Political Memes

and each of these faiths have millions of fundamentalists that see these texts as their moral imperative.

I'll assume that that's the definition of "fundamentalist" you're working with here since that's the one that makes what you say below make sense; tell me if I'm wrong. I'm saying this beforehand because the word seems to mean different things when applied to different groups in a way that limits its utility unless defined beforehand.

which is shockingly backwards and eager to kill all that they deem unworthy (i.e. you).

Uh... no? The passages that get quoted from the Quran in these contexts are clearly talking about warfare (even ISIS was more restrained than what you imply) and I legitimately have no idea what you're talking about with respect to the Bible and Torah.

However, they all provide a mask of normalcy for the fundamentalists that are "True Believers".

No true Scotsman fallacy. You're implicitly defining "true believer" as "person who does bad stuff" and using that to disregard the vast majority of the followers of the Abrahamic religions.

This veneer of respectability prevents society as a whole from ever questioning the Abrahamic faiths, the instructions that they are given, and their motivations.

You mean do exactly what you're doing? What are you even expecting "society as a whole" to do here?

Islam wants to murder or convert you (or force you to pay a tax for their "protection"... from them).

Assuming you're referring to offensive jihad, Islam does allow for peace between Muslims and non-Muslims, so even the more bellicose interpretations aren't that bellicose (and of course there are less bellicose interpretations that render you just wrong).

Christianity wants to convert you or prays for Jesus to return and save them (and murder you). Judaism isn't interested in converting you, but they see themselves as The Chosen People as ordained by God, superior to gentiles (you) in every possible way.

I see a serious lack of "eager to kill all that they deem unworthy" here.

All Abrahamic faiths have proven to be ruthless and bloodthirsty when they rule.

Counterpoint: History. With few exceptions, Muslim polities are famous for not being bloodthirsty when they rule, and while Christianity's track record is worse it's far from all bad (the Crusader States were decently tolerant of Muslims under their rule after the massacres of the First Crusade, for example). As for Judaism, Israel is a secular nationalist project founded by secular nationalists where religion has only become a serious factor in governance relatively recently. If you want to prove this charge against Judaism you'll have to start with pre-Roman Judea and pre-Islamic Yemen.

All of them want to control you, no exceptions. All have rules that they want you to follow; even the nice ones that don't want to slaughter you think that you should live by their rules out of "respect", but they have absolutely no respect for you.

Yeah as proven by all the Christians in the Middle East that can't drink alcohol or eat pork, or all the atheists so oppressed by the government of, say, Spain. Hell, even Israel—famously not the most tolerant place—hasn't tried to enforce Jewish law on Palestinians. If anything the secular atheists have been the intolerant group in recent years (see: hijab bans all over Europe).

Listen to what their fundamentalist rabbis, priests, and imam's say (thousands of videos on Youtube to choose from).

And here it becomes apparent you don't know as much about this stuff as you seem to think. Up to a rounding error all Islamic scholars (what you understandably but somewhat incorrectly called imams) are fundamentalist (assuming the definition at the top of my reply); both the tolerant scholars and intolerant scholars are working off the same scriptures with the same "fundamentalist" attitude towards them.

The fact that they are tax free is ridiculous and obscene.

They're tax-free because they're non-political nonprofits. Let me turn that around: What entitles you to the donation money paid by the attendants of a mosque or church to pay for maintenance or utilities? Legally there should be no difference between a religious nonprofit institution and a book club.

Lemmy discovers that ideological systems have ideology 😭

BASED

When you put it like that, humanity sounds like a sinful lot destined to be purged by the fires of climate change.