asaris

Two responses. You may be killing because of a belief, but you are not killing for a belief. That is, the belief features in the chain of reasoning, but it is not the sole or even the most important feature in that chain; your neighbor is. That is to say, there's a difference between killing you because you refuse to be baptized and killing you because you're about to kill someone else.

Second, your response assumes there's a chain of reasoning at all; that is, in the situation where you are about to kill my friend, I think something along the lines of "I should kill to defend my friends; Donald is my friend; therefore I should kill you to defend Donald". But more likely, the 'reasoning' is likely to be much simpler: "Donald is my friend, therefore you must die". We don't kill in these situation because for the sake of the categorical imperative, we do so for our friends. Which might just be a different way of putting the first point.

Perhaps this discussion would help if you could provide an example of where you believe you should use violence to defend your beliefs. I'm fairly certain that would help me out, at least.

__________________
"Die Deutschen meinen, daß die Kraft sich in Härte und Grausamkeit offenbaren müsse, sie unterwerfen sich dann gerne und mit Bewunderung:[...]. Daß es Kraft giebt in der Milde und Stille, das glauben sie nicht leicht."

"The Germans believe that power must reveal itself in hardness and cruelty and then submit themselves gladly and with admiration[...]. They do not believe readily that there is power in meekness and calm."

-- Friedrich Nietzsche