I don't see why people go to war over religion

1. 0

   Religulousposted 13 years ago

   They are just killing people in an argument over who has the best imaginary friend.

   replyreport
   1. 63

      pisean282311posted 13 years agoin reply to this

      ...true..fighting for something which cannot be seen and killing fellow human being which can be seen..fellow human being who has similar challenges, ability to love,care...strange but quiet true about what you said...

      replyreport
   2. 66

      alternate poetposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      If it was only that simple !   Religion is just a tool of them upstairs to whiz up a bit of hatred when they want a war (and how it easy it is).  Makes a total mockery of all those who 'gave their lives' - especially in places like Vietnam and Iraq.  Without the tacit support and votes of the christian block they probably would not have happened in the first place.

      replyreport
      1. 61

         Disappearingheadposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         Good answer.

         replyreport
   3. 82

      Don Wposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Religious wars are rarely about religion, contradictory as that may seem. They are ususally about politics, and at a deeper level the biological imperative for humans to form groups and compete with other groups for limited resources. Religion just happens to be one mechanisms by which that occurs.

      replyreport
      1. 58

         Beelzedadposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         Really? Why were they called "Holy Wars" and not "Political Wars" or "Limited Resources Wars"?

         replyreport
         1. 82

            Don Wposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            Because that's too honest. Easier to deny killing over resources and politics than admit it. That's why we have "Operation Iraqi Freedom" rather than "Operation Kill People to Control Oil" which is not as justifiable as emancipating Iraq and defending ourselves from "weapons of mass destruction". Likewise we have "Jihad" rather than just "blowing people up because they are different to us", which is not quite as justifiable in those people's minds as a 'holy war' commanded by a supreme being.
            
            It all boils down to forming groups and competing. When that behaviour is elavated to the level of international politics, war between entire countries and cultures is the result. That behavior is the root of all wars. The name we give those wars simply represents our attempts to rationalise behaviour which is essentially animalistic.

            replyreport
            1. 58

               Beelzedadposted 13 years agoin reply to this

               Well, it would appear the two groups in conflict during the Crusades, for example, were the Christians and the Muslims. The Christians wanted to regain their "Holy" land back from the conquering Muslims. Jerusalem did not hold any other political or economic value to the Roman Catholics other than being a place where they would go straight to heaven. The Crusades were all about intense piety. Many other such Holy Wars were fought for much the same reasons.

               replyreport
               1. 58

                  Jeramiposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                  Jerusalem was smack dab in the middle of the trade routs.
                  
                     A major source of wealth.

                  replyreport
                  1. 58

                     Beelzedadposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                     Haven't read any other books lately, Jerami?
                     
                     Jerusalem was far from any trade routes, had chronic water shortages and was completely unsuitable for a strategic location. It was completely isolated.
                     
                     

                     replyreport
                     1. 58

                        Jeramiposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                        Believe what you want!
                        
                           How did the far east trade with the west?
                        They didn't sail around the continent at that time.

                        replyreport
                        1. 58

                           Beelzedadposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                           LOL! This isn't about believing, Jerami.

                           replyreport
               2. 82

                  Don Wposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                  Jerusalem may or may not have had direct economic value. But there was value in being seen to control Jerusalem. That would have been a sign of militarily and political dominance. Such dominance would yield it's own rewards with regard to resources. This is analgous to the idea of the alpha male. Individuals in a group compete for dominance first and foremost, but this ultimatey yields rewards in the form of greater access to resources within the group. I think international conflict is a manifestation of this group-level behaviour, i.e. the same behavior but on a bigger scale. 
                  
                  The Christian group and the Muslim group were (still are) competing for dominance like two individuals would compete for dominance (including those of other species). The only difference is that our behaviour is wrapped in the different levels of complexity we call society, culture, nationality, politics, race, religion etc. Strip that away however and it boils down to people forming groups and competing with 'others' which is no different to what other social animals do. In my opinion, every war ever fought can be traced back to this biological imperative. Unfortunately we seem advanced enough to be able to destroy ourselves as a result of that imperative, but apparently not advanced enough to be able to change it or ignore it.

                  replyreport
                  1. 58

                     Beelzedadposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                     Actually, the dominance was of a religious nature. There were many other cities that could have provided a much better military or political strategic dominance than Jerusalem.
                     
                     
                     
                     There were no resources to dominate in Jerusalem, that was the point.
                     
                     
                     
                     Perhaps some, but these wars were ultimately fought over religious beliefs and the dominance of controlling what they believed was the gateway to heaven. 

                     replyreport
                     1. 82

                        Don Wposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                        The conflict in the Middle East wasn't solely a religious conflict. The Byzantine Empire was loosing ground in the East to the Turkish Muslims which led to the shifting of political power (and associated wealth) from the Byzantine Empire to the Seljuk Turks. So this was a conflict about territory and political power as much as it was religion.
                        
                        Religion was to the crusades what Weapons of Mass Destruction were to the second Iraq war. False Justification. Both conflicts can be summed up simply as: an attempt to control territory by brute force which belonged to someone else, and to rationalise it in such a way that makes it seem justified. Doesn't matter whether that justification be the defence of Christendom or the emancipation of Iraq, those things were not the underlying causes of the conflicts, only the rationalisations for them. Both are examples of groups competing with other groups over limited resources (oil and territory).

                        replyreport
                        1. 52

                           paarsurreyposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                           replyreport
      2. 52

         paarsurreyposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         Yes, it is the politicians who start wars in the name of religion.

         replyreport
   4. 60

      qwarkposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      ..we humans are earths prime predator. it's in our genetic programming to "kill."
      If religion were abolished, done away with completely, we'd figure out another reason to kill each other.
      Everyday of our lives, we are researching and testing new ways to kill each other efficiently, effectively and without compunction.
      Most likely, the 3rd WW will not be "conventional." Someone will sit down at a computer keyboard, tap out a message or code and millions, maybe billions of we humans will be eradicated and the computer operator will sit back, sip on a cuppa hot coffee, open the centerfold of a playboy mag and if so inclined, "spank-the-monkey."
      We are a primitive lot still looking to the heavens, doing our tribal dances and appealing to mythical god/s to alleviate our fears, to protect us from superstition and guide us thru another day of survival.
      Without the protection of "tooth-and-fang," we have survived thru history using guile and wit.
      The anomaly consciousness has guided us to a point in our evolution that has "rewarded" us with an ability to reign supreme and commit the maximum act of predation i.e. we can "virtually" destroy all extant life on the planet!...and existing as the "primitives" we are, we may just be the perpetrator of our demise.
      Certainly, time has the answers.

      replyreport
      1. 58

         Jeramiposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         That sounded like a very logical answer.
         
            Mankind will do as mankind does hiding behind any masks that works.

         replyreport
   5. 82

      Don Wposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      My interpretation of this particular human behaviour as expressed in programming code for no real reason other than it seemed like a good idea at the time  
      
      if (calcChanceOfSurvival(kill) > people.chanceOfSurvival){
          people.kill('others')
          conflict = true
      }
      
      if (conflict){
          if calcSelfImage(rationalisation) > people.SelfImage{
              if rationalisation(religion) > rationalisation(politics)   
                  people.SelfImage += people.rationalise(religion)
              else
                  people.SelfImage += people.rationalise(politics)
      }
      
      Other valid inputs for rationalise function: race, culture, nationality.

      replyreport
   6. 60

      Shahid Bukhariposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      People do not go to war of their own free will and judgment ... they are led into Warring ... by a people, who ''use" the human Emotions, involved in Belief  ... as the means, of making one, kill a fellow human with impunity ...
      
      War is the Political way, of  acquiring, personal Objectives, adopted by  criminals ... called, Political Leadership.

      replyreport
   7. 85

      oceansnsunsetsposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      I only know of one religion that teaches that (leaving out the imaginary friend part/put down).
      
      Hopefully people aren't following any religion that actually teaches killing others as part of its doctrine.  We do see plenty of people in history choosing to go against their religion however, and killing.  It is wrong, and one way to test things is to see if the prophet or teacher encouraged it. 
      
      It isn't wise thinking to use the heretics of a religion as the means in which to judge a religion.  What ends up happening very often is that the person doing the criticizing is often agreeing with the teacher or prophet as in the case of Jesus for instance. 
      I will always find it indicative of more going on, when people engage in such thinking and put downs of whole groups of people to further their own beliefs/worldviews.  I hope they realize they are really bolstering some other worldviews in doing so, in regards to what makes something look true or not.
      That is its own whole new evidence if you think about it.  I pay attention to the realities I see all around me, and what truths they point to.  No one can make whatever the actual truth is, something other than that.

      replyreport
   8. 0

      Twenty One Daysposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      "I don't see why people go to war over religion"
      
      So science -who founded all religions/enabled sensationalism- could use the things they designed and fashioned for war...
      
      

      replyreport
      1. 58

         Mark Knowlesposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         Thank you. And here you are going to war. LOLOLOL
         
         Dear me - you religionists do like to absolve yourself don't you?
         
         Is that because you are free of sin?
         
         Did Y'achoo free you up to go to war and blame it on some one else? LOLOLOL

         replyreport
         1. 0

            Twenty One Daysposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            Tissue For You !

            replyreport
            1. 58

               Mark Knowlesposted 13 years agoin reply to this

               Farmer's blow works for me.

               replyreport
   9. 79

      pennyofheavenposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      I doubt whether it has anything to do with best friend etc. Power, greed and control comes to mind.
      
      When there is war within, that is sure to manifest as war without. On an individual scale or global. Eliminate the battles that go on within, less chance that it will manifest.

      replyreport
   10. 61

       taskeincposted 12 years agoin reply to this

       LOL .. I agree, "who has the best imaginary friend."

       replyreport
2. 71

   Cagsilposted 13 years ago

   And look how sane it appears?

   replyreport
3. 0

   AMBASSADOR BUTLERposted 13 years ago

   Love peace free. You will never see love peace free go to war over religion. The reason why is because it knows that every human being is the same principle to the core of their being. This is the light that shines out to a darkened world and the world can not comprehend the light. So what you get is war. Blinded by the light. Your arms and weapons are too short to fight against the light.

   replyreport
   1. 59

      spookyfoxposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      "Bananas chair sandwich. You will never see bananas chair sandwich go to war over religion. (Etc.)"
      
      This is pretty much how I read that post.

      replyreport
4. 60

   libby101aposted 13 years ago

   The reason why people go to war over religion is because you have individuals who turn into groups that believe other's do not have rights and should not be able to think clearly on their own!
   
   If everyone would respect other's rights this wouldn't happen! But you always have those few that think they need to use a strong arm to make a point!

   replyreport
   1. 60

      dutchman1951posted 13 years agoin reply to this

      wars over religion are about power and land, one president, dictator, king, or ruler wishing to control more power  (oil, land, money) and they make it over  as its about God, so people get passionate and want to fight.
      when in truth it is money and world power. we fall for it every time.

      replyreport
      1. 0

         Baileybearposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         has been happening for centuries

         replyreport
5. 59

   constantia11posted 13 years ago

   Another word for seen is understanding. That is all.
   If we understand something we can see.
   War is only if people do not see and do not understand.
   If people could see , they would not need war.
   If there was light and knowledge there never would have been war.
   War is blind and happens in darkness.
   Yet about what war do we talk. We need specific details to be able to discuss a specific case to see what is going on. Is there really war over religion or do we just asume that because we did hear others say that there is war over religion. If we talk about any specific war it is good perhaps to start a special hubs on that subject to be able to be more specific about any detail. This subject is very abstract and you can not be specific. We can even laugh without knowing what we are laughing about. Yet war is something that should be taken seriously since people get hurt. I think anyway, to bring light in the word stops war. It takes people with courage , hope and faith within them to do that. There are perhaps wars, but they can be stoped if we give it a chance ourselves. Because I do not believe anybody would like it if war continue to go on just to prove someone is right and the other one is wrong. War is not in the benefit of noone and for noone in the whole world ever. That means, a war far away, is also near by and infects all of us anyway. We should not look the other way as if far a way wars have nothing to do with us since it is our bother too and it belongs to our world matters that also should matter also to us. Yet I believe only in the truth that can set free for all people, like a lie, will cause the opposite. This will be true for ever and always.

   replyreport
6. 63

   kmackey32posted 13 years ago

   

   replyreport
   1. 0

      andycoolposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Some people just love wars and hate peace. Religion is secondary, it's an excuse to get involved in war. If it's not religion it would be either politics or racism or money... and the list goes on! NOTHING CAN STOP WARS IN THE WORLD, see it's so simple!

      replyreport
7. 70

   tritrainposted 13 years ago

   I think it's more about "people going to war of a LACK of religion".  That is, one side lacks the particular beliefs or religion of the other side.
   
   Atheists and Agnostics probably tend to find other justifications.
   
   Unfortunately, I think there are always some people who simply want some reason, any reason, to go to war or harm other people.

   replyreport
8. 62

   Lady_Eposted 13 years ago

   Ditto Religulous.

   replyreport
9. 62

   proton66posted 13 years ago

   It's all the above. Religious wars are the result of an established organization projecting its spiritual views to be more correct and considers other's views corrupt or false.  That, in turn, creates tension and the need of the offended party to defend and thus, wars are ignited. Other than that, it is more or less the need to take control of resources i.e. minerals and such found in certain territories or countries.

   replyreport
10. 63

    pisean282311posted 13 years ago

    why has simple answer..it is plain ego and lack of self assurance...people hold beliefs ..get ego attached to it and when their conversation can't bear result..they go for war..as if god they belief in wants protection from mortals!!!!!!!!

    replyreport
11. 66

    b. Malinposted 13 years ago

    A simple answer... Sometimes just for Survival!  Also many a woman has fought in the name of freedom.  A great woman leader was Golda Meir, she was Israel's first Prime Minister.  No one wants to start a war...and we certainly pray for those men and women whom are put in the situation of having to defend Our Rights to such things as, Religious Freedom.
    
    I guess someday someone will just press a button...but let's hope he or she will hesitate!

    replyreport
12. 60

    Petra Vlahposted 13 years ago

    In the name of love for God, more people were killed than all the natural disasters combined.
    It is just that aggorance to think "my God is better than yours", but in effect wars are more an economic and political action and God is used and manipulated to inflame passions and convince regular people to go to war while the powerful are watching from a distance nd protect their own interests.
    Does it sound familiar? It should!

    replyreport
    1. 52

       paarsurreyposted 13 years agoin reply to this

       I agree with you; the war is kindled by the non-believers; the truthful believers are always peaceful.

       replyreport
    2. 60

       qwarkposted 13 years agoin reply to this

       Petra:
       Wars are responsible for man's greatest losses and progress.
       But past wars have been "conventional." One side won or lost and many military and civilians lost their lives.
       I can't think of a nation that has gone to war and not chanted god is with us!
       Of course power and greed are the foundation of most.
       So we can say that we are an unique, primitive species which is genetically programmed to kill and because we have no natural enemies our sophistication cannot override our natural propensity for the kill.
       We use this man made concept: god as an excuse to commit genocide and possibly take out most life on the planet thus regressing life to it's base existence...all while screaming passionately: GOD BE PRAISED!
       Pure human asininity!

       replyreport
       1. 60

          Petra Vlahposted 13 years agoin reply to this

          Exactly my point qwark and the worst part of it all is that we never learn and keep on repeating the seams mistake over and over again

          replyreport
    3. 58

       Jeramiposted 13 years agoin reply to this

       I am not sure if that is true.
       
         100 million Romans died during the "Justinian plague"
       
         and don't remember how many people died  but  1/2 to 2/3 of the population of all of Europe, and China died from the Bubonic plague of the 13 century.
       
          That is a lot of people.
       
          Can you imagine what the world would be like today if all of those people had not died?  It they all had their quota of children and they had theirs?  If there had not been so much mass destruction that had not happened in the past. 
          Life would be a different place.
       
          When will all of that dieing end?
       
         Never; as long as there is so much living going on.

       replyreport
13. 58

    Jeramiposted 13 years ago

    Don W wrote:
    Religion was to the crusades what Weapons of Mass Destruction were to the second Iraq war. False Justification. Both conflicts can be summed up simply as: an attempt to control territory by brute force which belonged to someone else, and to rationalise it in such a way that makes it seem justified. Doesn't matter whether that justification be the defence of Christendom or the emancipation of Iraq, those things were not the underlying causes of the conflicts, only the rationalisations for them. Both are examples of groups competing with other groups over limited resources (oil and territory).
    ======================
    
    
    
       And that is what the last one will be about also.

    replyreport
14. 52

    paarsurreyposted 13 years ago

    I don't see why people go to war over religion
    
    Religion teaches for unity, love, accepting truth; it does not teach to kill.

    replyreport
    1. 58

       Beelzedadposted 13 years agoin reply to this

       Have you not been reading your posts?

       replyreport
15. 52

    paarsurreyposted 13 years ago

    Religion is for uniting the people on truth; not for killing the fellow human beings.

    replyreport
    1. 58

       Mark Knowlesposted 13 years agoin reply to this

       Except the atheists.

       replyreport
       1. 75

          Castlepalomaposted 13 years agoin reply to this

          The best and easiest way to kill someone is to convince youself the other person is sub human or a demon.
          
          The rest is history

          replyreport
16. 52

    paarsurreyposted 13 years ago

    People should understand the truthful religion; no need to go on war over religion. Everybody has a free will which should be respected.
    
    I am an Ahmadi peaceful Muslim

    replyreport
17. 58

    Jeramiposted 13 years ago

    Twenty One Days wrote:
    "I don't see why people go to war over religion"
    
    So science -who founded all religions/enabled sensationalism- could use the things they designed and fashioned for war...
    
    ======
    
      I was wondering why people who want to go to war hide behind religion.  But I guess you answered that too.

    replyreport