Historically, religion has often proved a more lethal and more divisive force than any secular ideology. It has also often been a more divisive force than race.
In a vast and diverse country like India, a political party with secular ideology can ensure stable and progressive government.
If you're willing to recognize the religious element in one secular ideology, you need to be able to recognize it in your own.
Whenever people are certain they understand our peculiar situation here on this planet, it is because they have accepted a religious Faith or a secular Ideology (Ideologies are the modern form of Faiths) and just stopped thinking.
Secularism is not only indifferent to alternative religious systems, but as a religious ideology it is opposed to any other religious systems. It is therefore a closed system.
What I do not like is militant secularism, whereby anything is acceptable as long as it's not Christian.
I think it is fair, in a way, to describe certain forms of Marxism, for instance, as the secular equivalent of a religion. But, I think the same is true, to a certain extent, of secular liberalism as well.
Even secular people can't really escape from the need to rest their ideas on some belief, some sort of commitment that is not scientific commitment.
Liberal humanists now seem to dominate the fields of art, journalism, and communication, which are powerful and uniquely able to spread anti-Christian thought.
Intolerance has always been with us, you know. The moment you have ideology, we have intolerance, whether it's the secular ideology or, you know ideocratic ideology, which always brings with it some kind of intolerance.
