[MD] Whacko tolerance

[plattholden at gmail.com]

Hi Bo,

Agree. There's no absolute right to religious practice any more than there's a 
absolute right to free speech. Obama's support of Islam is mind-boggling. But 
then again, consider his middle name. We should not be too surprised.   

Platt

Note: Per Horse's instructions, I started a new thread.

On 15 Aug 2010 at 13:36, skutvik at online.no wrote:

Platt, All.

14 Aug. you wrote to DMB:

> I wonder if Obama and DMB would be so absolutist about religious
> freedom being "unshakable" if a religion practiced human sacrifices?.
> Or encouraged "honor" killings? Or treated women as chattel. Not too
> "intellectually" justifiable if you ask me --.an example of tolerance
> as a moral imperative run amok.

Spot on! DMB's stems from his SOMish use of the term "religion" as if 
that is some concept removed from the MOQ's level "matrix". As you 
say human sacrifice and ritual cannibalism were social level patterns 
that may  well be called "religions". These were found among the 
Mayas and Aztecs  when the "conquistadores" came there and the 
early anthropologists found the same trend in other places, but no one 
- even in the name of "freedom" - would think of allowing these old 
social practices into the intellect-steeped West, but the relatively new 
social pattern known as "Islam" must be allowed - even if it as anti-
intellectual as such comes - and for good measure to the place where 
their fundamentalists did their infamous act. The Muslims constantly 
claim "hurt feelings", but building a mosque on/near Ground Zero is 
the worst violation nothing is.         

Bodvar