Well you and I are no scholar of any ancient text so I don't think with confidence we can say that the murder of people and discriminatory acts are mandated. What about Buddhist? What about Sikhs, Hindus, or Upanishads? If you are going to discount religion, don't discount all religion without adequately studying it (college courses in religious studies does count to make anyone an expert). For instance I study neuroscience and wouldn't make claims about it if I didn't know it and had an advance degree in it, as such acts especially making claims about something that is potentially misleading looks bad. I can't make claims about religion especially all religions if I am not familiar with their text. Simply looking at the news and watching acts of violence in the name if faith js not enough reason to paint all religions with one brush. The "devil made me do it" is not an excuse for acts if violence. Our courts if law cannot prosecute the devil, we prosecute the individual and I believe like courts of law we should take the same approach when someone commits acts if violence in the name of religion.
I'm not sure I would consider myself a scholar in religious texts, nor do I think I've deserved such acclaim. I have, however, taken the time to read the texts of many religions, including The Bible, The Torah, The Quran, parts of the Vedas, many Buddhist texts (mainly Zen related), and so on.
And my experience is that most religious people do not adhere to the texts in a literal manner. Perhaps we should be grateful for that since many of these texts contain, endorse and even command acts that any modern society would consider horrendous.
I have in other treads argued that if one claims that the text of one's religion is the word of one's god then a literal interpretation of it is the only correct option, and that those that do are the "true" adherents to their religion. The only other option is to allow the notion that these texts are just texts, mutable and not necessarily more right or correct than any other text.
Hence, it appears as if those Christians (and certainly Jews) who condemns homosexuality are the "true" adherents and that those who discard the more unpleasant parts of their text are not.
I have a question regarding your impression of religions though, and it is an interesting question, or at least I think it is.
Do you know of any religion who does not consider their group, or at least humans in general, to be of immense importance to the universe?
It seems as if this is a universal notion; that we are somehow essential and central to the world. This is a very dangerous notion because it indicates that this world was made to have us in it, and like a puddle vaporizing in the sun* we may find ourselves extinct before we realize that this is not the case and that the world, and certainly the universe, does not need humans.
Rather it is us that needs the world and we would do well to make note of this.
