Your grammar is atrocious. That should be:

Thou shalt have whatsoever religion that thou desireth as long it remaineth moderate according to the definition of the majority.



I had a quick look at the wiki entry for the Diocletian persecution. There's an interesting footnote:

Early pagan opponents of the Christians would see their God as a political criminal, executed under a governor of Judea for proclaiming himself "King of the Jews", and note that their holy texts included an allegorical attack on the Roman state that prophesied its imminent destruction (Revelation). These arguments were less effective as time went on, since Christians were visibly apolitical

If only we'd remained apolitical.

Just had a final thought I wish to share.

In this modern day and age, shouldn't we be burning DVDs instead of books?

I am afraid this wouldn't work, as "Burning" means "Copying" when it comes to CDs and DVDs

Really?

...and it doesn't mean copying. It just means "writing data to"

I am pretty late on this thread.

As a Hindu, I must tell you, these things never happen in India and so I was really surprised to see some Hindu claiming folks burning Koran and Bible. Hindu's will never indulge in any acts which will dishonor other religions. We earn respect by respecting others. We can always argue about whats right whats not, but burning religious books is no way to make an argument.

I highly disregard and condemn those acts. Probably those guys had some other motives ( maybe they want to go to Swiss Jail instead of going back to India. . Kidding!).

I accept that Hinduism is mostly a non-confrontational religion, but to say these things never happen? What about that incident in Utar Pradesh where some Hindus attacked and destroyed an ancient mosque because they wanted to build a temple there?

Are you sure?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Ch...lence_in_India

Think about if Vatican or Mecca or Jerusalem was destroyed by foreign intruders and some other structure was built upon it. The natives will probably try to restore the original structure whenever they get freedom and that's what happened in this place in India. I hope this answers your question. That said probably you will be glad to know that the court in India made a decision and decided to still allocate a third of that land to Muslim's. I am sure vice versa situation can never happen in a country like Pakistan for example although all Hindu temples in Pakistan originally stood there. Bahmian buddha in Afghanistan is a good example.

If you are still not contended you can always google to find how most of India including its ancient temples was ravaged from 8th Century to 17th through invasions before the East India(Britishers) did their part of plunder.

Yes, I am aware about this. I totally condemn all the violence. I will probably call it an anti-Conversion violence. Religious conversion has been banned in some states in India because of this. If only christian missionaries concentrate more on spreading teachings of Christ instead of converting(mostly poor and tribal) Indigenous Indian people by luring them through money etc., I am sure this will not happen. All the violence in this wiki is related to conversion, there is no other factor involved.

Point is Hindu's or Budhhists don't convert people from other religions and it will be really nice if other parties reciprocate. Also, there is no problem if a Hindu gets inspired by other religious teachings and accepts it but if you are a dumbass being lured into conversion by a badass then someone will try to protect the dumbass. Of course kicking badass's butt is not the solution, instead respecting each other is a better solution.