It is unjust to prove or disprove someone's religion.

"You say other's religions are none of my concern, but they are my concern when other's religious beliefs effect my life. With politicians basing their political decisions on their religion, people teaching their children their religion before their children are able to think for themselves, tax exempt status for religious institutions, etc., there's plenty of reason for other's religious beliefs to be my concern. What happens when a religion tells its followers to forcefully convert new members? Is it unjust for them to convert others forcefully? If yes, then we should stop them, but would telling them that their religion is unjust or wrong be unjust? If both are unjust, then we have to allow one of the options. Even the lack of a choice in this scenario is allowing the first option. If you argue that both options are unjust, then it's impossible to be just. If you argue that either are not unjust, then you abandon your argument. It isn't, however, possible to be unjust in a situation that leaves two unjust options. In that case, choosing the least unjust option would be the just thing to do. This means that, in this case, it is just to either allow the religious members to forcefully convert others or it's just to stop them from practicing their religion." That statement of it doesn't concern you was wrong and I concede that one. Like I said, explaining my rebuts is hard because there are exceptions to the exceptions TO THE EXCEPTIONS. It's a very complicated ideal of mine and I'm trying to verbalize it to where it makes sense. If they want to believe in that particular religion, then let them be. It's unjust to forcefully believe in something someone else told you to believe in. It's like a woman or man depending who you are. I'm not going to force her to love me. It's her choice to love me or not and it's my choice to love her or not. I wouldn't necessarily call their religion unjust. That's your misconception. THE ACTION THEY'RE DOING is unjust. No religions are unjust. That's the misconception that you've obtained. It's the actions themselves that are unjust. Attacking someone's religion to force them to believe in something else is wrongful. "You quote "[do] Jesus Christ, and do those who submit themselves wholeheartedly to Him and His teaching [cause war]? No.", but you also say "Christians can interpret very differently even though they believe in the same thing". It's possible for a Christian to interpret the bible in any way. To say an interpretation is wrong is unjust by your standards. You also quote "So, does religion cause war? Sadly, it does". Religion, at times, but not always, starts war on its own. Islam calls for violent punishments for a variety of religious offenses. It's not just their opinion; it's their religion. To allow them to behead someone who leaves Islam, which the Quran tells them to do, is unjust. To tell them that their religion is wrong is, even if I were to consider that wrong, the least unjust of the two options. As I've said before, choosing the least unjust of two options is just. However, it's not unjust to tell anyone who thinks that way that they're wrong. Religion can and has caused wars without controversy caused from religious criticism." Like I said, there are exceptions to the exceptions to the exceptions. If there are religions as a belief of evil, then I will not hesitate to challenge that belief. Didn't I say that it's okay to challenge beliefs to share ideals? I'm not going to force anybody to abandon their beliefs and transfer to something else. As a matter a fact, you don't have to. You can believe what you want to while believing in other things. You don't have to be stuck with ONE religion. Like I said, it's the actions that are unjust. I don't want to force them to completely change their ways, but I won't stand here and watch the innocent perish. Yes, some Christian was beheaded because he didn't believe in the Islamic ways. An innocent man/woman died because some Muslims forced him into believing in their beliefs. This is the thing I'm talking about. This is what this whole thing is talking about. I know you're not trying to defend this because you've basically said that is unjust. It is unjust. It's all about differentiating right from wrong. Using your actions and ideals as a force for good or a force for evil. "Lack of gnosticism isn't a reason to abandon the pursuit of shared truth. When someone's religious beliefs contradict understood science, there's noting unjust about informing that someone. It's necessary to inform certain people with more vigor than others. If other's are, as sometimes happens, ensuring the scientific ignorance of their children, then it isn't that one person's delusion. Innocent children are in danger of brainwashing and the matter requires more forceful attention if polite attempts yield no results." It is necessary to inform certain people with more validity if only if the belief you're disproving is unjust and it's for the greater good of the people to prove yours is right. But, I can't say any religions are invalid. For example, that thing you were talking about Muslims beheading people. If something was proven that it's wrong to behead people religiously, then they're wrong. It's for the greater good for the people, and our statement has been proven. That is just. What you said about children being brainwashed makes me think of free thinking. "Different interpretations of religion are no reason to call it unjust to disprove/prove a religion. The First Amendment doesn't protect anyone from other's opinions and freedom of religion doesn't either. To silence arguments because they may offend others or change their minds on religious matters is what's truly unjust." Actually, it is kind of. People have different answer to these big questions that we don't know yet: How did we get here? What happened? What are we supposed to do? What happens if we die? It is unjust for someone to rudely disparage your innocently claimed beliefs. It is not unjust to silence arguments. How is that truly unjust? I'm supposed to stand here and watch Christians beheaded? War break out because of some religious reasons? THAT'S UNJUST! To silence arguments attacking someone's opinion is like stopping a bully almost. Are you going to stand there and watch your friend get bullied or are you going to protect him as a friend?