New religious movements primarily emanate from social trends. According to Fisher and Rinehart (2016), the new religious movements might have evolved from a charismatic figure or from previous religions or not. In spite of their presence, a group of people might advocate for the tolerance of these new religions, whereas another group might oppose the idea that the religious movements should be tolerated. Those that argue for their tolerance might refer to the notion that in the contemporary society, people enjoy the freedom of choice. Fisher and Rinehart (2016) provide several factors that those arguing for tolerance might identify with, which are include the freedom of choice, and the idea that the status of the prevailing religions is institutional and with little spiritual life. For this reason, those that might be seeking spiritual fulfillment should be accorded the freedom to pursue their beliefs.
On the contrary, individuals opposed to the idea of tolerating new religion might argue from the point of view that some of the religious movements advocate for violence. The foundation of such arguments is that the new religious movements might be extremists, who resort to violence to establish their beliefs (Fisher & Rinehart, 2016). An individual could argue that most of the religions that resolve to violence might be protesting against the hostility of their surrounding culture. On the other hand, some of these movements might cause psychological damage to the followers, especially the vulnerable populations such as the young people. The members might fight back to protect their movement, particularly in times when the leader is coercive or extremely charismatic (Fisher & Rinehart, 2016). The group of people opposing the tolerance of the new religious movements might use these instances to advocate for their cause.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Regardless of the stance taken by an individual in relation to tolerating the new religious movements, tolerance is important as a value, especially in the globalized society. Mass global migration has also increased the misconceptions among individuals, including the cultural and religious complexities. For this reason, tolerating differences among people’s beliefs is unavoidable, which means that individuals have to learn to co-exist with each other despite the differences. Cultural and religious differences in the contemporary society exist at all the levels of the society. These differences can only be addressed successfully through the education process or through the understanding of the rights of individuals in the society, which is a significantly secular requirement that demands knowledge.
The theme that has become fundamental in interfaith movements is the belief in a supreme creator, in spite of the different names that people from different religions are likely to use in identifying the Supreme Being. However, the single most notorious element that is hardening the religious boundary is the political culture. For instance, Fisher and Rinehart (2016) indicate that individuals that perceive that all people should be one might be forced to take political action to protect other members in the earth. For this reason, such people are likely to follow provisions that harden the existing religious boundaries to provide the protection. Regardless of the stance that people take in terms of religious beliefs, globalization can resolve some of the issues being experienced. The reason for indicating that globalization is the solution emanates from the provision that the world is increasingly becoming heterogenic in terms of religious beliefs, which means that individuals are increasingly tolerating diverse religions.
Reference
Fisher, M.P. & Rinehart, R. (2016). Living Religions (10 th Ed.). Pearson.
