Wars of Religion

[Castel]

I'll say it this way then, very rarely is religion "the spark" that lights a war. Do some people who want to create a big roaring war fire dump religion on to use it as fuel? undoubtably. I'll certainly give you that.

Fair enough.

But I think that there's always another problem. Religion now isn't as it is then. Imagine I'm a Catholic (or Arab polytheist) prince with a Protestant (Monotheistic Muslim) court and rivals elsewhere. Imagine that said people want a leader of their own in power. Imagine I took steps to prevent this and joined with other Catholic leaders to keep our opposition from attacking or undermining us. Would you say that religion was the cause of the problems or practical concerns? Was religion a just a pretext or an important factor in all our machinations? That's the issue as far as I can see and it's what I can't get past. How you feel will determine your slant.

And now that this thread is hopelessly derailed, the timer starts on how long it takes to get locked.

[Naathi Prince]

Fair enough.

But I think that there's always another problem. Religion now isn't as it is then. Imagine I'm a Catholic (or Arab polytheist) prince with a Protestant (Monotheistic Muslim) court and rivals elsewhere. Imagine that said people want a leader of their own in power. Imagine I took steps to prevent this and joined with other Catholic leaders to keep our opposition from attacking or undermining us. Would you say that religion was the cause of the problems or practical concerns? Was religion a just a pretext or an important factor in all our machinations? That's the issue as far as I can see and it's what I can't get past. How you feel will determine your slant.

And now that this thread is hopelessly derailed, the timer starts on how long it takes until it gets locked...

lol yep. This is kind of a hypothetical, so I'll use a real example in post Henry VII England. Protestantism, both in Germany and England, was popular mainly with people like Lord Baelish. The reasons being primarily that they could supplant the current ruling class. Anne Boleyn's family quite literally did exactly this.

In general tho, I subscribe to the "some people just like killing people, and most people don't care either way" theory. People are less likely to kill each other now because the consequences are higher and so are the weapons.

[LuisDantas]

Not so much religion itself as the use of religion as an excuse for immoral behavior. Melisandre is the most obvious example, but the Queen's Men are if anything worse.

The faiths themselves coexisted in peace for millenia in Westeros. Even R'hllor was preached by Thoros with hardly any incident. Braavos sort of makes a point of respecting all worships as well.

The analogy with the War of the Roses and other real-world conflicts does not seem to me to extend far beyond the characterizations of some of the main characters and the general concepts of monarchy, fealty and succession. And I want to point out that the 30 years war was between Catholics and Protestants, religions far more alike than unlike. That alone breaks the parallel with Westeros, where the Old Gods are largely Paganism; R'hllor is basically neopentecostalism; and the Faith of the Seven is essencially sane Christianism.

[LordBloodraven]

"non-riling up the peasants reasons" is a pretty big disclaimed. Bran the Cute already pointed out that the thirty years war had nothing to do with religion and everything to do with the French-Spanish royal family fight. The others are dubious as well. I can make a longer response here, but then we're no longer talking ASOIAF.

and the crusades....ww1, britain fought germany because it saw germany uniting europe under its banner. Is it really ought of the range of possibility that the European nobles in the middle ages saw the muslims in the same fashion? They were expanding constantly and deposing local power structures, they saw themselves as next and launched a counter offensive under the banner of the only person who could command the loyalty of all of them, the Pope.

You'll never disentangle the religion causes from the more political ones. The Thirty Years War is as caused by religions than by political rivalries between the Bourbons and the Habsburgs. You cannot discard the religious factor: that war started found its causes in the adhesion of german princes to Lutheranism. Afterwards, many other factors just added itself on it. And so is the French Wars of Religions which is a good example of the difficulty to dissociate religious factors from self-interested/political ones. One prominent French calvinist, De Mornay Duplessis, wrote in one of his pamphlets that when a king is in the wrong way, it is a duty for nobles and officers of the state to depose him, and at worst to kill him. Henry de Navarre and other ambitious noblemen seized that religious sanction to further their agendas: some of those who backed them were deeply fanatical while others were just seeking a fortune but at the end, France suffered from 30 years of Civil War.

It's hard to find a single cause for any war.

[Naathi Prince]

You'll never disentangle the religion causes from the more political ones. The Thirty Years War is as caused by religions than by political rivalries between the Bourbons and the Habsburgs. You cannot discard the religious factor: that war started found its causes in the adhesion of german princes to Lutheranism. Afterwards, many other factors just added itself on it. And so is the French Wars of Religions which is a good example of the difficulty to dissociate religious factors from self-interested/political ones. One prominent French calvinist, De Mornay Duplessis, wrote in one of his pamphlets that when a king is in the wrong way, it is a duty for nobles and officers of the state to depose him, and at worst to kill him. Henry de Navarre and other ambitious noblemen seized that religious sanction to further their agendas: some of those who backed them were deeply fanatical while others were just seeking a fortune but at the end, France suffered from 30 years of Civil War.

It's hard to find a single cause for any war.

I agree with this statement.

[The Crow's Eye]

You'll never disentangle the religion causes from the more political ones. The Thirty Years War is as caused by religions than by political rivalries between the Bourbons and the Habsburgs. You cannot discard the religious factor: that war started found its causes in the adhesion of german princes to Lutheranism. Afterwards, many other factors just added itself on it. And so is the French Wars of Religions which is a good example of the difficulty to dissociate religious factors from self-interested/political ones. One prominent French calvinist, De Mornay Duplessis, wrote in one of his pamphlets that when a king is in the wrong way, it is a duty for nobles and officers of the state to depose him, and at worst to kill him. Henry de Navarre and other ambitious noblemen seized that religious sanction to further their agendas: some of those who backed them were deeply fanatical while others were just seeking a fortune but at the end, France suffered from 30 years of Civil War.

It's hard to find a single cause for any war.

Thank you. Why hasn't someone said this before?

[Castel]

Not so much religion itself as the use of religion as an excuse for immoral behavior. Melisandre is the most obvious example, but the Queen's Men are if anything worse.

But this doesn't seem to ring true in Mel's case imo. We have no indication that she was after power or a murderer before she came to Westeros and got caught up in Stannis' claim. I think she's more of an example of what happens when people are led to believe -even rightly- that some event will lead to total suffering skyrocketing just before the world ends, in which case a logical argument can be made for literally any action that seeks to prevent it.

[SerStinger]

First off, 70% was not an accurate number.

Secondly, even if religion is simply an excuse, that doesn't condone religion. Why religion can be such a good excuse for starting the wars? Why does it have such a huge potential for being misused? Imagine the generals and the commanders are doing it simply for power. What about the soldiers? The people who support the war effort? If religion is used to brainwash people, and it is, that proves that religion is harmful to the humanity. Only religion can provide the motivation for someone to do evil things such as that.

Thirdly, even if we say that religion is not responsible for the most the wars, that would still take off an inch of the mountain of the evils of religion. Religion is the cause or the main supporter of ignorance, bigotry, lack of critical thinking, sexual prudence, child abuse, rape (in the form of arranged marriages), opposition to science, etc etc. If I want to put it in a nutshell, religion creates slaves. Religious people have a slave mentality. (That also answers the poster who said then what about Buddhism and Quakers). We need people who value critical thinking over faith, freedom over unnecessary taboos, and skepticism over certainty.

Now, are there NO religious people who are like that? There are, but judge for yourself, (1) are they numerous? (2) can you really call them religious? Because if someone says God is energy or is a deist, s/he is not really religious.

By the way, can we really say that Melly is using religion as an excuse? We have had her POV, and we know she sincerely believes in the shit she does. If she was not a religious nut she would be a great character. She's nice and charismatic and able, but dies evil things because she thinks those evil things are the right thing to do.

[The Last Giant]

The best evidence any of us have is the wars that are happening today.

All wars currently being waged have at least one highly religious side

[Stannis the Stern]

People need to understand that religion isn't a single monolithic thing, it has been used for despicable acts of human nature but it has also been used as tool for good. The first and second world war weren't caused by religions but on political and secular levels and thus was the cause of 60 million deaths.

[SerStinger]

People need to understand that religion isn't a single monolithic thing, it has been used for despicable acts of human nature but it has also been used as tool for good.

You also have to understand that do understand this. But we also have a scale, and we can compare the good it has done to the evil it has done. All evil ideologies have some good parts as well. Plus, if religion is destroyed it doesn't mean the good things it does will be stopped. Imagine charity for example. An atheist and a religious person are both able to donate to charity. But only a religious person can kill someone because they ridiculed a prophet. Religion is the evils of religion, the good parts come from humanity and will survive.

[Scipio Africanus]

WellI wanted to point out that throughout history very few wars were actually purely fueled by religion as the casus beli, but others already pointed that out. Religion is however a great tool to motivate soldiers to die for your cause, I'd say it's the best there is. One thing dying for an invisible line on the map (your country) or your sovereign whome you don't personally know or have ever talked to, but to die and be sent to heaven is a much more attractive stimulus.

As for ASOFAI I don't think there will be a major religious war but I do see the Faith Militant guys clashing with followers of the Red God at some point.

[Irri's Bear]

I really didn't want this to become a debate on the pro's and cons of religion. But as to the possibilities of a religious conflict in Westeros. Sigh...

[Stannis the Stern]

You also have to understand that do understand this.

I am flabbergasted what you just typed there.

But only a religious person can kill someone because they ridiculed a prophet.

But isn't that really the same with everything though. People kill people in the name of their ideas whether religious or not. It's human nature.

Religion is the evils of religion, the good parts come from humanity and will survive.

That I completely agree on.

[Stannis the Stern]

I really didn't want this to become a debate on the pro's and cons of religion. But as to the possibilities of a religious conflict in Westeros. Sigh...

lulz! Funny how everyone gets carried away.

[The Storm Queen]

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)

Yep, even the 30 years war cannot be called an religious war imho. It started as such but keep in mind that in the end Catholic France was fighting the Catholic Holy Roman Empire together with Protestant Sweden.

I am an atheist and I really would love to believe that religion is the reason for war and hate against certain groups and that its absence is enought to guarantee peace. But honestly, there is no serious political science theory that claims this.

I do believe that religion can faciliate the dehumanization of other humans who are not part of your group. But I do not believe that this is enough to explain war as a whole.

Concerning the OP: I discussed a few months ago here and pointed out that the High Septon reminded me of Savanarola in Italy. So I do not believe that there will be a war per se but it is entirely possible that we will see the rise of an anti-establishment movement in KL (and possibly the Crown Lands and the Riverlands) that somehow affects the storyline in the South. Especially the Lannister, the Tyrells and later Dany I can see affected by this.

[SerStinger]

I am flabbergasted what you just typed there.

I just missed a word. You also have to understand that we do understand this.

But isn't that really the same with everything though. People kill people in the name of their ideas whether religious or not. It's human nature.

I won't kill in the name of my ideas because I'm not sure if my ideas are right. Yes, people kill for nationalism and communism and other evil ideologies as well. But no one kills for critical thinking. The problem is with ignorance, rigidity and intolerance. Religion is the deification of ignorance, rigidity and intolerance. Therefore it's even worse than those.

[Fire and Blood!]

I won't kill in the name of my ideas because I'm not sure if my ideas are right. Yes, people kill for nationalism and communism and other evil ideologies as well. But no one kills for critical thinking. The problem is with ignorance, rigidity and intolerance. Religion is the deification of ignorance, rigidity and intolerance. Therefore it's even worse than those.

Judging by you atheists nowadays have become more intolerant than religios people and if you ask me atheism is synonymous to immorality.

[SerStinger]

Judging by you atheists nowadays have become more intolerant than religios people and if you ask me atheism is synonymous to immorality.

What have I done which is intolerant? I have posted my opinions on an internet forum. I may go on to write them in a book or give speeches. I haven't passed laws prohibiting religious thought and practice, I haven't blown up myself, I haven't tortured anyone, I haven't maimed the penis of any children. How can expressing an opinion can be a sign of intolerance?

Of course, a tolerant atheist is the one who is too cowardly and shuts up. Any atheist who speaks the truth is labeled and called intolerant or extremist.

[Fire and Blood!]

What have I done which is intolerant? I have posted my opinions on an internet forum. I may go on to write them in a book or give speeches. I haven't passed laws prohibiting religious thought and practice, I haven't blown up myself, I haven't tortured anyone, I haven't maimed the penis of any children. How can expressing an opinion can be a sign of intolerance?

Of course, a tolerant atheist is the one who is too cowardly and shuts up. Any atheist who speaks the truth is labeled and called intolerant or extremist.

As far as I know there are no laws against atheinsm also,I haven't heard of anyone being tortured because of religion, pople who blow themselves are just idiots and they do it not because thair religion demands it but because thei see it as a means to wage war.As for circumcision(which I myself am strongly against) there are people who do it evef if it's not part of thair religion.Expressing oponion is not intlerant yet I have never heard anyone religious speaking against atheism while on the other hand almost every atheist I have met speeks against religion and how it shouldn't exist, that is why I say atheists are more intolerant.