Ice Turtle Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 I really can't see the North and South as one kingdom as long as the Faith is armed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fire Eater Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 MUST.... RESIST.... TEMPTATION..... TO START.... A DEBATE.... ON RELIGION......*stabs self, burns self*Whoo, that's better.NO IT'S ACTUALLY RELIGION WHICH KILLS PEOPLE. THOSE WHO STARTED THE CRUSADES, THOSE WHO FLEW THOSE PLAINS INTO TWIN TOWERS, THOSE WHO COMMITTED THE HOLOCAUST, WOULD HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO REASON TO DO SUCH THINGS IF THEY DIDN'T THINK A FAIRY TALE GOD HAD TOLD THEM TO DO SO. REMOVE RELIGION FROM HISTORY AND 70% OF THE WARS AND TORTURES AND EVILS WOULD BE GONE, BECAUSE THE MOTIVE BEHIND THEM IS RELIGION AND ABSOLUTELY NOTHING ELSE.See? I couldn't help it. I need to go to shrink. "hey doc! I'm addicted to pointing out that people's evil superstitions are evil".If religion is meant to spur conflict then how do you explain Quakers and Buddhists?I thought most wars were started for political reasons. This was true even with the Crusades, which was started when the Byzantine emperor asked for help from the Pope in defending his imperial borders. It also was seen as a way to deal with the problem of too many knights for too little land in Europe, and for every pious man that went solely to fight for religion there were ten men who went mainly in hopes of plunder of the fabled riches in the east and lands of their own. As for the Holocaust, Jews weren't the only victims but Gypsies, homosexuals, handicapped, etc. They weren't killed in the name of Christianity, but in the name of Nazism and the Aryan race.As to the OP, Stannis's army will be made up of worshipers of R'hollor and the Old Gods, meaning the Faith will come into conflict with them. Cersei might convince the HS to fight Stannis in attempt to do what the Andals couldn't do: supplant the Old Gods in the North with the Seven. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Castel Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 If religion is meant to spur conflict then how do you explain Quakers and Buddhists?Religion =/= all religion. Besides, we all know that when people speak they're generally talking about Judeo-Christian beliefs.The whole thing started when someone made the claim that "people kill people" a very weird, if true answer that doesn't take into account the fact that religion and other irrationalities like racism don't require people to be rational actors before going to war. Look at the current High Septon, does he look like he needs a reason to go after Stannis and his men?To claim that people fight wars and that religion is just an excuse seems to ignore the very real value it has in people's lives and tries to create justifications for things when sometimes the answer really is as simple as trying to kill someone and take their land because they believe in a different god. This is putting aside that certain things would be far more difficult without a centralised head of religion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jarl the climber Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 This is how I see things breaking down. The worshipers of the Old Gods will fight to protect their heart trees but so far they seem the least militant of the Faiths. So far they have ignored Mels burning of the Godswood at Storms End. Aeron the head honcho of the Drowned Men wants to lead a revivla because he senses a great crisis is coming and only the restoration of the Old Ways can hope to meet it.Mel a R'hollor preistess, who George has recently confirmed is acting on her own agenda outside of the heirarchy of her church, is intolerant to other religions and has desecrated Godswoods and Septs as well as burning people who protested these acts. Many of her coreligionists in Essos see Dany as AA and might tag along with her if she goes to Westeros. You have Thoros who has been tolerant to other religions and mostly gained converts by his actions and miracles.Then you have the Fatih Militant. They seem to be more of a reactionary movement, that seems strongest in the Riverlands and the Crownlands. They seem to be intersted in protecting the smallfolk and perhaps in the long term bringing about a reigious revival that improves the piety of noble and baseborn alike. The actions of Thoros in the Riverlands and his protection of the peasantry and the fact that he was making converts put pressure on the Faith to take a more radical stance or lose credibility and followers. I don't think the Faith really has a big problem with Thoros, and his followers are people they want to win back over not kill. Mel has gone beyond the pale and can not be reconciled but shes kind of in a remote area outside of main population centers. There is a Red Temple in Sunspear and Oldtown. If Dany is followed to Westreros by 100,000 foriegn fanatics thats when you reach the tipping point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
E-Ro Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 Hitler was not an aetheist, that is a lie spread by the church to demonise us, and make us look bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jarl the climber Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 Hitler was not an aetheist, that is a lie spread by the church to demonise us, and make us look bad.Hitler had a sort of weird Norse belief system it wasn't really fleshed out, I think Mein Kampf was supposed to replace the bible. He did not beleive in the christian god however. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
E-Ro Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 Hitler had a sort of weird Norse belief system it wasn't really fleshed out, I think Mein Kampf was supposed to replace the bible. He did not beleive in the christian god however.Regardless the lie was spread by the christian church. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chaircat Meow Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 Most people in Westeros don't seem to care enough about religion to cause a religious war, imo.Most people seem more bemused than offended at Stannis' 'conversion' (in the south anyway) and I can't see a religious war happening in the North. The faith is a bit more powerful now in KL, but it has no religious rivals there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Naathi Prince Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 MUST.... RESIST.... TEMPTATION..... TO START.... A DEBATE.... ON RELIGION......*stabs self, burns self*Whoo, that's better.NO IT'S ACTUALLY RELIGION WHICH KILLS PEOPLE. THOSE WHO STARTED THE CRUSADES, THOSE WHO FLEW THOSE PLAINS INTO TWIN TOWERS, THOSE WHO COMMITTED THE HOLOCAUST, WOULD HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO REASON TO DO SUCH THINGS IF THEY DIDN'T THINK A FAIRY TALE GOD HAD TOLD THEM TO DO SO. REMOVE RELIGION FROM HISTORY AND 70% OF THE WARS AND TORTURES AND EVILS WOULD BE GONE, BECAUSE THE MOTIVE BEHIND THEM IS RELIGION AND ABSOLUTELY NOTHING ELSE.See? I couldn't help it. I need to go to shrink. "hey doc! I'm addicted to pointing out that people's evil superstitions are evil".tell that to genghis khan. I'm sure he killed people to spread his religion. Alexander the great too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
E-Ro Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 tell that to genghis khan. I'm sure he killed people to spread his religion. Alexander the great too.Did you miss the 70% part? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Castel Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 tell that to genghis khan. I'm sure he killed people to spread his religion. Alexander the great too.He said 70%. Do Genghis Khan and Alexander have some magical quality that prevents them from being in the 30%? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Naathi Prince Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 Did you miss the 70% part?still isn't true. Stalin and Mao were super religious too. and napoleon! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Naathi Prince Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 He said 70%. Do Genghis Khan and Alexander have some magical quality that prevents them from being in the 30%?no, they just happen to be the world's biggest butchers, how about Shaka Zulu, I'm sure he was fighting for religious purposes. War is about power. Nothing else. Do people sometimes use religion to justify their power grabs? Of course. Are there religious nuts that don't care about power and only their faith? Sure. but 70% of the time, the war is not about religion, its about increasing one's own power. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Castel Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 still isn't true. Stalin and Mao were super religious too. and napoleon!Now you're just being silly. Regardless of what you feel about the claim naming 5 generals does not disprove it in the slightest, Fire Eater did more to refute it without naming one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chaircat Meow Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 Most wars have nothing to do with religion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
E-Ro Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 no, they just happen to be the world's biggest butchers, how about Shaka Zulu, I'm sure he was fighting for religious purposes.War is about power. Nothing else. Do people sometimes use religion to justify their power grabs? Of course. Are there religious nuts that don't care about power and only their faith? Sure. but 70% of the time, the war is not about religion, its about increasing one's own power.This right here is the problem, religion condones rape, torture and killing, opression of women and other ridiculous things. It gives people a reason to do horrible things without feeling bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chaircat Meow Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 Now you're just being silly. Regardless of what you feel about the claim naming 5 generals does not disprove it in the slightest, Fire Eater did more to refute it without naming one.That's true, although the claim itself also was unsupported. I've no idea where this 70% comes from. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Naathi Prince Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 Now you're just being silly. Regardless of what you feel about the claim naming 5 generals does not disprove it in the slightest, Fire Eater did more to refute it without naming one.No, I'm sure noting that most of the world's most famous warriors didn't give two figs about religion and never did has nothing to do with whether religion starts 70% of the world's wars. fire eater is right, however. The 20th century is probably the bloodiest in history and the wars were fought over totalitarian ideas, no faith. While there were certainly wars of faith (the thirty years war comes to mind) they represent a small minority. after all, whats 30 years compared to 100 years (the war between england and france that had nothing to do with religion) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Castel Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 War is about power. Nothing else. Do people sometimes use religion to justify their power grabs? Of course. Are there religious nuts that don't care about power and only their faith? Sure. but 70% of the time, the war is not about religion, its about increasing one's own power.I was defending his assertion less because I think 70% is accurate and more to deal with statements like this. I think this is terribly wrong and naive, not least because you contradict yourself almost immediately. War is exclusively about power yet some people wage it for religious purposes? That makes no sense. Some people do indeed fight because they feel they have some sort of religious or cultural superiority and claim if not outright duty, pretending otherwise is strange. True, power absolutely plays a part, but so does religion.I dislike oversimplifications in the name of protecting the image of Group X. It's like claiming that crime is about lazy people, or economic factors. Nothing else. You may be right sometimes, but by oversimplifying you can also end up wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Naathi Prince Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 This right here is the problem, religion condones rape, torture and killing, opression of women and other ridiculous things. It gives people a reason to do horrible things without feeling bad.religions are different. My faith has never condoned rape or torture, and most cultures throughout history have condoned killing in certain circumstances (and the oppression of women). Plenty of things give people justification to do wrong things. Religion also gives people impetus to do right as well. its not as simple as you'd like it to be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.