It has often been advocated by some well-intentioned persons that in interest of communal harmony we ought to cultivate equal respect for all religions. On face value, it appears to be a laudable advice, but a closer scrutiny reveals that this is an impossible as well as undesirable ideal to follow.
A person can have equal respect for all religions only if either he knows nothing about various religions or if he has a totally non-serious attitude towards them or both.
Take the question of existence of god, which is central to many religions. Zoroastrianism, Judaism, Christianity, Islam and Sikhism are monotheistic religions. In Hinduism we find anthropomorphism, polytheism, monotheism, monism and even atheism existing side by side. Finally, Buddhism and Jainism are atheistic or non-theistic religions.
Now, either god exists, or he does not. It cannot be the case that god both exists and does not exist. All available evidence suggests that it is impossible for god to exist. But, in any case, a person can either believe that god exists or he can believe that god does not exist. How can he have equal respect for both these beliefs? Or, in other words, how can he have equal respect for both theistic and atheistic religions? If he believes in the existence of god, he will have more respect for theistic religions. On the other hand, if he is a rationalist and atheist, he is likely to have more respect for atheistic religions than for theistic ones.
Again, most of religions including Jainism believe in the existence of soul. Buddhism, on the other hand, rejects the existence of soul. Now, let us imagine two persons -- one who believes in existence of god and soul, say A; and another who rejects both these beliefs as false, say B. How is it possible for both A and B to have equal respect for Jainism and Buddhism? It is natural that B will have more respect for Buddhism than for Jainism and vice versa. One cannot have equal respect for both truth and falsehood. It is not even desirable to promote equal respect for truth and falsehood.
Let us turn our attention to theistic religions. According to Christianity, Jesus was the "son of god" and the whole of the Bible including the New Testament is "revealed" by god. This belief is, however, rejected by Zoroastrianism, Judaism and Islam. Again, according to Islam, Mohammed was a "messenger of allah" and the Koran is "revealed". Now, a person may believe that the first statement is true whereas the second one is false. Alternatively, he may believe that the second statement is true whereas the first one is false. Thirdly, he may believe that both these statements are true; and finally, he may believe that both these statements are false. In the first case, he is a Christian and will have more respect for Christianity. In the second case, he is a Muslim and is certain to have more respect for Islam. In the third case, if the person is really serious, then he is likely to turn schizophrenic, because the teachings of Jesus and Mohammed are different, if not contradictory, on many important issues. In the fourth case, the person is not likely to have any respect for either of these religions.
Thus, equal respect for all religions is not possible. Different religions make different truth-claims, and one cannot have equal respect for truth as well as falsehood. As pointed out earlier, it is also not desirable to promote equal respect for truth and falsehood. What is both possible and desirable is to have equal respect for all human beings irrespective of their religious beliefs; or equal respect for human beings belonging to different religious groups, including those who do not believe in any religion. In other words, what we need for promoting communal harmony is humanism and not a muddle-headed approach towards religion.