Zappaz, I find the first quote a bit long. Can you try to shorten it? Andries 12:02, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)
The following quote seeems to be off-topic
- "We often seem most comfortable with people whose religions consist of nothing but a few private sessions of worship and prayer, but who are too secularized to let their faiths influence the rest of the week. This attitude exerts pressure to treat religion as a hobby."
- Stephen Carter, The Culture of Disbelief: How American Law and Politics Trivialize Religious Devotion
- Very much on topic... one person's selfless devotion is often considered by others to be that person's senseless fanaticism: the distinguishing thing to my mind is usually how tolerant and accepting people are of others right to differ from them, and pursue paths of faith, doubt, exploration and behavior other than their own, so long as it does not violate the equal rights of others.
- Most people who are devoted in a more than casual way to some particular traditions, beliefs or cause, make people who aren't devoted to much of anything beyond their own personal comfort very uncomfortable. As well they should be when the "devotions" involve impelling others to suffer various forms of danger, loss, or injury. But when it remains a common thing to ridicule and mock any person whose faith or beliefs are unusual or extraordinary, the fanaticism of intolerance and oppression becomes quite an easy and acceptable thing to many, and something they can indulge in quite casually, even towards those who are themselves most benevolent or benign.
- Even the word "cult" despite its modern use in a denigrative way that implies a blind fanaticism to a closed society, is a word that has historically been used in a far more benign way, for traditions of mild and casual devotions as well as those of more rigorous and exclusive form. ~ Achilles † 12:32, 12 November 2005 (UTC)