go to bed with a clean conscience, what business of mine is it if they do things I don't like?

If people grow accustomed to living and letting live, which I believe they do, the 'superstructures' of church and state will have to follow suit.

David asks, "Can we live and let live?".

No David, we can't.

We couldn't a million years ago, we can't now, and in a million years time we'll still be fighting each other.

Eventually, like all species, we'll become extinct. And only then will fighting cease amongst humans.

Live and let live? I would like to think so too, David.
I may be wrong but hasn't that ideal lead to anarchy in the past? Given the human condition and its propensity to not learn from the past (in a metaphorical sense at least) it will do so (not learn, that is) again.
Answer? Some form of regulation.
Problem? The regulators - Church, State, whatever ... always has been, always will.
I agree with your sentiments though.

When our whole system of society (government) is enforced at the point of a gun, how can anyone naively ask to live and let live?

Only when all people stop demanding of others unconditionally can we begin a life of live and let live. It ain't happening in our life time, or ....

Can we start by banning people from going door to door flogging their type of religion.
Live and let live; that is my moto. I don't follow any religion, that is my choice.

It seems the only way to live and let live is between separate independent countries with strong rights to bar others from their doorstep, and also with strong rights NOT to be invaded by another country trying to 'liberate' the people.

Existing countries with mis-matched secular/religious cultures will simply have to split.

Also, secularism doesn't necessarily mean 'freedom of religion'- it simply means denying religion into professional (mainly political, sometimes social) practice- the Kemalists in Turkey are staunch secularists and they take great liberties to prevent any religious conduct in government and official public facilities.

It's a fact of life that most religious and non-religious persons have a specific form of social functioning that they need- and these ideas class on a political level of how society is to be governed.
That is, at the point one person refuses to tolerate a secular society's ethics is the point they are simply incompatible with that society.

live and let live...

analysis:
briefly went trough topic discussion. The saying "Live and Let Live" Do you ppl even get it? because from what i can see no one does. Humans have the right to choose their religion. Yes, they have the right to come knocking on your door.. whether or not you like it. It is their right and their beliefs. It is an entitlement we are born with. To choose how we want to life our lives, the way we want to live our lives. Without having c**p form an outside influence.

Unfortunately, i would say.. it is quite a challenge to adapt now.. just for now. Not easy but possible. Once we can learn that we HAVE to accept humans as they are, no matter what they practice and believe...

Understand this, and you will understand the passage: "Live and let live"

note to self: yu zai lang fei ser xiean.. bodoh

Yes, jinny. People do have a right to come knocking at my door, or anyone else's for that matter. But they also have a responsibility to leave immediately when I ask them to. No 'I'll only take a minute of your time', no 'but I am trying to save you', nothing. A smile, a 'thanks for your time', a 'have a nice day' and a respectful departure without further missionary antics. That's living and letting live. Offer your services (live) and accept rejection (let live).

A discussion of this type is an exercise in uselessness. That's because we are biologically programmed to fight. There ALWAYS comes a point where people fight to defend themselves or fight to impose something. We are "biologically" destined to do this; there is NO choice in the matter. All the discussion in the world will not change our biology, and will not provide insight into solutions to how we can "live and let live".

Humans can't live and let live. They have no choice in the matter. They are biologically programmed to disagree and fight

Otokonoko, you said.

"Perhaps as a product of better education, perhaps as a result of the 'information age', people are able to develop their own worldviews"

I couldn't disagree more. In our current cycle of society, the information technology revolution has lead to one of the worst cases of systematic misleading of the general population we have seen. It has destroyed most independent thinking in the community at large and help perpetuate and create the false and misleading views of events that see us marching off to wars in counties like Iraq. This war was totally illegal, had no UN suppoet making it an act of aggression. Bush, Blair and Howard are war criminals but you don't see the wonderful media pushing for justice for the innocent Iraqi's that died.

Man has always fought, it is cyclic. Look at the last 70 years as a good sample of how it goes. WW2 was followed by a period of relative cultural independence, then as the fifties unfolded the US started to assert itself. By the sixties the dominate political and economic powers were fighting each other mostly politically but still had their side wars going. The general population could at this time travel with relative safety around most of the world giving a sense of security. The late seventies bought relative calm as the opposition were getting in money trouble and could not afford to fight to hard, by the late eighties the imperial US dominance was more or less set and the wars of arrogance began. The gulf war mark one was the trophy war. This left the disaffected no choice but to use underhanded methods to fight their war and we now have our current mess.

It is not much different to the middle east during the time of Jesus and the Roman empire, so no i don't see humans being at all ready to 'Live and let Live.'

The problem with the right to knock on my door to advertise a religion is that it violates my right NOT to be harassed by these people- in short, they're not really letting ME live.
And that's only the top of why some people just are not fit to share a society, unless they are willing to conform to the standards of one or the other (and I don't believe in loosening my rights in order to meet some bible-thumper half-way in a compromise of interests either).

isnt it live and let die
or lets let them kill themselves
or put them to sleep with euthinasia

mankind is not perfect...

and religeons expecially have taken the blue pill..[or is it the red-pill]...i dont watch movies...

maybe they have taken..the 5 th..[ammendment]
but maybe that only applies in usa

what do you feel the next step..[after banning them]..will be?
will they go underground...AGAIN...

come back as the new-age..[neo-rage..movment..[again?]
get yet more indoctrinated..by those peers..saints
not knowing god...[let alone...doing that jesus did..

and said..they must do...ie serve..gods good...
have good fruits..[love god..love neighbour]

there has been those who listen to words..the same as you now voice
[and what has been..the end product?]...born again sinners?

show me..where you were told..this is heaven?

[the bible clearly reveals this is satans realm]..live by the flesh...or reject sin...and live for the holy spirit

im not sure what your thinking...in fact im sure your reacting...not thinking it through...

what you want...the latest purge..
burn all those thinking of god?

make getting together..and proving a jail offence
or give athiests free reign..thinking there is no karmic balance

to do as you suggest..needs re-writing
the whole premise..by which we are governed
that underpins..our law and justice systems

shall those serving swear..to tell the truth
or the queen..swear to be higher ranking
because her blood is true-blue?

debating is futile..if you got no plan..[man]

your wish-list..is revenge on abuse..suffered..
which you blame on parents..ONLY..TRYING to do..their best

or blame their belief system...
you now think..them to be..hypocrits about

[ok i dont know...but also clearly...
you dont know what your fighting
your athiest[or agnostic]..
thus reject the CON-cept..of god

you dont really know if he is good...or vile
claim you sought him..but in reality only doudt the works of those [who also dont know him]..[as their works/deeds reveal]

instead of attacking god direct..
you attack the mess-anger..cause you hate..{fear}..their mess-age

well they TOO..got that wrong
two wrongs dont make it right

love good
love neighbour
its easy if we try
no hell below us...abouve us..

only the answer..
as to why..

all this forum has is complaints, complaints and more complaints. If you are not happy, change it! move out of civilization. Live in a jungle, live on an island. Live alone without any society! my god! how about complaining about yourselves for once? Complain about you imperfectness of acceptance of others. I am not perfect. I do many things wrong. But i try not to judge others because I believe in life, we decide how we want to live, not get dictated by everyone else how to live it.

A lot of Australians have no respect for another culture, religion, believes because they can't be bothered. They go to bali, behaved like "yappies" i think is the word. They treat the island with no respect, the people with no respect and behave like they are the locals there and not the visitor. And you wonder why they do not like Australians? How I know? i have seen so many times, and I've talked to them about it. Thanks to all this, now they threat all Caucasians without any respect, because they need the money. This is not everywhere in bali and every australian. just the typical ones.

I disagree with your claim Jinny.

Many of the Balinese people have been indebted to the Australian people both as tourists and government visitors to their country's cities and villages for many years.

Australians have supported the Indonesian peoples' survival and every day life, in addition to fundraising and government support from Australian taxpayers.

If the word you hear from some Indonesians is correct, these few people may just be commenting about young Australian tourists visiting on their one off holidays.

Not the Australians that visit Indonesia on a regular basis over many years, who I have mixed with through work, social and volunteering circles for well over 30 years of my life.

How ironic that you start a post complaining about Australians with the complaint that the people in this forum complain too much!

I, for one, try very hard to see the positive side of things. I avoid complaining and, in this thread, presented my (perhaps naive) view that living and letting live is possible and even a reality. You disagreed in what reads very much like a complaint. You complained in your own thread about Globalisation and Evolution that "some like to use bombastic words in forums, to show how intelligent and well educated they are" - somewhat unfairly, I thought at the time. Please, jinny - try to understand that people express their opinions (too negatively, at times) in a forum aptly attached to the On Line Opinion site.

Why do you single out Australians as having no respect for other cultures? In my experience, Australians are more accepting and even more curious about other cultures than people I have met in Africa, Europe and parts of the South Pacific. Of course, there are many Australians whose behaviour make me seriously consider travelling with a different passport, but they have always been the minority.

I have never been to Bali so can't comment on the situation there, but I suspect that locals pandering to the hedonistic tourists (much as we pander to, or used to pander to the Japanese in places like Cairns and the Gold Coast) are as much to blame for what I have been told is a disgraceful and often disrespectful tourist economy. Cut the Australians out of Bali, or tell them they can't behave in ways they have been allowed (or encouraged) to in the past, and what impact would this have on the local economy? I'm sure it would be bliss at first, but how long would it be before the economic slump really hit home?

In tourist meccas like Bali, Ibiza, Corfu, Majorca, Airlie Beach, the Gold Coast, we see live and let live in hyperdrive - perhaps 'live and encourage to live' [read: get wasted] is a more appropriate phrase.

we are unique & Otokonoko, : You are both right. Sometimes I just find it hard to not think about the negative. When I posted last night I was very emotional and I apologize for writing about Australians that way. It is very unfair and judgemental of me to have done that. I wish I could take it back.

I try not to complaint to much. Bad habit of humans.. it has grown on me since I was a kid having parents that complained and argued about everything under the sun. I am still trying to change that about me.

There are a lot of things I love to see here. How some good samaritans can help total strangers. How friendly they are, and yes, how accepting they are. It's just my personal decisions I made which I take responsibility for, has clouded my views at times. Frustration takes over and then I go off venting. Sorry.

I just trust people too easily. At least I used to. Now I only trust myself. Which is the way I will keep it for the mean time.

I am sorry if I upset anyone by the c**p i write here. I really learn a lot from this forum when I choose to spend time here. Thank you so much, wishing everyone a blessed day :)

Dear jinny,

I thank you very much since you made me feel good by your post.

I had a mother who used to complain ad nauseam. She was not feeling well so we called a doctor. At the door way on his way out he had a few words with me. He told me my mother would be ok and just had indigestion. I went up to my mother's room, and she told me she was thankful that her heart attack had not killed her.

"But, mother, the doctor said you had indigestion."

"What does he know?"

She would never admit that she was wrong or ever apologise for anything.

Glad you are not like that.

Thanks David, I try as best as I can to learn from the life lessons I see, live, read about. I don't hate anyone, as I know if I would hate, I should hate myself first. With UOG I wish he would realize, in order to safe others, he need to save himself first. I feel sad reading his writings and I can feel his pain.

I have come to realize, we are all one. If we don't care, we will end up suffering in some sort of way. Our paths were already set. I am just doing my job in my purpose with this gifted life.

I am not a saint, I am a sinner. I am not perfect. I told my kids today after reading the response I received from my irresponsible lashing, I said if you want to complain about each other(sibling rivalry), start with I. I did something wrong. I am to blame.

:) Thank you for the lessons.. it never ends..

I could vouch that the ratio of Australian travelers who actually show respect to the cultures they visit are very low.

In Thailand, people were impressed that I was NOT a sex tourist, behaved myself, was happy to share a conversation, or even asked to share a (soft)drink. Of course, being approached by a loud obnoxious git who won't likely handle his liquor but intends to take it anyway would probably get a polite no in response.
That alone says something.

Also, people who assume that the locals simply dont like whites- not true- they only dislike Australians. Most people along south-east Asia are quite happy to meet people from Germany or Scandanavia- because these tourists are usually more polite and respectful.

Most Australians who travel seem to be looking for cheap stuff to hoard, and distance from people they would care to be judged by for bad behavior so they can let loose.

Anyway, my own cultural tolerance here varies- I don't really care if people speak different languages (although this annoys most Australians it seems)- I however have no tolerance for people that don't want to obey road rules, or carry some kind prejudice or religious fundamentalism with them.

In a way, it is a two-way street. I would obviously demand this respect for myself in Australia, and I would bloody well demand Australians not act like louts in someone else's country- aside from making us look bad, it's simply the right thing to do.

Hence why I never feel sorry for Aussies that get busted overseas.

"Unfortunately Christianity got off to a bad start. It divided humanity."

Christianity started on the Jewish foundation, where division already existed, then tried to improve on it.

"He who is not with me is against me" is a statement of fact, not a call for action. What then about: "If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also"? Is that too an expression of intolerance?

"Can we live and let live?"

No, but if we are realy keen on respecting others' choices, then we can certainly and under all circumstances "let live". Whether or not we subsequently also live is not up to us - but hey, this is the case anyway.

How does 'live and let live' feed into the social contract which requires 'mutual obligation? on the part of the state and the individual?

"How does 'live and let live' feed into the social contract which requires 'mutual obligation? on the part of the state and the individual?"

A social contract? What contract?

When one feels strong enough to grab theirs at the expense of others, one common bullying technique is to refer to some fictitious "social contract" or a "mutual obligation". Somehow, the same people 'forget' to mention such contract/obligation when theirs is the lower hand.

Fact is, no such contract was ever signed or otherwise agreed upon and in any case, exclamations made under duress do not count either and are not obliging!

As an individual, I have never agreed to any social contract. The only applying mutual obligation is between me and God.

The Canberra Times, 4 December 1986, "The average person can expect to give up three to four years of his or her life working to foot the arms bill, while ever more people suffer from illiteracy, ill health and chronic hunger."

We need new ways of thinking. Charles Olson proclaimed, "What does not change is the will to change." That there can be change, and that there are positive alternatives is evident. We need to find them and take direction.