--- Buddhism isn't any better. Neither is Scientism or Logical
   Positism which produced Eugenics right in the 20th century,
   resulting in many deaths in USA due to experimentation.
   Excessive idealism is the problem, whatever the coat of arms is.
   --- They're more pragmatic, yes, I agree with that. Given a
   choice, I'll take the deaths at the hands of Scientific
   Professivism over deaths due to political/geographical battles
   utilizing religious ideologies.

   And Buddhism generally has calmed down. It used to be brutally
   bloody, but the last couple of Dalai Lamas were pretty awesome -
   the current one has been a great diplomat, like Pope John II and
   the current Pope guy was for Roman Catholicism. ---- They're all
   secular. Find me an era in the past 5000 years where there were
   True Believers in political power controlling nations and
   armies, and you've just found me propaganda. --- Yes, but the
   religious laws are variously used for secular purposes.
   We have it here in the West.

   English Common Law is the sharia of Western Christiandom. --- Oh
   the burning at the stake thing was a short lived movement in
   Massachusetts, USA. Modern views of history mix that up with the
   Spanish Inquisitors and also with Gallileo, but, being born,
   raised and living in America my whole life, our education of
   history is shit. I'm striving for historical accuracy, not a
   game of "my philosophical stance is better than yours or
   theirs". --- I won't try to shake you from your belief system if
   it means that much to you. --- If replacing their religions with
   another one is the evangelical goal of the movement you are a
   part of, then by all means - I won't try to stop you from
   proselytizing. Preach on, brotha. I'm all for religious
   plurality.