Terrorism and “extreme” religion

Freedom of religion maybe a good thing for some. What that means is freedom of believing in irrationality, in miracles, in life after death and in some other divine retribution. This is fine as long as the dogma isn't antisocial and dangerous to the rest of us.

As I see it, Islam appears to stand out as one of these religions that rests on “shaky” theology in which everything goes and against which there's no religious authority willing to take a stand. Further, Islam is reflective of a medieval if not pre-medieval set of beliefs and culture. Most of Christianity is a bit more advanced, but nonetheless still lags behind our times by one or two centuries depending on the flavor served.

 

In the face of what's likely to come out of the Boston explosions, religious leaders of all persuasion should come together and not just condemn, but do some serious homework aimed at amending and clarifying the interpretation that can be made of their teachings by their most extremist fringe. Of course, they won't do it, because in religion, just like in business, there's competition!

All are pretty much vying for the same customer and everyone wants to be holier-than-thou. All this brings me back to the concept of “freedom of religion”; how can we see through that religious smokescreen? How can we be certain that a religion is “good”, namely isn't promoting death like extremist Islam does at the moment through the voice of its imams and sometime its governments where a murderous tone is common place?