I feel I need to stand up and say that in terms of religions and religious ideologies, I firmly believe that there is room for every religious experience, provided that plurality and diversity are respected and preserved.

There cannot be peace or civility between religious communities or societies if one religious community is asserting its doctrine or views above others, and attempting to silence other views. I believe firmly in pluralism, diversity, and personal freedom to choose.
I believe that there is room for each perspective to be heard and for people to make their own determination what is healthy and right for them. As a polytheist I recognize the existence of all the Gods, and that includes Gods I myself do not worship or give cultus to.
I will always stand by the values of freedom of religious belief and practice for every human being, and that includes people with opposing views. Where I personally draw the line is with any ideology asserting its superiority at the expense of others, and striving to enforce it
My belief is that all the Gods are worthy of worship by Their people, and that people devoted to their deity/deities should strive to serve their deity/deities to the best of their abilities. There is room for everyone to do that, in my opinion.
Despite the criticisms I've received for saying this, I will affirm again that I will never accept the ideology of one true faith, one true god, or one true religion, and I will not condone actions based on these views that seek to hinder or subvert the religious lives of others
My view is that it cannot be in the best interests of human solidarity or peaceful communities for any religious body to assert its truth above the dignity and rights of others to choose their own path and live out their religious ideals.
Whatever your religious calling or belief, live it according to your conscience and live it for the benefit of your spiritual development, but do so with the understanding that every other soul has a right to choose and to follow their own convictions.
When one religion seeks to subdue or control the conscience of others it regards as wrong, only oppression and division result, and that cannot encourage healthy individuals, communities, and societies. There cannot be one religion, one faith, one ideology.
So I stand firmly opposed to any group, belief, or religious ideology asserting its moral worth and rights above others, and then seeking to control or silence other views. I will never acknowledge that as being right or just, no matter what name or god you assign to it.

More from Religion

#Bookmark this

The full story of || Dhruv ||

We’ll see How Dhruv occupied a fixed position in the northern sky?

I repeat “Untold Unsung now Unearthed”

Go through entire thread carefully.

OM NAMO BHAGWATE VAASUDEVAAY

RT & spread the knowledge.
Any questions use #AskPratz


.... continuing from previous thread/story

O prince! Thus concentrate on that omnipotent eternal Lord with the mantra - ‘OM NAMO BHAGWATE VAASUDEVAAY’ .

https://t.co/H62ehDT3ix


The prince Dhruv greeted the sages and continued on his journey. At last, he reached a beautiful forest Madhuvan on the bank of the river Yamuna. It was the same forest, which was later occupied by a demon Madhu.


Shatrughana, the youngest brother of Sri Rama had killed demon Lavan, son of Madhu in the same forest & founded the township of Mathura. In the same forest, prince Dhruv decided to carry out his penance. As per the dictate of the sages, he began to recite the mantra continuously


Very soon, the earth began to move because of Dhruv’s severe penance. Even the seat of Indra could not remain stable. A stampede resulted among the gods. The gods then hatched a conspiracy to disturb the penance.

You May Also Like

"I lied about my basic beliefs in order to keep a prestigious job. Now that it will be zero-cost to me, I have a few things to say."


We know that elite institutions like the one Flier was in (partial) charge of rely on irrelevant status markers like private school education, whiteness, legacy, and ability to charm an old white guy at an interview.

Harvard's discriminatory policies are becoming increasingly well known, across the political spectrum (see, e.g., the recent lawsuit on discrimination against East Asian applications.)

It's refreshing to hear a senior administrator admits to personally opposing policies that attempt to remedy these basic flaws. These are flaws that harm his institution's ability to do cutting-edge research and to serve the public.

Harvard is being eclipsed by institutions that have different ideas about how to run a 21st Century institution. Stanford, for one; the UC system; the "public Ivys".