stlstrike3 wrote:It irks me to hear the term "radical" or "fundamentalist" before a religion. We need to stop talking about these people as if they're some perversion of the "real" Christianity or Islam. They are people who simply believe what their holy books actually say.
oh honestly, no they're not. they're people that want to tell everyone what they have to believe.
i don't just mean in the case of islamics telling christians to convert, or christians telling jews. i mean that christians and islamics take judaism and turn it into something else- that's fine in my opinion. religion begs to be remixed into something more useful. the problem is when you call the remix sacred, and condemn the original as pagan, sinful, earthly, and insufficient before god. and then fundamentalist christians force their *interpretation* on other christians, and fundamentalist islamics on other islamics, that's the danger of fundamentalism, not being allowed to practice your own religion because other members *of your own religion* won't allow it!
a "literal" interpretation is an "interpretation," too. you can take the bible literally if you want to, but it's a lot more bloody than if it's read the way people read it from the beginning- mostly as a group of allegorical symbols pointing to something else. fundamentalism isn't wiser, it's more superficial, but worse, it's the condemnation of people that read scriptures in a way that is balanced or sane. that's why "fundamentalism" is a dirty word, and it's a dirty word that fundamentalists deserve to be saddled with.
fundamentalism is the destruction of religion- the word religion itself means to "reconnect." there's no such thing as a literal translation- only two people arguing about meaning, that always happens. the difference is that with fundamentalism, calling the person you disagree with "evil" is something that your god smiles on, as he does when you destroy the infidels. thanks, but no thanks- i'm not putting a gold star on that effort.