Religion and Warfare

[Elder]

A little over a week ago, I was having a nice polite discussion with a co-worker of mine concerning our religious beliefs. He made the comment that he was not a fan of organized religion as he attributed most of our wars, deaths and other attrocities to it. While I didn't go into great arguement on the subject (I had no intention of a religious debate in the work place) I did politely give my opinion on the matter. Since then I have thought on the subject, and I'd like to put out some of my points and ideas so that y'all can debate them, tear them apart, misconstrue them, twist them, take them on to wild tangeants, or maybe even support them. Here we go:

1. A detailed look at Christian Doctrine (I really don't have the knowledge to speak for any other faith at the moment, although those who do please do make yourselves heard) shows no basis, encouragement, or condonement for any of the attrocities commited in the name of God. I know full well that they still happened, but I have yet to know of any faith that could truly control it's people, just as I have yet to know of any one, religious or not, who completely lives up to their own ideals or beliefs.

2. While religion definitely does have a disturbing tendancy to become involved in war, I don't believe it to be the root of war. Rather I see it as a corrupt political leader's pathetic excuse, or occasionally their manipulative motivational tool (I also count in this religions leaders with political power). I see this as the case with the Crusade, where you have christian kings and rulers fighting for land that has been fought over for far longer that Islam or Christianity have been upon the earth, all the while telling their devout subjects that it was God's will and using faith and devotion (both good qualities) for evil purposes.

I would like to point out that this sort of exploitation is no longer an issue in either of our nations as we have come to the enlightened idea that our religious leaders should not also be our political leaders. Thus, we see a certain lack of holy wars or inquisitions in the western world today.

I further point out that religion has also been used for positive purposes in war. In the American Revolution, men fought and died believing that God entitled men and women to certain rights, and brought us beautiful democracy because of it. One cannot really separate religion from this. After all, what greater basis can one give to the belief that all men are created equal.

3. Now this last comment may ruffle some feathers, but it seems to me that Atheism is no Saint in this matter either. In the regimes of both Stalin and Hitler we do not see one faith preying upon another, but rather the lack of faith persecuting those of various religions and religion related cultures, among others. I'm not sure, but I can't really think of any other single body counts that really top those.

Quite frankly, I'm tired of people condemning western religion for war. It's no longer an issue in the western world. Now, I'm sure there are plenty of you who want to argue with this. Please, be my guest.

[crazymf]

I think the west should now call the war on terror a war of religion. That way we don't have to piss around trying to pick the good muslims from the bad ones. Shoot everthing with a rag on his head.

Lets get it over with.

Somebody had to say it.

[Elder]

I think the west should now call the war on terror a war of religion. That way we don't have to piss around trying to pick the good muslims from the bad ones. Shoot everthing with a rag on his head.

Lets get it over with.

Somebody had to say it.

Now that would probably be the opposite of what I'm trying to convey. I'd like to think we as civilized people are past that point. You take shortcuts, you lose. Besides, what good is all that desert out there if there's no one living in it, and don't say oil as 1. People are worth more than oil and 2. do you really think that even if all the locals were gone any other nation would let us just take the oil?

On the other hand, one could also consider the war on terror a religious war in this sense: It is a war against an ideal. What is relgion but a set of beliefs and ideals. With this war we fight the ideal or belief that one can and should use fear and destruction to cause a revolution. Thankyou for that idea.

[GostHacked]

The Crusades. End of thread!

OK let me elaborate. Religion has been around longer than organized governments. That influence is felt still today. Before recorded history I will say people were killing each other over religion.

I agree that this war on terror is a war against religion. The way I see it, Christianity has been the major force in this new war on religion. Since organized religion is older than organized governments, religious leaders had the power to influence the masses. You pay.. er donate to the church to further their cause. So they can spread the good word. (that word today boys and girls is 'freedom') Converting those who can be, and killing those who cannot. That mentality is still strong today. The USA has 'under God' in almost everything they do. Praise Allah is touted by Iran. Even other countries that use 'under God' have a different version of what is God.

Every religion wants to be on top. So way back in the day, that money and taxes (kingdoms, kings, taxes, empires, religion) would be spent to defend your view of what is the true and just religion. Since words were not enough to convince you, I should strike you down. It is obvious you are inferior. I need something more than just a book for you to read. Horses, knights, armor swords ect ect. Today it's planes, tanks, and guns. And they are still trying to spread the good word.

Just now I am watching with my cousin an episode of Penn and Teller's Bullshit episode on Religion.

[theloniusfleabag]

Dear crazymf,

I think the west should now call the war on terror a war of religion.

Lets get it over with.

I am not totally against this, I think a little more brutal honesty might clear up some 'BS' surrounding the issue and force everyone's hand onto the table.

Shoot everthing with a rag on his head.

This bit, though, is a little much. It is generally Sikhs who wear turbans, not Muslims (although they do often wear 'hats'). I suggest you spend even one day reading a brief history of each of the major religions before you advocate genocide based on limited or erroneous information.

[crazymf]

I guess when you are a conservative traditionalist right wing country dude like me, it's hard to be sarcastic, because everyone takes you seriously. I'll try to push my sarcasm further to the right so everyone can recognise it.

However, how can this be a jihad on their part and non religious on the other side? Don't the gloves ever come off?

[Charles Anthony]

I am a fervent advocate of organized religion in general. Before I explain, I would like to indulge in some of this comedy.

OK let me elaborate. Religion has been around longer than organized governments.

Bingo. We have finally come to the crux (please accept the pun) of the matter but unfortunately, our blindness leads us to miss the mark.

If an "organized religion" does something bad, should we advocate and ridicule "organized religion"???

The anti-religious person says "Yes!!" with short-sighted glee.

The reasonably intelligent person says: "No. We should attack the specific members of that organization advocating something bad."

I challenge the anti-religious people to put the shoe on the other foot.

If an "organized government" does something bad, will you join hands with me and advocate anarchy??

The anti-religious person says "Uh... yeah, but... uhmmm..." while spinning around in a circle.

The reasonably intelligent person says: "I get it."

However, my analogy needs to be refined. Organized religion comprises one of the few forms of government that is voluntary. For this reason, I advocate organized religion and I have hope for this world.

I am going to cut this one off at the pass: I have no patience for arguments saying how people in backwards countries are coerced into following some religions. These objections are common and they make me laugh because they pale in comparison to the coercion of military powers and states. More importantly, free will can still keep violent religions in check.

People who generally oppose "organized religion" are dangerous baffoons. They have no respect for what separates us from the rest of the animal kingdom.

[Renegade]

I have no issue with organized religion, as an organization. I do have issue when an organized religion espouses behaviour which then infringes on the rights of those outside that religion. For example, if a religion advocates that abortion is murder, and then encourages its members that it is their God-given duty to stop murderers at any cost, then that religion is inciting violence.

Of course the members who take up the task and start bombing abortion clinic are to blame, but so is the organized religion for inciting violence.

[GostHacked]

People who generally oppose "organized religion" are dangerous baffoons. They have no respect for what separates us from the rest of the animal kingdom.

I think self awareness and a consience seperates us from the rest of the animals. I oppose organized religion for I have come to the conclusion it no longer serves any function in my life. I was brought up without religion. Does that make me a baffoon? I guess it does. Fine. Or maybe it offers me a view of religion that others cannot see. I am an outsider looking in observing. If I don't understand something I inquire about it.

If an "organized religion" does something bad, should we advocate and ridicule "organized religion"???

Oh hell yes indeed! Since most do not learn from their mistakes (those who do not learn history are doomed to repeat it) they have the potential to make another one.

The reasonably intelligent person says: "No. We should attack the specific members of that organization advocating something bad."

I agree here as well. Odd that I would agree on both points. Smart baffoon I am.

I have no respect for religion in the sense that they manipulate the stupid. Still believing and fighting for a 'God'. Religion does influence governments all over the world. More than you think. There is no seperation of church and state. None.

Israel is a Jewish state, don't tell me that the jewish religion does not come into play when making huge decisions that affect the masses of their country and others close by. Most 3rd world countries are being introduced to Christianity by people of Europe and North America. Trying to 'save' everyone by teaching them the good word. That has the potential for much violence. Even South America got that treatment.

Believe in yourself, not some mythical god. And I guess an organized religion like Scientology is nothing to wory about either. All hail XENU !!!! See what I am getting at? Bullshit, lies and missinterpretations of literature presented to the masses to manipulate them for their cause.

[Figleaf]

... Here we go:

1. A detailed look at Christian Doctrine (I really don't have the knowledge to speak for any other faith at the moment, although those who do please do make yourselves heard) shows no basis, encouragement, or condonement for any of the attrocities commited in the name of God. I know full well that they still happened, but I have yet to know of any faith that could truly control it's people, just as I have yet to know of any one, religious or not, who completely lives up to their own ideals or beliefs.

2. While religion definitely does have a disturbing tendancy to become involved in war, I don't believe it to be the root of war. Rather I see it as a corrupt political leader's pathetic excuse, or occasionally their manipulative motivational tool (I also count in this religions leaders with political power). I see this as the case with the Crusade, where you have christian kings and rulers fighting for land that has been fought over for far longer that Islam or Christianity have been upon the earth, all the while telling their devout subjects that it was God's will and using faith and devotion (both good qualities) for evil purposes.

I would like to point out that this sort of exploitation is no longer an issue in either of our nations as we have come to the enlightened idea that our religious leaders should not also be our political leaders. Thus, we see a certain lack of holy wars or inquisitions in the western world today.

I further point out that religion has also been used for positive purposes in war. In the American Revolution, men fought and died believing that God entitled men and women to certain rights, and brought us beautiful democracy because of it. One cannot really separate religion from this. After all, what greater basis can one give to the belief that all men are created equal.

3. Now this last comment may ruffle some feathers, but it seems to me that Atheism is no Saint in this matter either. In the regimes of both Stalin and Hitler we do not see one faith preying upon another, but rather the lack of faith persecuting those of various religions and religion related cultures, among others. I'm not sure, but I can't really think of any other single body counts that really top those.

1. WHICH Christian doctrine? Certainly substantial elements of the Old Testament type seems to endorse some pretty wicked stuff.

2. If it is the case that religion has been a tool of warmongers rather than a cause of war, how great is that? It's nature is why it's been so used.

3. Stalin misused the ideology of Marxism. Atheism was incidentally part of Marxism, not instrumental. Hitler was a neo-pagan romantic, not an atheist. Accordingly, your critIcism of athiesm is misplaced.

[Charles Anthony]

I was brought up without religion. Does that make me a baffoon? I guess it does.

I would say that you are misunderstanding.

There is no problem with people who have no religious affiliation. There is a problem with people who are anti-religion.

When a far-off and remote government or state does something wrong, are you going to advocate anarchy??? If you do not, you are being inconsistent.

[Electric Monk]

At the risk of sounding like a buffoon, I have a question. Why are the concepts of "faith" and "separation from the animals" taught by some organized religions a good thing?

One encourages belief without evidence, (not hard to see how THAT one could be abused!). The other fosters disdain and mistreatment of our environment and it's non-human inhabitants.

[White Doors]

3. Stalin misused the ideology of Marxism. Atheism was incidentally part of Marxism, not instrumental. Hitler was a neo-pagan romantic, not an atheist. Accordingly, your critIcism of athiesm is misplaced.

Are you also anti-marxist? 'Nationalism' has killed FAR more people in history than religion ever has.

Are anti-patriotism too?

If not, why the double standard?

[Elder]

Alright, Mr. Gosthacked, I must say I've already countered your replies and arguements with my initial post, so I see no particular reason to reply with anything more than this: read the arguement and come up with your own reply, please don't spew out the same atheist arguements I've heard my entire life. I hate to say it, but you really do Atheists no credit with your posts. I expected better.

Figleaf, congratulations you have made an intelligent arguement, which I will be more than happy to reply to:

1. I was referring mostly to New Testament Doctrine, and I do share your oppinion that the Old Testament does not always reflect the peaceful ideals that I see in Christianity. I still read it, as there are other moral lessons to learn from it, mostly concerning justice and obedience. However if one looks hard enough at it (and few ever do), you can find lessons of peace, love and faith in the Old Testament as well.

2. I hate to say it, but I can actually argue this point with you. You seem to have missed my point concerning Religions role in war, so I'll break it down: A. I was pointing out that it is the tool, rather than the cause, as many anti-religionists would believe. B. That tool is no longer effective in a negative fashion in the Western World due to extensive legal control. C. That tool, like any other, can be used not only for evil by warmongers, but for good by freedom fighters, idealists and those who would inspire others to do great things, and it is still effective for this purpose and is doing it today. I can't quote any statistics, but I'd guess that Organized religion is responsible for a very very very substantial part of humanitarian aid world wide. Further more, it is Organized Religion that is making the attempt to actually change people from bad to good, which does more than one might think. What could be more powerful than to take a man or woman and make him or her a better man or woman? It's what this world needs. Religion definitely is power, and all power can be used for either good or evil.

3. I really don't see the difference between Stalin misusing Marxism and the medieval governments misusing Religion, any argument concerning Marxism aside. As for your point on Hitler, I am grateful for the enlightenment there and you have a very good point, although you still see a rather secular government persecuting religious groups.

[Figleaf]

3. Stalin misused the ideology of Marxism. Atheism was incidentally part of Marxism, not instrumental. Hitler was a neo-pagan romantic, not an atheist. Accordingly, your critIcism of athiesm is misplaced.

Are you also anti-marxist? 'Nationalism' has killed FAR more people in history than religion ever has.

Are anti-patriotism too?

If not, why the double standard?

1. I am a classical liberal and oppose totalitarianism of any stripe -- no double standards.

2. I'm not so sure about nationalism beating religion. It would depend on your method of calculating.

[White Doors]

Dead people is the method I used.

[Figleaf]

Dead people is the method I used.

Dead from what? Bullets? Starvation? Disease?

Do you include Stalin's toll under nationalism or communism? Do you include aboriginal people killed in colonial settlement? ...

[Black Dog]

If an "organized religion" does something bad, should we advocate and ridicule "organized religion"???

The anti-religious person says "Yes!!" with short-sighted glee.

The reasonably intelligent person says: "No. We should attack the specific members of that organization advocating something bad."

Individuals should be judged by their own actions, but you cannot ignore the framework which supports or promotes their behaviour. For example, I can criticize people who label Muslims as terrorists, but recognize the problems inherent in the way the religion is interpereted by the leadership of some highly influential sects. Religion shoukld be a personal matter, with every individual interpereting their own sacred texts and precipts for themselves and living their lives accordingly. It's the cults that are the problem.

People who generally oppose "organized religion" are dangerous baffoons. They have no respect for what separates us from the rest of the animal kingdom.

A) what's so great about "organized religion?"

What about opposable thumbs? The ability to walk upright? Our ability to invent new and more effective ways of killing our own species?

[Charles Anthony]

A) what's so great about "organized religion?"

It is a non-coercive form of leadership and government. It is a social club.

[i am not going to pay attention to The Crusades or The IslamoExpansionophobia arguments until you all hold my hand and praise the glories of Anarchy.

Our Elder has more patience than I do and actually explains why in his post #14 above.]

What about opposable thumbs? The ability to walk upright? Our ability to invent new and more effective ways of killing our own species?

They separate us from most of the animal kingdom too. So does television. [i hate smilies.]

[blackascoal]

I think the west should now call the war on terror a war of religion. That way we don't have to piss around trying to pick the good muslims from the bad ones. Shoot everthing with a rag on his head.

Lets get it over with.

Somebody had to say it.

The only question is why anyone would say something as stupid as that .. then I saw your "redneck Albertan" and why became obvious.

[blackascoal]

Religion is God's proof that humans are not fully evolved.

He'll know we've grown up when we see the fallacy and uselessness of it.

[White Doors]

What if we shed religion totally but still embrace communism? Will He consider us 'grown up' then?