First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next  Last
Do Religions which preach peace fuel more wars than they prevent?
44056 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M / Queens, New York
Offline
Posted 1/30/08 , edited 4/18/08
Umm. it isnt the fact that they really fuel war or fighting as much as they just disagree. Like Christianity there is that line there that says "worship no idols" and when this fact goes against other religions it just a recipe for chaos. ...How should I say it "religious aggression, or better yet, pride, is a good term, is the reason why they get into arguments. Frankly religiously prideful people dont agree with other religions and disagreements turn into fights and fights turn into wars, such as the crusades.
455 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M / Earth
Offline
Posted 1/30/08 , edited 4/18/08
You people are taking something that is a thought and transforming it into something tangible. So your saying it's not the person himself that is not causing the war but the religion? Isn't it the lame white people in the south during pre-civil war that USED a bible, too literally in today's terms compared to past context, excuse to allow slavery. I think that religion is peaceful and it is man himself to blame when it comes to physical conflicts.
Posted 2/1/08 , edited 4/18/08

Stickmania wrote:
Well technically religion is tied with a god but fundamentally they are similar i see your point.

Eh, not as far as I can tell. Buddhism doesn't involve a god or gods at all. Taoism generally talks about the "will of heaven" or the natural order of things, etc. Everything that's considered a religion doesn't necessarily require a god or gods.
2801 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F
Offline
Posted 2/2/08 , edited 4/18/08
religion are made up by people to explain the unexplainable questions. it teaches us morals and ethics it creats laws and orders but it does not starts the war human emotions starts war greed for power wanting to be the superior ones, finding ways to be different and wanting people to believe they r better creats war and since religion back then and maybe now are seen to be one of the most important thing some people takes advantage of it and misuse it. our emotions creats war, suffer, chaose but it also creats love peace and happiness . beacuse there is war we know what is peace and because there is saddness we know what is happiness
2801 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F
Offline
Posted 2/2/08 , edited 4/18/08

shibole wrote:


Stickmania wrote:


shibole wrote:
Probably the religion that has been the most bloody in the past century is communism/marxism. This religion has killed more of its own people than any other religion in history. And to this day supposed athiests continue to believe in this religion claiming that it just wasn't "done properly" before.


While I agree that communism has caused a lot of deaths and stuff it isn't a religion, one of its key ideals is that there is no God, trust me on this I did an A level exam on communist Russia this morning.


You don't need God to have a religion, you just need faith. Communism/marxism basically involves a lot of faith.... faith which is very misplaced. (I mention atheists simply because they tend to claim they have no religion.)

Simply not believing in god doesn't make one a rational person, and the absence of god doesn't keep something based on faith from effectively being a religion.

what faith ?? communism is just some lier promising the poor that everyone is gonna own everything and no one is gonna be poor or rich but in the end no one really owned anything except for the corrupted leader since everyone had equal share (or they thought) no one really worked for anything they just put in the effort it was required .in a commuistic goverment no privet ownership , no religion,only one political party runs the government (even tho they ask u to vote )
114 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / Sydney
Offline
Posted 2/2/08 , edited 4/18/08
It's a load of rubbish, Religion was designed as a ruling power to put the fear of god into people and to not question anything.

A leader must simply say they are bad we are right because of god and people follow.

people will not revolt if they believe god will punish them. People will kill others to prove their religion is best, Christian v Islam v Jewish.

e.g the witch hunts in salem had no evidence other than god. The crusades were faught in the name of god. The war for the holy land has gone for centuries with both sides hating each other and creating terrorist like information agencies to rid themselves of their ungodlike enemies, massad.

half the world was taken over and forced into slavery in the sake of preaching them the proper way to live or stay as scum.

but the best example is russia who had no religion and was having trouble controlling their people, they sent some people out to look for religions they found orthodox, liked it, brought it back, forced every russian resident that now believe in the orthodox church or they will recieve devine judgement. they later used this tool has means of conquest murder and even turture.
4963 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / F / cebu
Offline
Posted 2/2/08 , edited 4/18/08
God, gold and glory

the spaniards came to our shores for that but i believe they came here only for gold and glory and manipulated us by using religion. however, it's good they came or else we would be pagans....
9383 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M / LuzViMinda
Offline
Posted 2/2/08 , edited 4/18/08
Yes.

Though its not the religions fault for so, but rather the people who interpret it incorrectly. Like the Christians of the Roman Empire, and after, such as in the Crusades, the Inquisition, the Witch burnings and the Age of Exploration.

The same could be said about the terrorists right now who give Islam a bad name. There's a prejudice against them that doesn't stop, and its sad, because Muslims are friendly people.

But the same could be said for those who know more accurate interpretations of their religion's message, but choose to withhold and manipulate the situation to his or her advantage. Just like the Spanish did to the Philippines, used God on us, then raped our lands, enslaved our men and pillaged our women.

But then the Americans and Japanese did a follow-up on screwing our country even without religion, though it was more of a territory mongering time by then.

Worst of all are the extreme converts, who would go around preach things in your face and won't leave you alone about it (I could be wrong, but I based this part on personal experience).
1328 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
39 / M / Closing in
Offline
Posted 2/2/08 , edited 4/18/08
1. You have to believe in a higher power to belong in a religion. That's the definition. Yes, technically buddhism is not a religion. It doesn't fit the definition. Ironically some variations of buddhism is religion. Buddhism is technically a philosophy. I is the modern concept of having to define everything that has put buddhism among religions. Buddhism is such a strong way of life, and unallowing of having "other faith" that allows it to be considered a religion. But it's technically not.
2. A lot of ideas requires faith, even some of the scientific ones. It is bizarre to call them religious because of it. And it's not only the ideas in themselves, but how people believe in them. A fanatical conservative might believe just as strongly in the idea as a communist. During the French revolution there were a lot of people believe in their ideas just as strongly as their neighbours. Communism is not special.
3. Atheist, religious and agnostic are definitions, not labels. They are pretty clear too. Not like descriptions like angry or happy, which are more subjective.
4. The crusades were brought on by the ownership of Jerusalem, the holy city.
5. The Bible can be interpreted any way you want it. Unless you heed the warning: interpreting the Bible is one of the two unforgivable sins. I don't think it was a direct quote that defended slavery, but an interpretation of what something "meant" to which the Bible can not be hold responsible.
5. Marx never defined how a communist government would work or what it would do. Communism is not a way of government, it's an analytic theory. Therefore there are many approaches to how a communist government should work.
6. The russians had a pagan religion. They went orthodox because a) they traded with Byzantine b) Byzantium accepted a marriage at some point. Russia wanted to establish relations with the west. It so happens that the Byzantium accepted. It was about diplomacy.
7. Salem was mass hysteria. Also there were a lot of "witnesses". In the aftermath, I believe it was Cotton Mather, there was published a book about how some testimonies was to be ignored. At a time when confessions due to torture was accepted as undeniable, this was pretty fair.
8. People will always revolt if agatonized. Like the jacquerie. And anyways: some of the poor people looked to the Bible. An old verse goes something like: "When Adam worked and Eve span, who was then the gentleman". The poverty-stricken may always revolt.
9: Religion is not about power, it's about faith. A religion is usually established out of faith. A church is about power (and finance).
10. Terrorism is about achieving a goal, not genocide.
11. Not all religions has the "fear God"- concept.
50278 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / Phatuum Thani, Th...
Offline
Posted 2/2/08 , edited 4/18/08
Religion is the leading cause of war and violence, it's also a heavy factor when deciding good and evil (i personally think Evil is nothing but a hypocrytacle point of view (i know i spelled it wrong, shut up>.<)
9/11 was a cause of conflicting religions, when musilims did not agree to our shipping of "Evil" pop products to their country.
In thailand, musilim extremists kill buddhists monks and school children daily.

(I don't believe in god, but if he exists he really has a F****d up sense of humor...

~Nyu~
Posted 2/2/08 , edited 4/18/08

jestorebo wrote:
1. You have to believe in a higher power to belong in a religion. That's the definition. Yes, technically buddhism is not a religion. It doesn't fit the definition. Ironically some variations of buddhism is religion. Buddhism is technically a philosophy. I is the modern concept of having to define everything that has put buddhism among religions. Buddhism is such a strong way of life, and unallowing of having "other faith" that allows it to be considered a religion. But it's technically not.

False!

re·li·gion (rĭ-lĭj'ən) Pronunciation Key
n.

1.
1. Belief in and reverence for a supernatural power or powers regarded as creator and governor of the universe.
2. A personal or institutionalized system grounded in such belief and worship.
2. The life or condition of a person in a religious order.
3. A set of beliefs, values, and practices based on the teachings of a spiritual leader.
4. A cause, principle, or activity pursued with zeal or conscientious devotion.

In any case, it's clear that Communism had it's "higher powers" such as Chairman Mao, Lenin, etc. So still I see no difference.



2. A lot of ideas requires faith, even some of the scientific ones. It is bizarre to call them religious because of it. And it's not only the ideas in themselves, but how people believe in them. A fanatical conservative might believe just as strongly in the idea as a communist. During the French revolution there were a lot of people believe in their ideas just as strongly as their neighbours. Communism is not special.

My point in calling things believed in due to faith "religion" is to distinguish them from things believed in due to science and rational observation/experimentation. People seem to think that some ideas believed in based purely on faith are somehow scientific if enough "educated" people believe in them. In reality, you may simply have supposed educated people who believe in irrational dogma which are just as invalid as certain religious dogma, yet they'll arrogantly claim that they're smart and educated (because they don't believe in god?) even though they're actually no more rational than ignorant religious types. Simply not believing in an established major religion doesn't make you educated and rational.



4. The crusades were brought on by the ownership of Jerusalem, the holy city.

Now I know that's BS. That may have been part of the religious manipulation used to get people to fight, but the thing that really caused the crusades was the Muslim attack on the Byzantine empire and the Byzantine pope asking the European pope for help.



5. Marx never defined how a communist government would work or what it would do. Communism is not a way of government, it's an analytic theory. Therefore there are many approaches to how a communist government should work.

Yea, but he was claiming to create an economic model that accurately modeled reality, which it didn't. In particular it doesn't acknowledge the role of skills and education at all (everyone is just a dumb worker drone), and assumes a bogus zero-sum system of wealth that is trivial for anyone to disprove. His model was unable to predict effects based on causes because it was based on a bunch of isolated, wishful thinking rather than cause-and-effect and real observation. It is the economic equivalent of alchemy.

What's sad is that people believed in it (and some still do) not because it was accurate but because they wanted to believe in what it promised. This is the same reason people believed in alchemy, but what's sad is that unlike alchemy, modern economic theory had already developed BEFORE Marxism. It was like someone developing alchemy after the dawn of modern chemistry.
1328 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
39 / M / Closing in
Offline
Posted 2/2/08 , edited 4/18/08
Shi:
1. You prove my point. Supernatural power, divine, higher power. Call it what you want. The differnence is that Mao and Lenin are not divine. They may be hold in great esteem, but they are not given supernatural powers. They are not said to create the world or anything. Not gods.
2. That's... too confusing. Now I have no idea what neither your or me meant. Something about faith in Communism? Don't see why it's singeld out from other beliefs like liberalism.
4. Europe never helped. They let it go. The crusades was brought on by a pope that specifically asked for the liberation of Jeruslem as God's will. Byzantine tried everything while not being strong enough to be a real enemy. Noone could be bothered. They got a little sympathy, but mostly indifference. Byzantine tried everything. At this point, the Turks were already in Europe. If the European powers could have been bothered, they would have been then. Some of the wars, in the 16th and 17th century was more about stopping the Turks. Even then there was not that much togetherness among Christian countries. There was even cooperation between the French and the Turks. At some point the French seem to have wanted Catholic Austria to go under. Goes to show, the political was more important than the religious. Did they ever try to free Byzantine?
61520 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
30 / Sore wa himitsu d...
Offline
Posted 2/2/08 , edited 4/18/08
If you ask me, it's the "non-believers will be punished" aspect of at least some religons that start Holy Wars (of course not including "power-hungry dictatiors using religion as an excuse" into the equation) due to a distorted form of 'helping others'.
And I think it goes something like this...

"Non-believers to to hell (or some equivilant nasty place)" is part of a religon > Nasty place is nasty! > Nosy, but otherwise caring, people want to prevent others from going to hell (or said nasty place) > Said nosy, but otherwise caring, people convert others to their religion, even if it's against their will > in the latter case, said unwilling converts 'will' fight back > ???? > HOLY WAR!!

If only said "non-believers will be punished" clause were to be removed from the worlds religons, then at least most of the world's Holy Wars would not exist.
Posted 2/2/08 , edited 4/18/08

Shimoko wrote:

If you ask me, it's the "non-believers will be punished" aspect of at least some religons that start Holy Wars (of course not including "power-hungry dictatiors using religion as an excuse" into the equation) due to a distorted form of 'helping others'.
And I think it goes something like this...

"Non-believers to to hell (or some equivilant nasty place)" is part of a religon > Nasty place is nasty! > Nosy, but otherwise caring, people want to prevent others from going to hell (or said nasty place) > Said nosy, but otherwise caring, people convert others to their religion, even if it's against their will > in the latter case, said unwilling converts 'will' fight back > ???? > HOLY WAR!!

If only said "non-believers will be punished" clause were to be removed from the worlds religions, then at least most of the world's Holy Wars would not exist.


Well thats questionable, a lot of them are fought against faiths that counter their own faith and have different beliefs more than to try and 'save' them. Humans just don't care enough about people in other countries.
463 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / Finland
Offline
Posted 2/2/08 , edited 4/18/08

n_n303 wrote:


Stickmania wrote:
But Religions always seem to be deeply involved in war. History is filled with religious wars such as the crusades etc all fought in a peace loving God's name. Indeed even today many soldiers would claim to be religious, wear a crucifix, pray 3 times a day and yet they would go against the very foundations of their peaceful religion by killing another man without even a second thought. Perhaps more sickening is the fact that so many soldiers claim that 'God is with them' and almost helping them to kill even though they are commiting sins of a huge magnitude. There are even soldiers who rely on their beliefs so that they can risk their lives: "if I die, I go to heaven" Without that reassurance many soldiers would be unwilling to risk their lives on the battlefield, and consequently would not fight at all. Surely therefore religious beliefs help to fuel wars that aren't even of a religious nature?


I find that very very very interesting and never looked at it that way. I'm sorry but that made me laugh. Its funny how soldiers go against their so called god and yet pray to him at the same time asking for help well killing another man. Religion is bullshit (my opinion dont take offense) and so are wars.


I agree with your last sentence
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.