Sarah and I were talking about something the other day, which the news reported all kinds of Christian groups had a problem with. She was upset, like why don't they just let people live their lives? It occurred to me the problem with Christian disapproval is not inherent. That is, Christians should be allowed to exercise their First Amendment rights the same as anyone, and be justified in encouraging its members to approve or disapprove of certain things. That is because the people who are Christians choose that form of belief. Moreover, the first amendment is meant to allow such speech, no matter who agrees or disagrees with it.

The problem comes from the hegemonic influence that Christianity as a whole, and arguably even Abraham-descendant monotheism (Judaism, Christianity, and Islam), exert. That is, what certain church leaders approve or disapprove of something, it in essence becomes a standard bearer of all morals. The related problem that in this country in particular, we subscribe to "universal truths and freedoms" to which all persons are entitled, and yet concurrently presume those are the same truths and freedoms given by religion. Maybe yes, maybe no. Humanity has existed long before these religions, and will likely exist thereafter. Maybe that's right and maybe that's wrong. But the bottom line is, that there are plenty of people out there, be they Hindus, Buddhists, Wiccans, or any other sphere of belief, who have different morals. Yes, before anyone gets huffy, there are certain morals we pretty much all agree with. Killing is wrong. Stealing is wrong. But it did not take the 10 Commandments to make these things law; certainly Romans and Greeks had such prohibitions, let alone the many societies that existed before them. More importantly, there are things we disagree with. Must we follow dogma to a T? When is sex allowed? How do we view abortion or use of stem cells? These are complex questions to which different faiths have different answers.

The resultant problem is that Christianity and Islam, in particular, are not so good at playing with others. I would have a much easier time accepting the dictates of priests on matters of conscience, if I didn't feel their mandates were restricting all of society. Let's remember separation of Church and State people. Ironically, when the colonies were founded, it was the religous zealots who demanded this, for they feared state encroachment on their religion. Yet now that Christianity has largely blended into a melting pot of similar beliefs, it is they who push relgion on the state, claiming the birthright of a Christian nation. I hate to be the one to break it, but there were Jewish settlements in the original colonies, and the founding fathers were certainly aware of Islam and Hindu, even if they were not in the Americas. All said, these founding fathers pointedly chose to make no reference to God in the Constitution, and refused to make any law favoring Christians over other religions.

So the bottom line is, I don't care what Christian leaders tell their followers. That is between them and their congregations. But to impart one's individual beliefs as the one and true center of the universe and force it on others is another thing. The thing that people forget with religion is that it is okay to believe in one's faith. But you have to remember that there will always be others who believe just as strongly that their faith is the truth. Yet the two are incompatible. Either one is "wrong" or both are. Based on the probabilities, doesn't it just make sense to believe what you believe, cherish your own faith, and to respect the other person as having the right to follow their own individual consscience?

The other problem with religious fervor is that sometimes people only look at the surface and not the meaning. Ironic for a relgion based largely on parables and metaphors. Regardless, Kevin Smith said it best in his much-maligned movie Dogma. (Which only proves this point.) People never kill each other over ideas. But they will over beliefs. The point that God has tried to impart on us all is just to have good ideas about how to live a moral life.

So next time your religious leaders tell you to lash out at someone else for believing something contrary to your faith, just think to yourself not that you believe what they are saying, but that whatever the substance of his argument is, that it is a good idea. And that others are entitled to their ideas. Maybe, just maybe, at the end of the day this will lead people to getting along better. Maybe instead of being willing to strap bombs to his chest, a young Palestinian will say to the American Christian tourist. "I disagree with your Jesus, but I no longer believe you are the great Satan." And maybe that Christian American tourist will say, "I don't believe your Mohammed spoke the word of God, but he seemed like a good person." And maybe instead of getting violent, they'll look each other in the eye, laugh, slap each other on the back.

Maybe then each will go their separate ways, thinking, I disagree, but their faith is a nice idea.