User:Woozle/interfaith treaty

Introduction

It seems to me that some sort of treaty between individuals of different faiths, including non-believers (aka atheists), could help members of all religions unite against greater threats.

This initiative would mainly be intended for individuals rather than religious leaders, as the leaders generally have their own unspoken agendas and are far too intertwined with the survival of their core dogma to be able to think as independent individuals – though if any religious leaders signed on, of course, that would be a terrific bonus.

Proposed Terms

We the undersigned are in agreement on the following:

• That religious extremism is a problem;
  • That it represents a threat to civilization and individual safety and happiness;
  • And that such threat is greater than the threat represented by apostasy, atheism, or the beliefs of other religions and sects, so long as those beliefs are not themselves extreme.
• We define religious extremism to include:
  • The advocacy of violence against others who do not believe the same as you do
  • The promise of eternal happiness in exchange for committing harm to others
  • Any claim that religious law is supreme over secular law, or that believers are entitled to violate secular law if their religion claims this is acceptable
  • Any claim that believers of a particular religion are morally superior to believers in another religion solely because of their religious affiliation
  • Any claim that believers of a particular religion are entitled to disrespect other individuals solely because they do not believe the same religion
  • Any claim that any religious law should be obeyed without regard to the reasonableness of that law, or without consideration for the harm that obeying it might cause

Notes

I originally wanted to include something about scriptural inerrancy doctrines, but (aside from the fact that this would make the Pope a religious extremist) I can't easily argue that such doctrine is unarguably harmful – as long as scripture is not allowed to override reality and reason ("...without regard to the reasonableness of that law..."). Perhaps this can go in a separate, more hard-line resolution about dangerous (but not terrorist-level) religious practices.

Other possibilities for that resolution: condemnation of compartmentalization of beliefs, double standards, hypocrisy, religious indoctrination of children (i.e. telling them that one religion is "right" and the others are "wrong" rather than saying "here's what we believe, and here's why; when you grow up, you can decide whether you agree")