What you speak of is a world that will never be. You speak of “holy scriptures”, wars have bee started over religion beliefs. You also speak of “Tolerance”, I hate to break the news to you but there is a lot of people in this world today that will NOT tolerate other’s religion or lack of, color of skin, sex of person, sexual orientation, place or area of birth, over weight, the list could go on and on.

I wish it was so.

If your all fingers in your hand would be same shape and size then I would agree with your visioon in reality. But the truth is every individual is different in thoughts and deeds.You can create a big society of your likings and similar thinking of nationalism and patritism but not whole America will follow your vision. I am sorry to say this and admire your vision.

God bless you and your country.

I want the world to be like this too, where people don't beat each other down for having differing views, but the reason this place does not exist is that people are too set in their beliefs and are unwilling to accept others' beliefs, even if they say their minds are open. These differences in views can be minor or they can change the world. People believe so many different things, and some of those beliefs conflict. We could either respectfully disagree with each other and leave it at that, or, like you say, "conquer or convert." The majority of people choose the former, but the minority that choose the latter are the ones that stand out. Every conflict boils down to a difference in views between two (or more) parties, with each party unwilling to accept the other's belief.

I don't quite understand why you call on people of this country, since we have a history of imposing our beliefs on others. Stopping genocide is fine, but if people halfway around the world don't want us spreading democracy in their country, who are we to tell them they are wrong? Democracy works fine for me, but forcing it upon others kind of defeats the purpose of it.

Too many times are reasoned arguements reacted to with aggression and deeply-felt loathing. The reason for this is that men, on average, like to have some control of their own lives, and at least half of those who like controlling their own lives have an urge, which varies from individual to individual, to control the lives of others.
The wish to control their own lives is sane and good. The wish to control others, whether for your own benefit or not, is the force hiding under the surface of many people that causes strife.
Sharing your ideas is a wonderful thing. I feel that without this, we'd all be living in crude huts or caves right now. The problem comes in when people think they're sharing their ideas, but they are going beyond presenting their beliefs, and actually attempting to change the beliefs of the other person against their will.
I am afraid I disagree with your fire with fire comment. It sounds like you are saying that if another country decides to come in and tell us that they run things now, that we should just say okay, and go with the flow, or respectfully protest and refuse to follow their commands. The -hypothetical- people who are trying to take over are attempting to control all the people of this fine country, and by attempting to control how another person acts, they stop respecting us. When respect stops flowing in one direction, respect flowing the other way is merely swallowed down a pit and is lost. The person giving the respect will soon be depleted and destroyed. The only way to make a person stop trying to control you is by removing your own respect and stopping them, at all costs, from holding you down and forcing their will on you.
I love your idea, and I wish it was possible, but there are just too many controlling people in the world who need a solid lesson in respect.

upon further thinking, Richard Cypher was the main character of the novels. Terry Goodkind was author.

We are a nation of pointing fingers. Its always someone else's fault for not being as "enlightened" as we are.

One of the key issues is the old saying "You can make some of the people happy some of the time but you cannot make all of the people happy all of the time". For every tolerance you create, you create less tolerance for someone else's ideas.
You create a tolerance for gay rights and then you have less tolerance for religion. You create more tolerance for amnesty and you create less of a tolerance for those who believe in upholding the law.

And there is such a thing as "bad tolerance" believe it or not. I've spoken out about a book Amazon was adveretising which basically tried to send the message that "pediphiles are people too". Is that a kind of tolerance we want to uphold? It worked for Dark Ages Japan so who knows?

We are a group and that will not likely change in the near future. We are not all the same person. And as long as that happens, as long as we are not a hive intellect, we will have differences.

Should our differences lead to violence? No. Should we persecute those who have different opinions than us? As long as those opinions do not threaten our basic freedoms and the constitution, then no. But we should have the right to have a difference of opinion. I don't know that mutual awareness can happen along side free will. I'm a bit of a stickler for free will as well as constitutional freedoms :)

The one thing I will agree with you 200% on is that we should have more respect and love for our country and for each other in general. Do we stop befriending folks who have different opinions than we do? I am lucky to have friends from all walks of life and a plethora of opinions. I refuse to surround myself with folks who only share my opinion. I think that would lead to a very uneducated view of the world. Sometimes our differences even get near what might be called heated. But no difference in opinion is worth ruining relationships over.

You posted an eloquent "sermon" which you used to ask a question here of "Why Not" I have to believe that you weren't wanting an answer that you already know. I believe you just wanted to use this "pulpit" from which to persuade others to copy your "sermon" and send it out to others.

As you know, the answer lies in a seemingly unchanging baseness in the "Nature of Humankind". This will continue until the "Next Coming"!

I believe that the only way we could fully keep up world peace is by having everybody thinking the same way. In our current world, some people are greedier then others, more sensitive to otheres, and not everybody is willing to understand people other than themselves. Try reading, "Brave New World". It's an enlightening book.

your vision of a perfect, peaceful world is one great vison! but when you think of what kind of people there are in the world today and what they are doing, it just doesent seem possible. give the human race about 500 to 1000 years to look beyond race, culture and beliefs and realise your vision but even then it might be hard to do considering whats happening in todays world

isn't this from star trek?

Most important from your start: nothing of value is free, and anything free is of no value and can harbor no responsible choice or use without everyone of equal ability, access and performance. Resources can not only be swamped by unequal masses, but any decent product would be waysided by the Titanic wake of incompetent submissions to sort thru.
>The greatest point in this is that education is the priority, but far from achievement in ubiquity. The internet is not free, it's not accessible as you desire, even here with Wiki world.Knowledge via the internet is the Evil apple that's really a painted peach.I/N is NOT orderly or catalogued, searchable or indexed to any, I mean ANY respectable degree a qualified or experienced researcher would attest to. Real Knowledge is systematically categorized with grand central hubs and banks navigable by consistent true data. Only striking onto a real libraries hard facility records can luck out this type of organization.That even costs and is near inaccessible due to patronage or copywrite restrictions.
>The basis for this is understanding how the I/N is pseudo-searched and unoriginal in it's paths. It's not a lead dawg. Web Crawlers are first relatively short ranged by design, so you will only see it's familiar territory or skip, jump pattern by design.It would take days to weeks to truly scan the net for one subject with the servers used by host companies.Sampling, sniffing, brown nosing patterns are preset delimiters & can miss vital singular locations.They learn by rote, & necessarily so because they are cheap & lazy and follow the crowd first, going to previously most frequently viewed sites, despite the fact that the stats came from a field full of blind Lemmings.drop off point before the big jump. There is no qualifier setting for sites for pertinence or substantiality, so they always come up simply from errant usage.Real research knows to go to specific directions, predictable authority and probable yield which canr't be programmed beyond common word or phrase appearance. For sensitivity& specificity you would have to design your own crawler and barter with the servor companies for their prices, THAT'S RIGHT. COST. Nothing is free, and if someone can get a fee, slap adverts on your back in passing, and track you to sell the stats to advertisers and utilization statisticians for the Cookie Companies, they most certainly will, beside getting their own nametag on you just for exploring, even at the wrong site.On top of it, the redundancy of loops and site hits is all commercialized to the advertising dollar paid to be seen or recorded or redirected to commercial supports off the crawlers path. The more paid in, the more frequently the sites are encountered, listed and repeated, so that a site of information value only may be #599,999 and inaccessible do to the ability of any site throwing in a common key word to your site, though it has nothing to do with their subject. The higher the web fee you pay, the more key words you can do to snag crawlers. So selling Viagra can hall in searcher from NASA, Forestry, Turtleneck sweater shoppers,Insomniacs, Firemen, Church Deacons and anyone else caught up in the currents of uprighteousness. And nothing of this speaks of the subliminal schemata that has entrenched the myriad of unmonitorable connections.And everything is subpoenable! with connections, anyone can get to your research. And you thanks to Googles officially applied for but unofficially in use Sat and remote monitoring and storage begun last year, with compilation to phone, internet, mail flow and electronic transaction thru its own servers and associate companies or bartered contract sharing not reported.Tell George that Big Brother is Barney with the Googley eyes(ref to Snuffy Smith character'60s)
>What you desire in spirit can only hope to be found in cooperative communities, helping small worlds, like Askpedia. But the technology can't because there is money to be made directly or indirectly.Of those generous souls that gave programming freely to help, 10,000 others thru in commercial ties, gates, service ststions toll roads and traffic cops. If used off-line the benefit is ignoble. On-line, you have to watch over your shoulder for stat recorders, trackers sticky cookies, and spoiled milk.
>>Showing the public what they think they want to see in an expeditable chincy way on a fancy, alternative game playing, piece of technology that goes "ping" in quick succession and unfilterable multitude despite lack of focus, specificity, verifiability, and appropriate cross referencing for expansion
of ideas leads to complacency, over confidence by shear numbers, or exhaustion in attempts to comprehend. In all my years of research for uncommon or serious in depthness, the Net is best at most a finder of a few leads to phone or physical contact to hard sites, and more often the spportive revelation of opening hours and MapQuest to get there.I go to a building, library, I have all history of books, journals, papers, not just post1992 or rare full indexed for all publication.
>>Sorry for the grim look at the I-Net commercial side(we even have adds, tracks, stat selling.Free, proper, accurate, relevant use will for long times be relegated to small worlds and clque usage, much like the original Arpa connections to just collegiate institutions and research centers.
>>For other comment, see Nash comment.
Dreaming is not bad, it's in our nature, but waking you must realize it is the other aspects of drive and instinct and protection along with some altruism that got us this far advanced, and in the clammor, toes need stepped on be.
We haven't yet been able to civilize soccer fans or cheerleader moms yet let alone get Congress to play nice, say hey to Janus, and actually get to work on our dime. You can't save the World,just a small part of it. Sooner or later there will be enough parts saved to balance the great box of Nuggets.
Patience.Peace, or at least peace of mind!