Religion
In reply to the discussion: It would be wrong to expect atheists or antitheists to answer for a murderer who used those labels. [View all]gcomeau
(5,764 posts)You're still working from the same common source text and making a claim that that source text provides moral guidance.
If people say "ok", use that text as a moral guideline, and it results in them going out and killing a bunch of people it is not in any way unjustified to ask the other people claiming that that text should guide people's actions to explain the approach they are advocating.
And if the only answer you can come up with is "well... that guy did it differently than I would" that's pretty weak. So what if a bunch of other people also do it differently? What if it becomes even a somewhat significant minority? Considering it's a minority of a very large group you are saying should be using this source material that works out to decent amount of people. At what point does it become right to ask you if you should really be continuing to tell people to use this text?
If a car company sells people a car saying it's a great way to get around and 1 in a million people get killed by the thing spontaneously combusting or something people expect answers.
If your holy book led... let's say... 1 in 1000 people who took it seriously to go out and start killing people, are you seriously saying that you should still not face any questions about whether it's appropriate that you keep telling MORE people to refer to it as their moral guideline when it appears prone to deadly interpretation just because you personally didn't do that?