The Evils of Religion

[QUOTE="sonicare"]OMG - Jandurin in OT!!!!Jandurin

Run for the hills! :lol:

How many times can I use song before it stops being funny to me?

Indefinitely.

If you believe that all those wars were purely religous in nature, then you are naive. For instance, the crusades had huge economical reasons for their cause as well.

Besides, you can list hundreds of wars that didn't have religous causes. What's your point?

sonicare

I guess hes just trying to point out that religion isnt the main cause of war. To all the people who say "Religion is responsible for all wars."

all this thread has proven is that religion is a great source of conflict and death, but not the only one.

[QUOTE="PullTheTricker"]Religion: An insurance policy against death that disappears up in smoke the moment you try and claim on it.

There is nothing "after" death. You die. End of. xxDustmanxx

It seems that some people have trouble grasping the truth...

Albigensian Crusade,

Almohad Conquest of Muslim Spain,

Anglo-Scottish War (1559-1560),

Arab Conquest of Carthage,

Aragonese-Castilian War,

Aragonese-French War (1209-1213),

First Bearnese Revolt,

Second Bearnese Revolt,

Third Bearnese Revolt,

First Bishop's War,

Second Bishop's War,

Raids of the Black Hundreds,

Bohemian Civil War (1465-1471),

Bohemian Palatine War,

War in Bosnia,

Brabant Revolution,

Byzantine-Muslim War (633-642),

Byzantine-Muslim War (645-656),

Byzantine-Muslim War (688-679),

Byzantine-Muslim War (698-718 ),

Byzantine-Muslim War (739),

Byzantine-Muslim War (741-752),

Byzantine-Muslim War (778-783),

Byzantine-Muslim War (797-798 ),

Byzantine-Muslim War (803-809),

Byzantine-Muslim War (830-841),

Byzantine-Muslim War (851-863),

Byzantine-Muslim War (871-885),

Byzantine-Muslim War (960-976),

Byzantine-Muslim War (995-999),

Camisards' Rebellion,

Castilian Conquest of Toledo,

Charlemagne's Invasion of Northern Spain,

Charlemagne's War against the Saxons,

Count's War,

Covenanters' Rebellion (1666),

Covenanters' Rebellion (1679),

Covenanters' Rebellion (1685),

Crimean War,

First Crusade,

Second Crusade,

Third Crusade,

Fourth Crusade,

Fifth Crusade,

Sixth Crusade,

Seventh Crusade,

Eighth Crusade,

Ninth Crusade,

Crusader-Turkish Wars (1100-1146),

Crusader-Turkish Wars (1272-1291),

Danish-Estonian War,

German Civil War (1077-1106),

Ghost Dance Uprising,

Siege of Granada,

First Iconoclastic War,

Second Iconoclastic War,

India-Pakistan Partition War,

Irish Tithe War,

Javanese invasion of Malacca,

Great Java War,

Kappel Wars,

Khurramite's Revolt,

Lebanese Civil War,

Wars of the Lombard League,

Luccan-Florentine War,

Holy Wars of the Mad Mullah,

Maryland's Religious War,

Mecca-Medina War,

Mexican Insurrections,

War of the Monks,

Mountain Meadows Massacre,

Revolt of Muqanna,

Crusade of Nicopolis,

Padri War,

Paulician War,

Persian Civil War (1500-1503),

Portuguese-Moroccan War (1458-1471),

Portuguese-Moroccan War (1578 ),

Portuguese-Omani Wars in East Africa,

Rajput Rebellion against Aurangzeb,

Revolt in Ravenna,

First War of Religion,

Second War of Religion,

Third War of Religion,

Fourth War of Religion,

Fifth War of Religion,

Sixth War of Religion,

Eighth War of Religion,

Ninth War of Religion,

Roman-Persian War (421-422),

Roman-Persian War (441),

Russo Turkish War (1877-1878 ),

First Sacred War,

Second Sacred War,

Third Sacred War,

Saladin's Holy War,

Schmalkaldic War,

Scottish Uprising against Mary of Guise,

Serbo-Turkish War,

Shimabara Revolt,

War of the Sonderbund,

Spanish Christian-Muslim War (912-928 ),

Spanish Christian-Muslim War (977-997),

Spanish Christian-Muslim War (1001-1031),

Spanish Christian-Muslim War (1172-1212),

Spanish Christian-Muslim War (1230-1248 ),

Spanish Christian-Muslim War (1481-1492),

Spanish Conquests in North Africa,

Swedish War,

Thirty Years War,

Transylvania-Hapsburg War,

Tukulor-French War,

Turko-Persian Wars,

United States War on Terror,

Vellore Mutiny,

Vjayanagar Wars,

First Villmergen War,

Second Villmergen War,

Visigothic-Frankish War.

According to The Encyclopedia of Wars, the above 123 wars were religious in nature. Seems pretty extensive, right? Not really, since this list covers less than seven percent of the thousands of wars documented in the book. All of the others were for power, money, and in many cases, for the sake of war.

This topic is, of course, made for the purpose of dispelling the myth that religion is the cause of all, most, or even many wars throughout history. Assuming that the Encyclopedia documented every war in known history (the book goes as far back as 2325 B. C.), religion has been the cause of about seven percent of all wars in the history of the world, and some of the above are extremely debatable (like the United States War on Terror).

And, not to attack Islam, but if that one religion were removed from the equation, all the other religions combined would account for about four percent of all the wars in history.

Religion the cause of most wars? No.

Dracargen

[QUOTE="luke1889"]

[QUOTE="Dracargen"]The argument is: If religion wasn't used to justify the Crusades, skin color would have been , and so on.ConkerAndBerri2

I am sorry, sir, but that is simply not true. If there was no religion, those wars would not even have happened.

Yes, it would. That's exactly my point.

[QUOTE="ConkerAndBerri2"][QUOTE="luke1889"]

[QUOTE="Dracargen"]The argument is: If religion wasn't used to justify the Crusades, skin color would have been , and so on.luke1889

I am sorry, sir, but that is simply not true. If there was no religion, those wars would not even have happened.

Yes, it would. That's exactly my point.

[QUOTE="luke1889"]

[QUOTE="Dracargen"]The argument is: If religion wasn't used to justify the Crusades, skin color would have been , and so on.Dracargen

I am sorry, sir, but that is simply not true. If there was no religion, those wars would not even have happened.

Yes, they would have, in another form. Or do you deny that people in power tend to have a way of getting what they want?

You misunderstand me. Wars waged over, or in the name of, religion are purely based on the differing religious beliefs and also (as some people seem to think) following the words of holy scriptures.

If there were no religions, these wars would never happen.

Let me ask you this, if there was no land, could a war be waged over land? Exactly.

[QUOTE="luke1889"][QUOTE="ConkerAndBerri2"][QUOTE="luke1889"]

[QUOTE="Dracargen"]The argument is: If religion wasn't used to justify the Crusades, skin color would have been , and so on.A_Tarkovsky

I am sorry, sir, but that is simply not true. If there was no religion, those wars would not even have happened.

Yes, it would. That's exactly my point.

Would you care to enlighten me as to how less wars is a bad thing?

[QUOTE="Dracargen"][QUOTE="luke1889"]

[QUOTE="Dracargen"]The argument is: If religion wasn't used to justify the Crusades, skin color would have been , and so on.luke1889

I am sorry, sir, but that is simply not true. If there was no religion, those wars would not even have happened.

Yes, they would have, in another form. Or do you deny that people in power tend to have a way of getting what they want?

You misunderstand me. Wars waged over, of in the name or, religion are purely based on the differing religious beliefs and also (as some people seem to think) following the words of holy scriptures.

If there were no religions, these wars would never happen.

Let me ask you this, if there was no land, could a war be waged over land? Exactly.

[QUOTE="A_Tarkovsky"][QUOTE="luke1889"][QUOTE="ConkerAndBerri2"][QUOTE="luke1889"]

[QUOTE="Dracargen"]The argument is: If religion wasn't used to justify the Crusades, skin color would have been , and so on.luke1889

I am sorry, sir, but that is simply not true. If there was no religion, those wars would not even have happened.

Yes, it would. That's exactly my point.

Would you care to enlighten me as to how less wars is a bad thing?

[QUOTE="luke1889"][QUOTE="Dracargen"][QUOTE="luke1889"]

[QUOTE="Dracargen"]The argument is: If religion wasn't used to justify the Crusades, skin color would have been , and so on.A_Tarkovsky

I am sorry, sir, but that is simply not true. If there was no religion, those wars would not even have happened.

Yes, they would have, in another form. Or do you deny that people in power tend to have a way of getting what they want?

You misunderstand me. Wars waged over, of in the name or, religion are purely based on the differing religious beliefs and also (as some people seem to think) following the words of holy scriptures.

If there were no religions, these wars would never happen.

Let me ask you this, if there was no land, could a war be waged over land? Exactly.

Sir, you are mocking me. You cannot wage a war over something that does not exist, because you would be fighting for nothing.

EDIT: and also, that would be a war over the ocean, and not the land. By saying that, you only proved my point.

[QUOTE="Dracargen"][QUOTE="luke1889"]

[QUOTE="Dracargen"]The argument is: If religion wasn't used to justify the Crusades, skin color would have been , and so on.luke1889

I am sorry, sir, but that is simply not true. If there was no religion, those wars would not even have happened.

Yes, they would have, in another form. Or do you deny that people in power tend to have a way of getting what they want?

You misunderstand me. Wars waged over, or in the name of, religion are purely based on the differing religious beliefs and also (as some people seem to think) following the words of holy scriptures.

If there were no religions, these wars would never happen.

Let me ask you this, if there was no land, could a war be waged over land? Exactly.

Well i don't think most people actually followed their holy scriptures in regards to war.

[QUOTE="A_Tarkovsky"][QUOTE="luke1889"][QUOTE="Dracargen"][QUOTE="luke1889"]

[QUOTE="Dracargen"]The argument is: If religion wasn't used to justify the Crusades, skin color would have been , and so on.luke1889

I am sorry, sir, but that is simply not true. If there was no religion, those wars would not even have happened.

Yes, they would have, in another form. Or do you deny that people in power tend to have a way of getting what they want?

You misunderstand me. Wars waged over, of in the name or, religion are purely based on the differing religious beliefs and also (as some people seem to think) following the words of holy scriptures.

If there were no religions, these wars would never happen.

Let me ask you this, if there was no land, could a war be waged over land? Exactly.

Sir, you are mocking me. You cannot wage a war over something that does not exist, because you would be fighting for nothing.

EDIT: and also, that would be a war over the ocean, and not the land. By saying that, you only proved my point.

luke1889

[QUOTE="luke1889"][QUOTE="Dracargen"][QUOTE="luke1889"]

[QUOTE="Dracargen"]The argument is: If religion wasn't used to justify the Crusades, skin color would have been , and so on.123625

I am sorry, sir, but that is simply not true. If there was no religion, those wars would not even have happened.

Yes, they would have, in another form. Or do you deny that people in power tend to have a way of getting what they want?

You misunderstand me. Wars waged over, or in the name of, religion are purely based on the differing religious beliefs and also (as some people seem to think) following the words of holy scriptures.

If there were no religions, these wars would never happen.

Let me ask you this, if there was no land, could a war be waged over land? Exactly.

Well i don't think most people actually followed their holy scriptures in regards to war.

And what do you think Al Qaeda fights for? And all the terrorists being "trained" in the Middle East? They're using their religion to kill innocent people.

[QUOTE="luke1889"]

EDIT: and also, that would be a war over the ocean, and not the land. By saying that, you only proved my point.

A_Tarkovsky

Yes you did. I don't deny that people would still fight over other things, but they would not fight over that which does not exist.

So if there was no land, there would never be any wars over land. Sure there could be wars over the ocean, but not the land.

[QUOTE="123625"][QUOTE="luke1889"][QUOTE="Dracargen"][QUOTE="luke1889"]

[QUOTE="Dracargen"]The argument is: If religion wasn't used to justify the Crusades, skin color would have been , and so on.luke1889

I am sorry, sir, but that is simply not true. If there was no religion, those wars would not even have happened.

Yes, they would have, in another form. Or do you deny that people in power tend to have a way of getting what they want?

You misunderstand me. Wars waged over, or in the name of, religion are purely based on the differing religious beliefs and also (as some people seem to think) following the words of holy scriptures.

If there were no religions, these wars would never happen.

Let me ask you this, if there was no land, could a war be waged over land? Exactly.

Well i don't think most people actually followed their holy scriptures in regards to war.

And what do you think Al Qaeda fights for? And all the terrorists being "trained" in the Middle East? They're using their religion to kill innocent people.

[QUOTE="A_Tarkovsky"][QUOTE="luke1889"]

EDIT: and also, that would be a war over the ocean, and not the land. By saying that, you only proved my point.

luke1889

Yes you did. I don't deny that people would still fight over other things, but they would not fight over that which does not exist.

So if there was no land, there would never be any wars over land. Sure there could be wars over the ocean, but not the land.

Yet again, those people against religion try to change the topic to prove the TC wrong. This is a trend I hope doesn't spread, or the people attacking religion will seem like idiots, and I would say that even if I wasn't a Christian.

[QUOTE="luke1889"][QUOTE="A_Tarkovsky"][QUOTE="luke1889"][QUOTE="Dracargen"][QUOTE="luke1889"]

[QUOTE="Dracargen"]The argument is: If religion wasn't used to justify the Crusades, skin color would have been , and so on.A_Tarkovsky

I am sorry, sir, but that is simply not true. If there was no religion, those wars would not even have happened.

Yes, they would have, in another form. Or do you deny that people in power tend to have a way of getting what they want?

You misunderstand me. Wars waged over, of in the name or, religion are purely based on the differing religious beliefs and also (as some people seem to think) following the words of holy scriptures.

If there were no religions, these wars would never happen.

Let me ask you this, if there was no land, could a war be waged over land? Exactly.

Sir, you are mocking me. You cannot wage a war over something that does not exist, because you would be fighting for nothing.

If there were no religions, it would work like this:

Me: I am going to wage a war in the name of religion.

You: What is religion?

Me: never mind.

In fact, I could not even purport such a thing, because, in a world where something would otherwise not exist, it would seem like I'd be waging a war in the name of something I'd just made up on the spot.

[QUOTE="luke1889"][QUOTE="A_Tarkovsky"][QUOTE="luke1889"]

EDIT: and also, that would be a war over the ocean, and not the land. By saying that, you only proved my point.

A_Tarkovsky

Yes you did. I don't deny that people would still fight over other things, but they would not fight over that which does not exist.

So if there was no land, there would never be any wars over land. Sure there could be wars over the ocean, but not the land.

You still misunderstand me.

I said that if there there were no religions, you could not fight a war in the name of religion.

How is that not making sense? I'm not talking about less wars, or wars being waged over other issues. Just that isolated point.

And what do you think Al Qaeda fights for? And all the terrorists being "trained" in the Middle East? They're using their religion to kill innocent people.luke1889

Of course all religions are comparable.

And im assuming you know Islam then, tell me where in the religion itself, it teaches to kill unbleivers.

My point is that people who kill for religion, do it in name only. Not becuase they follow the scripture.

[QUOTE="A_Tarkovsky"][QUOTE="luke1889"][QUOTE="A_Tarkovsky"][QUOTE="luke1889"]

EDIT: and also, that would be a war over the ocean, and not the land. By saying that, you only proved my point.

luke1889

Yes you did. I don't deny that people would still fight over other things, but they would not fight over that which does not exist.

So if there was no land, there would never be any wars over land. Sure there could be wars over the ocean, but not the land.

You still misunderstand me.

I said that if there there were no religions, you could not fight a war in the name of religion.

How is that not making sense? I'm not talking about less wars, or wars being waged over other issues. Just that isolated point.

[QUOTE="luke1889"]And what do you think Al Qaeda fights for? And all the terrorists being "trained" in the Middle East? They're using their religion to kill innocent people.123625

Of course all religions are comparable.

And im assuming you know Islam then, tell me where in the religion itself, it teaches to kill unbleivers.

My point is that people who kill for religion, do it in name only. Not becuase they follow the scripture.

The minds behind the training contort the meaning of the scriptures and teach others that that is corrct. It's brainwashing; there's no denying that.

I do appreciate that I am speaking for a minority, but the fact still remains that they are killing in the name of Islam.

And the crazy thing is, you yourself will know all too well that scriptures are very open to interpretation. Consequently, there's nothing to say that they're more right or wrong than anyone else's take on it.

[QUOTE="luke1889"][QUOTE="A_Tarkovsky"][QUOTE="luke1889"][QUOTE="A_Tarkovsky"][QUOTE="luke1889"]

EDIT: and also, that would be a war over the ocean, and not the land. By saying that, you only proved my point.

A_Tarkovsky

Yes you did. I don't deny that people would still fight over other things, but they would not fight over that which does not exist.

So if there was no land, there would never be any wars over land. Sure there could be wars over the ocean, but not the land.

You still misunderstand me.

I said that if there there were no religions, you could not fight a war in the name of religion.

How is that not making sense? I'm not talking about less wars, or wars being waged over other issues. Just that isolated point.

Technically, there could be less wars. We already have had wars over land, over the ocean, over oil, over most things that you can wage a war over. So if you remove one of the motivations for war, the total figure should decrease. All of the others would still continue, but one would not.

[QUOTE="123625"]

[QUOTE="luke1889"]And what do you think Al Qaeda fights for? And all the terrorists being "trained" in the Middle East? They're using their religion to kill innocent people.luke1889

Of course all religions are comparable.

And im assuming you know Islam then, tell me where in the religion itself, it teaches to kill unbleivers.

My point is that people who kill for religion, do it in name only. Not becuase they follow the scripture.

The minds behind the training contort the meaning of the scriptures and teach others that that is corrct. It's brainwashing; there's no denying that.

I do appreciate that I am speaking for a minority, but the fact still remains that they are killing in the name of Islam.

And the crazy thing is, you yourself will know all too well that scriptures are very open to interpretation. Consequently, there's nothing to say that they're more right or wrong than anyone else's take on it.

While they kill in the name. They won't always be doing what the scripture is telling them to do. And a majority of Muslims would tend to dissagree with you.

I'll assume you know Islam and its teachings to say its not wrong.

I don't like the fact that it's the cause of ANY war, to be honest...jointed

So you want to get rid of anything that's ever caused a war? Well, race has caused more, so I guess we should dispel all human variations :roll:

[QUOTE="luke1889"][QUOTE="123625"]

[QUOTE="luke1889"]And what do you think Al Qaeda fights for? And all the terrorists being "trained" in the Middle East? They're using their religion to kill innocent people.123625

Of course all religions are comparable.

And im assuming you know Islam then, tell me where in the religion itself, it teaches to kill unbleivers.

My point is that people who kill for religion, do it in name only. Not becuase they follow the scripture.

The minds behind the training contort the meaning of the scriptures and teach others that that is corrct. It's brainwashing; there's no denying that.

I do appreciate that I am speaking for a minority, but the fact still remains that they are killing in the name of Islam.

And the crazy thing is, you yourself will know all too well that scriptures are very open to interpretation. Consequently, there's nothing to say that they're more right or wrong than anyone else's take on it.

While they kill in the name. They won't always be doing what the scripture is telling them to do. And a majority of Muslims would tend to dissagree with you.

I'll assume you know Islam and its teachings to say its not wrong.

Let me ask you a similar question to the one I asked earlier.

If there was no Islam, could you kill in its name?

[QUOTE="jointed"]I don't like the fact that it's the cause of ANY war, to be honest...Kritical_Strike

So you want to get rid of anything that's ever caused a war? Well, race has caused more, so I guess we should dispel all human variations :roll:

Your comparison is disjointed. There is much difference between religious beliefs and a person's skin colour. One being inherent and one being not.

Let me ask you a similar question to the one I asked earlier.

If there was no Islam, could you kill in its name?

luke1889

Well of course you couldn't IF there was no Islam.

But then that leaves the possibility for other wars, based on other reasons that COULD of happened.

War wouldn't be any less with or without.

Maybe there could be more, because most religions say not to kill. But while im not sure on Islam, im sure there is a similar message in there, no? Religion could also be restraining people from war. Just a possibility.

God loves you.

[QUOTE="Kritical_Strike"]

[QUOTE="jointed"]I don't like the fact that it's the cause of ANY war, to be honest...luke1889

So you want to get rid of anything that's ever caused a war? Well, race has caused more, so I guess we should dispel all human variations :roll:

Your comparison is disjointed. There is much difference between religious beliefs and a person's skin colour. One being inherent and one being not.

Money, nationalism, self-preservation, resources....all have resulted in more wars than Religion has (individually). If Religion is evil because it's caused 7% of all wars, they those who are following this logic should find all of the above examples more evil, and should be looking to abolish them.

For example, your national orientation is NOT inherent, and this pride for one's country has almost certainly caused more wars that religion. So, shouldn't we abolish pride for one's country? Or abolish seperate countries all together? No, because we should not blame patriotism for these wars, rather, we should blame the fools who misuse it.

The same applies to religion: it is not religion that is evil, but those who misuse it.

[QUOTE="luke1889"]Let me ask you a similar question to the one I asked earlier.

If there was no Islam, could you kill in its name?

123625

Well of course you couldn't IF there was no Islam.

But then that leaves the possibility for other wars, based on other reasons that COULD of happened.

War wouldn't be any less with or without.

Maybe there could be more, because most religions say not to kill. But while im not sure on Islam, im sure there is a similar message in there, no? Religion could also be restraining people from war. Just a possibility.

As to the part I have bolded, I'm glad that someone has seen the point I was making.

I appreciate that most, if not all, religions teach not to kill, but I would be willing to wager that no religion would reduce the amount of conflict, especially in the present and future. Most of the wars over land and sea have come and gone; we have well established borders now. Sure, there's still the odd one here and there, but nothing like there used to be.

Let us not forget that I don't think we get morals from religion. So you can probably appreciate where my view on this stems from.

[QUOTE="luke1889"][QUOTE="Kritical_Strike"]

[QUOTE="jointed"]I don't like the fact that it's the cause of ANY war, to be honest...Kritical_Strike

So you want to get rid of anything that's ever caused a war? Well, race has caused more, so I guess we should dispel all human variations :roll:

Your comparison is disjointed. There is much difference between religious beliefs and a person's skin colour. One being inherent and one being not.

Money, nationalism, self-preservation, resources....all have resulted in more wars than Religion has (individually). If Religion is evil because it's caused 7% of all wars, they those who are following this logic should find all of the above examples more evil, and should be looking to abolish them.

For example, your national orientation is NOT inherent, and this pride for one's country has almost certainly caused more wars that religion. So, shouldn't we abolish pride for one's country? Or abolish seperate countries all together? No, because we should not blame patriotism for these wars, rather, we should blame the fools who misuse it.

The same applies to religion: it is not religion that is evil, but those who misuse it.

Only that last bit is actually relevent to my train of thought. If it did not exist, it could not be misused.

[QUOTE="Kritical_Strike"][QUOTE="luke1889"][QUOTE="Kritical_Strike"]

[QUOTE="jointed"]I don't like the fact that it's the cause of ANY war, to be honest...luke1889

So you want to get rid of anything that's ever caused a war? Well, race has caused more, so I guess we should dispel all human variations :roll:

Your comparison is disjointed. There is much difference between religious beliefs and a person's skin colour. One being inherent and one being not.

Money, nationalism, self-preservation, resources....all have resulted in more wars than Religion has (individually). If Religion is evil because it's caused 7% of all wars, they those who are following this logic should find all of the above examples more evil, and should be looking to abolish them.

For example, your national orientation is NOT inherent, and this pride for one's country has almost certainly caused more wars that religion. So, shouldn't we abolish pride for one's country? Or abolish seperate countries all together? No, because we should not blame patriotism for these wars, rather, we should blame the fools who misuse it.

The same applies to religion: it is not religion that is evil, but those who misuse it.

Only that last bit is actually relevent to my train of thought. If it did not exist, it could not be misused.

So you're saying it shouldn't exist?

[QUOTE="123625"][QUOTE="luke1889"]Let me ask you a similar question to the one I asked earlier.

If there was no Islam, could you kill in its name?

luke1889

Well of course you couldn't IF there was no Islam.

But then that leaves the possibility for other wars, based on other reasons that COULD of happened.

War wouldn't be any less with or without.

Maybe there could be more, because most religions say not to kill. But while im not sure on Islam, im sure there is a similar message in there, no? Religion could also be restraining people from war. Just a possibility.

As to the part I have bolded, I'm glad that someone has seen the point I was making.

I appreciate that most, if not all, religions teach not to kill, but I would be willing to wager that no religion would reduce the amount of conflict, especially in the present and future. Most of the wars over land and sea have come and gone; we have well established borders now. Sure, there's still the odd one here and there, but nothing like there used to be.

Let us not forget that I don't think we get morals from religion. So you can probably appreciate where my view on this stems from.

All this basically means is that its the people who misuse the religion are the wrong ones. Not the religions fault.

So you're saying it shouldn't exist?

Kritical_Strike

In a word: yes.

And if you're going to tell me that religion gives people morals and, without it, the world would be plunged into chaos and sin...just don't.

[QUOTE="luke1889"][QUOTE="123625"][QUOTE="luke1889"]Let me ask you a similar question to the one I asked earlier.

If there was no Islam, could you kill in its name?

123625

Well of course you couldn't IF there was no Islam.

But then that leaves the possibility for other wars, based on other reasons that COULD of happened.

War wouldn't be any less with or without.

Maybe there could be more, because most religions say not to kill. But while im not sure on Islam, im sure there is a similar message in there, no? Religion could also be restraining people from war. Just a possibility.

As to the part I have bolded, I'm glad that someone has seen the point I was making.

I appreciate that most, if not all, religions teach not to kill, but I would be willing to wager that no religion would reduce the amount of conflict, especially in the present and future. Most of the wars over land and sea have come and gone; we have well established borders now. Sure, there's still the odd one here and there, but nothing like there used to be.

Let us not forget that I don't think we get morals from religion. So you can probably appreciate where my view on this stems from.

All this basically means is that its the people who misuse the religion are the wrong ones. Not the religions fault.

Yes, but if it did not exist, it could not be misused.

ahaha look at these kids discussing religion like they know what they be talking about

Yes, but if it did not exist, it could not be misused.luke1889

Arguing if it did or didn't exist is not a good argument.

Mainly because many things could of happened, if it didn't exist.

There could be more or there could be less.

For example.

Two billion people follow Jesus, he teaches not to kill. But if he didn't, would there be more or less wars or conflicts?

Same with hundreds of other religions that promote peace. What would be holding them back?

There could be quite possibly more wars than ever.

[QUOTE="Kritical_Strike"]

So you're saying it shouldn't exist?

luke1889

In a word: yes.

And if you're going to tell me that religion gives people morals and, without it, the world would be plunged into chaos and sin...just don't.

Sorry for the comparison but...

Car accidents kill thousands, if not millions each year, but no one wants to abolish the automobile. For some people, it's just a necessity and removing it from their lives would be unthinkable.

There's certainly other reasons you might want religion to dissappear, maybe you think it's full of lies, or a waste of time, or an improper way to acknowledge a higher power? But claiming religion needs to dissappear because it's caused 7% of all the wars in history is ridiculous. I repeat: Would you like to abolish all nations? Because the divisions seperating these countries causes a hell of a lot of wars.

[QUOTE="luke1889"]Yes, but if it did not exist, it could not be misused.123625

Arguing if it did or didn't exist is not a good argument.

Mainly because many things could of happened, if it didn't exist.

There could be more or there could be less.

For example.

Two billion people follow Jesus, he teaches not to kill. But if he didn't, would there be more or less wars or conflicts?

Same with hundreds of other religions that promote peace. What would be holding them back?

There could be quite possibly more wars than ever.

Because you assume that religion is what sets the moral standard, I cannot really discuss this much further.