Look, I don't hold an undue paranoia about the dangerous potential of the devout. Despite everything Chris Hedges says, I feel I can walk down the streets of Colorado Springs, even in front of Focus on the Family, and say what I want, when I want, with no fear of reprisal. In fact, the shootings at New Life Church last December show that it's often those with a grudge against religion that are the most dangerous in society.But the latest Knoxville shootings carried out by a wacked-out avenging angel named Jim Adkisson have me thinking again about the problem of catastrophist faith-based terrorists who want to purify society. Did anyone tell Adkisson that denominations like Unitarians and Congregationalists have been around since this nation was founded, and that they thus have more legitimacy than most evangelical groups? Did anyone tell representatives of the latest salafi wackadoodle Islamic group that there is no chance of establishing a global caliphate on the blood of others, in this world or the next one? Can all the world's faiths agree on purging their adherents of the type of lone-shooter-cum-suicide-bomber who believes in a personal duty to kill the innocent? Some religious leaders within Christian, Islamic and Jewish traditions have been a little bit remiss at coming down hard on the catastrophists among them. So let's make it clear, no matter what your vision of a divine God may be, there is no moral legitimacy in the avenging angel role. If you seek to purify society in the name of your religion, you are a terrorist and should be treated accordingly.
