Progressive and moderate religious believers absolutely have objections to religious beliefs that are different from theirs. Serious, passionate objections. They object to the Religious Right; they object to Al Qaeda. They object to right-wing fundamentalists preaching homophobic hatred, to Muslim extremists executing women for adultery, to the Catholic Church trying to stop condom distribution in AIDS-riddled Africa, to religious extremists all over the Middle East trying to bomb each other back to the Stone Age. Etc., etc., etc. Even when they share the same nominal faith as these believers, they are clearly appalled at the connection: they fervently reject being seen as having anything in common with them, and often go to great lengths to distance themselves from them.
And they should. Im not saying they shouldnt. In fact, one of my main critiques of progressive believers is that their opposition to hateful religious extremists isnt vehement enough.
But its disingenuous at best, hypocritical at worst, to say that criticism of other religious beliefs is inherently bigoted and offensive
and then make an exception for beliefs that are opposed to your own. You dont get to speak out about how hard-line extremists are clearly getting Christs message wrong (or Mohammads, or Moses, or Buddhas, or whoever) and then squawk about religious intolerance when others say youre the one getting it wrong. Thats just not playing fair.
And, of course, its ridiculously hypocritical to engage in fervent political and cultural discourse as so many progressive ecumenical believers do and then expect religion to get a free pass. Its absurd to accept and even welcome vigorous public debate over politics, science, medicine, economics, gender, sexuality, education, the role of government, etc
and then get appalled and insulted when religion is treated as just another hypothesis about the world, one that can be debated and criticized like any other.
Thank you for posting that, what a breath of fresh air.
It's like she reads DU.