TED Conversations

Maxime Touzel

This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »

A "U.N." for Religions

I'm thinking of a way to bring the religious leaders of every religions, cults, sects or any other religious beliefs representatives together.

The goal behind this is to make them all agree on a term of mutual respect and to make them sign a contract saying that they agree to consider others beliefs in an equal way and not superior nor inferior to their own beliefs, to try and reach a true global religious brotherhood in order to bring a peaceful era, to end the religious wars and religious hatred and to end the possibility for political leaders to use religions as a tool to bring wars more acceptable.

Some of them might not agree to sign an agreement such as this, for fanatical reasons or any other reasons, but some would and that would make all the difference.

I wonder how many followers would still perceived themselves as being "higher" or "superior" from others by knowing that their own spiritual leader didn't agree to sign a "philosophical agreement" such as this, knowing that this agreement is meant to show the true Love and Compassion these spiritual leaders are teachings in their own way.

With such a philosophical agreement of fraternity, we could let go the differences, the first step toward a true global peace would be accomplished.

Religions are not suppose to be part in politics and many beliefs despite politics, but this "agreement" could signify the end of the fetal state of humanity.

An U.N. like Organization for Religions could mean a lot for our future. I consider this to be an essential asset in order to build a peaceful world.




Are you in favor of this ?
I would like to know.
Thank you.

+2
Share:

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • Feb 23 2012: there are religions or rather paths wherein on one side the Buddha says... "dont follow this just because i say so, find the truth of ur own life...witness your own life..." n then there are those who have even mandated how n what animal to eat what not,how to beat wife who doesnt agree with you etc.In such diverse band of so called religions there r these clear observations that i see across the world...1)the spread of the religions has been more or less inversely proportional to element of spirituality actually put to practice(i may quote a master"religions are: spirituality gone wrong" 2)ideally all religions should have been "spirituality adapted to the geography",so they would have been absolutely harmonious despite behavioural differences...had this urge to outnumber, outgrow, not been there 3)when that animalistic urge became dominant in religious systems,religions started to go beyond the adapted geography, n hence behavioural conflicts started...so today religions i feel have lost their truth even in behavioural aspect n its core that is universal brotherhood,spirituality,etc had turned virtual way back
    so challenges ahead of such UN of religions 1)Even if we discard "mine is superior" attitude,show mutual respect (that has been theoretically always there so whats new actually?)we will not progress truely untill certain absolute behavioural rubbish r trashed for once n all from all religions 3)atleast for the sake of idealistic guideline the united nation of religions may declare any act of violence or killing for religious propagatory purpose as punishable in its court.4)concrete steps to protect "the minorities" we need to understand,certain paths that remained nearer to the word 'religion'-"reconnect to GOD" never felt the need to propagate, as they practised all inclusiveness 100%, they are on the verge of extinction.we ought to protect them. High time that religions start to reconnect to being human at the least if not reconnect to GOD
    • thumb
      Feb 23 2012: The idea i promote does not include a court for religion neither imposing rules over them.

      It is meant to be a gathering for all the religions representatives to agree on a mutual respect and work together fraternally. The goal of this is to succeed to reduce the amount of fear and hatred that one religion might get from another.

      I feel like imposing rules over is not the right way, even though parts of texts should be remove, it's not by forcing their ways that we will reach a state of world peace, if one religion feel that a passage of their texts is to be removed, it is their own choice, if this event can help bring to this reasoning, good. But i'm not sure that imposing rules will be met with better openness on their part.

      First let's build a Peace treaty, then we'll see what are the outcomes.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.