Aviator and others,
This question of yours is surprising, because while you seem skeptical of God' s existence, you also seem skeptical of Nietzsche's words, who wrote a century and a half ago "God is dead." But this question presupposes first a certain notion that God might exist--and you don't deny it.
You said: "Some say"I am Hindu", some say"I am Muslim". Some say"I am American", some say"I am Afgan". Some say"I am Madhesi", some say"I am Pahade". Some say"I am Communist", some say"I am Congress". What is all this? What are we fighting for? Why so much differences? And why is god letting this happen? Why don't God use his/her chakra (that Geeta talks about) and chop the head of all those shit-heads who do nothing than spread hatred."
The last sentence is precisely what you shouldn't think, because this is precisely what God is NOT. God is not the vengeful despote we sometimes picture Him to be, and doesn't kill anybody; if He does, then it answers your questions and we need not seek any further. But since "God is love" then this cannot be the case.
You typed: "Every now and then, we hear news of people being killed, we see photos of blood-bloated bodies of men, women, childrens and animals. HOW COULD A LIVING GOD ALLOW THIS?"
If this happens, it is precisely because we have turned our back on God. Man's relationship with God is reciprocal. God created man in his image and likeness (and not in form, as somebody said in this thread), which means that man was also endowed with free will (Nepali22901 said it very well). Since the Fall, since he turned away from him, God has sent His grace upon mankind, and even sent His Son (Christ) to help mankind in his quest back to God. Now, we are free to accept this grace or not. One of the Church's greatest Saint, St. Athanasios the Great, explained it beautifully and simply: "God became man so that man might become God." This clearly shows that it is a reciprocal action, that mankind's relationship with God is not a one-way relationship. Why is it so? A relationship is, by essence, reciprocal; if not, it is no longer a relationship. A love relationship involves two persons who give to one another, and not uniquely one to the other. Similarily, friendship exists only between two persons at least, who exchange and accept the other's friendship; if not, it cannot be called friendship and should rather be called coercion.
Therefore, if man turns his face to God and accepts His grace to become in His likeness, that is Love, those evils you listed would not happen. In this sense, we, not god, are responsible for our own misery.
You said: "And above all, Man, a rational animal, who is superior amongst all other animals, has respect for no other species. We slaughter animals just merely for the sake of food, clothes, rituals, and sometimes even for fun. Is there any species that man hasn't eaten. Say ants,frogs,cockroaches,snakes,dogs,..........,whales. Do they not deserve to live? HOW COULD A LIVING GOD ALLOW THIS?
Will we die of starvation if we don't eat meat? Will we die of cold if we don't wear leather or fur? AND HOW COULD A LIVING GOD allow man to slaughter poor animals on his/her name. Have we forgotten that even animals can response to stimuli, even they have the right to live. And what's their fault, that they can't speak?, that they are innocent?, that they can't fire guns?, that they can't explode bombs?, or 'that they can't protest for their rights by killing innocent people and destroying national assets to get the government's attention.
Cattles who were once revered partners in Hindu culture now suffer dreadful lives and abuse.
Male calves are taken away from their mothers shortly after birth and sold to butchers. Did they come to this earth only to eaten by some hungry bastards? HOW COULD A LIVING GOD ALLOW THIS?"
Animals, like man, are part of creation. The current environmental problems (and this is what I believe you are refering to here) are another similar consequence of the fall. By turning away from God, we have turned away from His creation as well. Similarily, if you don't like an artist and his style, you will not like his work, you will not care for it at least.
There is however something. You refered to slaughtering animals for food, clothes, etc. In prehistoric times, this is precisely what people were hunting animals for; their own SURVIVAL depended on this nature they lived in. But don't forget that those people also had a greater respect for nature than we do now. The ancient pre-christian religions anywhere in the world (and you stated it very well with the Hindu religion) had thanksgiving cults for various aspects of nature, including hunting; Native Americans considered it a gift of nature to hunt animals for their survival.
This leads me to say that Christianity is often wrongly and unjustly accused of detaching man from nature, hence the current situation. Reading what I said above, it is not true. When Christianity was an ideal in the European Middle Ages, men did not plunder their environment like they do today. The current situation begins precisely when they rejected Christianity and God, begining with the "Enlightenments" and the Industrial revolution. A person sincerely devout to God or divine truth would not seek to produce in polluting factories or dump toxic waste in nature.
Today, it is true that we no longer need animal food as before, and meat is indeed proven to be unhealthy if consummed to often. If I have presonally nothing agasint eating meat, it must be in very reasonable quantity and we must always pay attention to wher it comes from and how animals were treated. To leave on a positive tone, these "ethical" practices are becoming more widespread today, precisely as a result of what you described and were --rightfully--horrified at.
Phoebus.
