At 7/4/12 02:56 AM, Jmayer20 wrote:
Camarohusky could you explain how my post is straying dangerously close to the blind absolutism that causes people to fight religious wars. I know you think I am wrong but I would like you to explain way you think I am wrong.
K. Here goes.
At 7/3/12 09:08 PM, Jmayer20 wrote:
It makes no sense to kill someone or fight people just because they do not follow your religious beliefs. I say this for one reason.
Starts off fine here, but then you get to these.
1.) God does not care what religion you follow or how you worship him/her. Meaning there is no reason to fight.
2.) God does not exist which would mean you are killing people needlessly.
3.) God likes sending people to hell for mistaking which was the right way to follow him/her. This would make god evil so why follow an evil deity.
These are absolutist statements that ignore huge nuances in religion as a whole, and a couple strong concepts, nay two core concepts, of religion. Faithy and humanity.
First, you are approaching religion with a black or white mentality. This, either it's wholly right or wholly wrong ideal is the exact sort of thinking that dirves people to fight in such conflicts. Instead of speaking in open and conciliatory terms, your terms are harsh, binding, and inflammatory (just like those who wish to foment angry religious fervor).
Second, you speak of religion in the sphere of logic, when religion just does not exist on that plane. Religion is not an entity of logic or logical thinking. It is an entity of faith and emotion. Trying to use logic to explain it or appeal to it is about as pertinent as using 5 males to describe how birth control affects the female population. Think of religion and logics like men and women. Try talking to a woman the same way you talk to a man (i.e. being rowdy, dirty, trying to fix problems, and generally straightforward and overtly logical) and see how that works out.Just like men and women need to overlook parts of themselves to coexist, so do logic and religion. Logic needs to realize that religion doesn't exist in its realm, and religion needs to learn that it is not based on logic and should be treated as such (not like disregarded, just not taken as the pure scientific truth of all things).
In the end, I dispute a fundamental premise of your argument wholly. Religion has never been the primary or even the major reason to go to war. Religion is not a reason for war, rather it is a tool or a weapon of war. The reasons for war have always been the same: land, power, influence, money, glory, resources, or vengeance. All wars that have ever been fought were fought for one or a combination of these (yes, even the Crusades were not fought for religious reasons). How religion has played in is not that it is a cause to go to war, rather it is a tool with which warmakers can convince (fool) the masses into fighting the war for them. Before the rise of the concept of nations and nationalism, religion was one of the few things that could turn a peaceful peasant onto a bloodthirsty warrior willing to risk life and limb for their ruler. because of religion's roots in a very violent time in human history, it is full of references to this violence, and to draconian rules of the ancient times. The resulting texts are easily twisted into calls for violence against anyone a charismatic and manipulative leader feels like targetting. This can be seen today. Al Qaeda fights for vengeance and power. The Yugoslavian region mass killings were part of a power struggle between factions. Few other conflicts today have any religious overtones, as that has been largely replaced by nationalism since the enlightenment.