> > So, basically I don't get it. I don't think we can compare them to the > Vikings. And I don't think this is just history repeating itself. And > forcing change (through military or other means) from the outside might > only > result in making matters worse (as evidenced in recent efforts) and maybe > if > nurtured from within, it might have better results? > > Kiran >
Yeah, it was somewhat flawed of an example. But lets say that radical christians were able to get big funding and take over the US. It would be pretty scary as well. And maybe they'd be supporting christian martyrs worldwide to protect christandom. If you watch the documentary "Jesus Camp," it's scary. Little kids chanting about how they were christian soldiers and how they were in a religious war. Thankfully we have government agencies that keep their eyes on those guys, and most Americans, like most people in the world, I think, are moderate and just wanna live and let live (except Paul McCartney when he was writing that song for the James Bond movie...) A lot of religions have that part where they are the chosen people and everyone else is infidel shit. I think those who seize on that find it much easier to do whatever they want to outsiders. But ultimately, if it comes to crossing the street to avoid a perceived risky group of people, or showing one is above such thing -- in the individual case, I think we're programmed to err on the side of safety. It's much easier to be an idealist (I find) in a safe environment. :-)
