Wars of Religion

[Naathi Prince]

Indeed.Which leads right back to the main problem of this thread. If you tie religious matters into your secular power structure you can't really seperate them from each other. It's quite possible to be both religiously and practically motivated.

Some institutions are more slanted towards "evil" than others simply by their very nature. One could even make the argument that said nature weeds out everyone not willing to play the game the way they want.

Also:

By SerStinger himself.

Then why say it? A universities evil? how about schools? plenty of child abuse going on in both of these two places we've regretfully learned. It is people that are evil, the structures we create for ourselves are simply flawed.

[SerStinger]

no, you just made the unsubstantiated claim that it causes 70% of the wars. Institutions in and of themselves aren't good or evil, its the people who run them that make them so.

70 was a random number to mean "the great majority". You can hang on you want on an exaggeration I made in a comedic post, but it won't change the truth. Most wars are either started because of religion or people are sent to the frontline after being brainwashed by religion. I made a mistake. Happy? And it depends on what institution. If it's an ideological institution, it changes the people.

Exactly. Religion in itself is actually good. Love your neighbor, your enemy, take care of other people etc. It's the people that ruin its practice who make religion looks bad.

I'm sorry but a religion is not that. It's "you will go to hell if you disagree with me". Bible and Koran are much more full of hatred towards other than those superficial kind lines. I suggest you read them. Take a look here: http://skepticsannot...uelty/long.html

The truth is exactly the opposite of that. Good people do evil things because of religion. Mother Teresa was a good person, but she was extremely bigoted. Take away religion and she would be a good person.

A universities evil? how about schools?

The difference is, schools and universities don't have scriptures and ideologies and they don't separate people into different groups. They are not ideological.

[Naathi Prince]

70 was a random number to mean "the great majority". You can hang on you want on an exaggeration I made in a comedic post, but it won't change the truth. Most wars are either started because of religion or people are sent to the frontline after being brainwashed by religion. And it depends on what institution. If it's an ideological institution, it changes the people.

I'm sorry but a religion is not that. It's "you will go to hell if you disagree with me". Bible and Koran are much more full of hatred towards other than those superficial kind lines. I suggest you read them. Take a look here: http://skepticsannot...uelty/long.html

The truth is exactly the opposite of that. Good people do evil things because of religion. Mother Teresa was a good person, but she was extremely bigoted. Take away religion and she would be a good person.

The difference is, schools and universities don't have scriptures and ideologies and they don't separate people into different groups. They are not ideological.

We've already shown you that most wars aren't primarily instigated by religion. I even challenged people to give me a major conflict started solely by religion. Most of the world's great empires (who cause the most conflict) didn't care about religion. Take away religion, and Mother Teresa isn't Mother Teresa, she doesn't go to india and she doesn't help all those people.

[Castel]

Then why say it? A universities evil? how about schools? plenty of child abuse going on in both of these two places we've regretfully learned. It is people that are evil, the structures we create for ourselves are simply flawed.

Take the Westerosi Knights. Do you think that a hardcore pacifist will end up as a knight or stay one? Structures determine how the people within them act, gangs can make people more violent, police and army organizations can create a level of camaraderie that can lead to problems in times of wrong-doing. Military organizations can breed contempt for the enemy. Religious systems that have their own political concerns can band together to protect themselves and putting down the law.

We've already shown you that most wars aren't primarily instigated by religion. I even challenged people to give me a major conflict started solely by religion. Most of the world's great empires (who cause the most conflict) didn't care about religion. Take away religion, and Mother Teresa isn't Mother Teresa, she doesn't go to india and she doesn't help all those people.

But there are other, atheistic people that give charity. IT is religion however that made MOther Teresa a fanatic that went around opposing abortion and considering suffering important to human existence.

In her Nobel Prize acceptance speech, she declared, "Abortion is the worst evil, and the greatest enemy of peace... Because if a mother can kill her own child, what will prevent us from killing ourselves or one another? Nothing."

She has also described abortion as “…the greatest destroyer of peace today…”

In the aftermath of the Indo-Pakistani War of 1971, it was determined that more than 450,000 Hindu women in East Pakistan(now Bangladesh) had been systematically raped. Even in these circumstances she asserted her rejection of abortion by publicly renouncing abortion as an option and by calling upon the women left behind to keep their unborn children

EDIT: Let me add a more clear-cut example:

Mother Teresa encouraged members of her order to baptize dying patients, without regard to the individual's religion

Atheists can have problems with abortion, but interfering with people's religious life..purely religious.

It has been alleged by former employees of Mother Teresa's order that Teresa refused to authorize the purchase of medical equipment, and that donated money was instead transferred to the Vatican Bank for general use, even if it was specifically earmarked for charitable purposes

Again, you seem to mistake religion is not the sole cause of conflict with religion does not cause conflict.

Exactly. Religion in itself is actually good. Love your neighbor, your enemy, take care of other people etc. It's the people that ruin its practice who make religion looks bad.

Ridiculous. Religion has a ton of things in the books that are just terrible, it takes cherry picking to pretend it's all good news. I would argue that a lot of times the worst people are just being faithful to the message. And any belief that believes in exclusivity "I am right, and you being wrong will lead to torture" is automatically dangerous as it encourages dogmatic behavior and can lead to people believing, quite rightly, that any action taken for it's sake is good. After all, if God sanctioned it and it stops you and others from burning in hell any action is justified.

[SerStinger]

We've already shown you that most wars aren't primarily instigated by religion. I even challenged people to give me a major conflict started solely by religion. Most of the world's great empires (who cause the most conflict) didn't care about religion. Take away religion, and Mother Teresa isn't Mother Teresa, she doesn't go to india and she doesn't help all those people.

You haven't shown me shit. A major conflict instigated by religion? Crusades, Isreali-Palestine conflict, Irish civil war, Iraq insurgency, Kosovo war between Serbs and Muslims, is that enough or you want more? Why would a piece of shit like Jerusalem be so much fought over if not for religion? And maybe you are right in the case of Mother Teresa as a single example, but the truth is, charity and arts won't be reduced in the world if there is no religion.

[Naathi Prince]

Take the Westerosi Knights. Do you think that a hardcore pacifist will end up as a knight or stay one? Structures determine how the people within them act, gangs can make people more violent, police and army organizations can create a level of camaraderie that can lead to problems in times of wrong-doing. Military organizations can breed contempt for the enemy. Religious systems that have their own political concerns can band together to protect themselves and putting down the law.

But there are other, atheistic people that give charity. IT is religion however that made MOther Teresa a fanatic that went around opposing abortion and considering suffering important to human existence.

Again, you seem to mistake religion is not the sole cause of conflict with religion does not cause conflict.

Ridiculous. Religion has a ton of things in the books that are just terrible, it takes cherry picking to pretend it's all good news. I would argue that a lot of times the worst people are just being faithful to the message. And any belief that believes in exclusivity "I am right, and you being wrong will lead to torture" is automatically dangerous as it encourages dogmatic behavior and can lead to people believing, quite rightly, that any action taken for it's sake is good. After all, if God sanctioned it and it stops you and others from burning in hell any action is justified.

I'm not really arguing with you, i think we agree on most of this, its SerStinger's position I have an issue with.

[SerStinger]

I'm not really arguing with you, i think we agree on most of this, its SerStinger's position I have an issue with.

But.... but... but.... we're saying the exact same thing. :( How my position is different from him?

[Naathi Prince]

You haven't shown me shit. A major conflict instigated by religion? Crusades, Isreali-Palestine conflict, Irish civil war, Iraq insurgency, Kosovo war between Serbs and Muslims, is that enough or you want more? Why would a piece of shit like Jerusalem be so much fought over if not for religion? And maybe you are right in the case of Mother Teresa as a single example, but the truth is, charity and arts won't be reduced in the world if there is no religion.

I went over the Crusades already in this thread, you chose not to respond. These wars, btw, don't add up nearly to "most of the world's conflicts", so yeah, you are going to need more. Do you think most Israelis care about Judaism? They don't. The just wanted a country of their own and picked a place they have historical ties to that wasn't Europe. Then you postulate something completely unprovable, that religion has nothing to charity or arts.

[Stannis the Stern]

Can we just fuck the whole religious debate and get back on topic. I highly doubt there'll be a clash of religions in Westeros, the Faith of R'hollor is very small minority and with the base of the Westerosi version of the religion in the North I don't think it'll come soon in contact with The Seven. The High Sparrow may establish a Papacy like regime in King's Landing, he'll outlaw certain practices, condemn people of heresy and probably has the power to launch a Crusade purging the Seven Kingdoms. Unsure about the Old Gods, seems to be the only somewhat peaceful religion in the land, could cause friction between Stannis supporters who follow the Lord of Light. Can't think of too much about the Drowned God, too isolated of a religion.

[Naathi Prince]

But.... but... but.... we're saying the exact same thing. :( How my position is different from him?

because you make ridiculous claims (even if you do walk them back a bit) and you also don't seem to understand that something can have both positive and negative effects.

[SerStinger]

because you make ridiculous claims (even if you do walk them back a bit) and you also don't seem to understand that something can have both positive and negative effects.

I have said TENS of times that religion has both positive and negative effects. I'm just saying the bad outweigh the good and the good would survive even if religion didn't.

[Castel]

It would be less a war and more an extermination if The Faith went against anyone I think. The Old Gods wouldn't wage war because they are pretty much the most decentralised religion in the land. People can wage war in their defense sure, but no Crusade-like movements from the head.

[Stannis the Stern]

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

We? You mean atheists? I don't adhere to any religion anymore, I'm a Pantheist.

[E-Ro]

It would be less a war and more an extermination if The Faith went against anyone I think. The Old Gods wouldn't wage war because they are pretty much the most decentralised religion in the land. People can wage war in their defense sure, but no Crusade-like movements from the head.

Yup, the old gods have no organisation, rules or leaders. Its a pretty laid back religion. The faith can try their luck with moat cailin but good luck, the andals couldnt do it and nor could numerous invaders. If the high septon tries anything he will get his when the winter ends everybody goes back home and he has no more power.

[SerStinger]

I went over the Crusades already in this thread, you chose not to respond. These wars, btw, don't add up nearly to "most of the world's conflicts", so yeah, you are going to need more. Do you think most Israelis care about Judaism? They don't. The just wanted a country of their own and picked a place they have historical ties to that wasn't Europe. Then you postulate something completely unprovable, that religion has nothing to charity or arts.

I'M NOT SAYING RELIGION HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH CHARITY OR ART! I'm saying that charity and art can exist independently without religion.

And of all the places in the world, Jews have to go to a fucking desert populated by antisemites which has always been at war. It's not because their fairy tale book promised that land was their promised land. They couldn't go to Canada.

I have already answered your claim about crusades. Even if you are right about the motives (and you're not by the way), still, they advertised it as a religious war. Only religion could provide the ideological explanation for crusades.

And sorry, I just don't care enough to bring so many examples that would make the majority.

We? You mean atheists? I don't adhere to any religion anymore, I'm a Pantheist.

I usually by the term atheist, but irreligious is a better word. Atheists, agnostics, deists, and pantheists are in the same boat IMO. My enemy is organized religion only.

[LordBloodraven]

It would be less a war and more an extermination if The Faith went against anyone I think. The Old Gods wouldn't wage war because they are pretty much the most decentralised religion in the land. People can wage war in their defense sure, but no Crusade-like movements from the head.

You cannot dissociate the Old Gods religion from First Men Culture. If the Faith takes initiatives like cutting weirwoods down, we might see them fighting against the Northerners (if they come there) as a whole. It's decentralized, very personal but still alive. And besides, this is what differenciates the most northerners and southerners

[Castel]

You cannot dissociate the Old Gods religion from First Men Culture. If the Faith takes initiatives like cutting weirwoods down, we might see them fighting against the Northerners (if they come there) as a whole. It's decentralized, very personal but still alive. And besides, this is what differenciates the most northerners and southerners

Well yes, compared to the Rahlooians the First Men have a better chance, but they are far more of a spent force. What matters is when the Faith begin to show those religion-destroying tendencies. If they're past the Neck...

It doesn't help that they need a particular type of tree. You can rebuild septs much faster than you can plant weirwood trees.

[Fire and Blood!]

I usually by the term atheist, but irreligious is a better word. Atheists, agnostics, deists, and pantheists are in the same boat IMO. My enemy is organized religion only.

Then our argument was pointles I am the last person to defend the church but for me an atheist is a person who doesn't believe in the existence of God not a peson who is against the church as an organisation, and that is something I can't agree with.

[E-Ro]

Well yes, compared to the Rahlooians the First Men have a better chance, but they are far more of a spent force. What matters is when the Faith begin to show those religion-destroying tendencies. If they're past the Neck...

It doesn't help that they need a particular type of tree. You can rebuild septs much faster than you can plant weirwood trees.

The north is far from spent. If the high septon sends his little men north their organs will be hung from heart trees and their heads sent back to him. The high septon is powerful right now but not powerful enough to invade the north. The people have had their fill of war if he tries to start another one he will lose support, especially considering the north has been accepted into the kings peace under roose bolton.I think you are overestimating his power.

[SerStinger]

Then our argument was pointles I am the last person to defend the church but for me an atheist is a person who doesn't believe in the existence of God not a peson who is against the church as an organisation, and that is something I can't agree with.

You're right but that is an entirely different argument. You sure have the right not to accept that. :)