EDEB8 - Ultimate Online Debating
About Us   Debate    Judge   Forum

Radical religion

< Return to subforum
Page: 12345Most Recent
admin
By admin | Jul 8 2014 4:47 PM
Isn't it interesting how "radical Islam" and "mainstream Islam" have become far more meaningful divisions to most of the world than the division between Sunni and Shia? It's little wonder, perhaps, that people are such islamophobes, in a world where muslims are so often on the news for their attacks on others. But it's not just Islam - the Dalai Lama has had to do a lot of preaching to calm down the buddhists fighting muslims in south-eastern asia - the ultra-conservative jews in Israel keep justifying violence against Arabs - and I'm pretty sure we can all think of various wars Christianity has been implicated in.

How is it that religions - all of which supposedly preach tolerance and peace - become so terribly violent? Is it just adapting the religion to suit human necessity? Is it human nature perhaps? Or is there a moral danger in religious thinking itself? Can humanity do anything to prevent the radicalization of religion?
I'm the main developer for the site. If you have any problems, ideas, questions or concerns please send me a message.
Let's revive the forums!
admin
By admin | Jul 8 2014 5:00 PM
This thread inspired by this pic from imgur:

I'm the main developer for the site. If you have any problems, ideas, questions or concerns please send me a message.
Let's revive the forums!
Blackflag
By Blackflag | Jul 8 2014 5:41 PM
admin: Religion doesn't become violent. It supports violence. It's really not that hard to understand, for those who don't scapegoat religion. Power, poverty, ect. all just use religion as a means to an end. I can defend just about every religion as preaching peace, as most do. But when people want to reach an end, they use religion as a mean. Jesus, who I'm only referencing for his quote, warned beforehand that the majority of the religious would be "wolves in sheep's clothing", or those who do with religion exactly what I said. As for radicalization, it's not happening. I think people are smart enough to realize that religion is only radical where poverty is. Most of Europe and America are quite peaceful, while also being Christian. Yet in the Congo, Nigeria, Dominican Republic, and other nations where both Christianity both religion and poverty exist, there is religious radicalism. Someone involved in an Azerbaijani study once made a interesting claim on how Azerbaijan is able to maintain secular peace between its Shiite's and Sunnis, having one of the biggest religious splits in the Middle East. In Azerbaijan, people have families, wealth, healthcare, ect. In countries like Iran, where by birth your most likely going to be in poverty, all you have is religion. That's when sectarianism kicks in.
Blackflag
By Blackflag | Jul 8 2014 5:46 PM
admin: First of all, the "fundamentalist" catholics that occupy America only represent a small minority of our religious community. Nor do they fight the protestants, even though our religious churches are constantly fueding. Guns and bibles are more of a good "murican" thing. As I said earlier, this small minority live in lands with the most poverty. Studies show the majority of fundamentalists come from Mississippi (incredibly poor), the Bayou's of Louisiana (also poor), the flats of Florida (poor), ect. If you want to fight radicalizing religions, which isn't to much of a problem in America (religious aren't radicalizing. They've capped at idiocy), then try fighting poverty. This really should be sufficient in answering your question.
admin
By admin | Jul 8 2014 6:21 PM
Blackflag: While I can see this being the case as a general trend, somehow I don't think it fully accounts for why wealthy people become engaged with using religion to spread a message of hate, or why many poor peoples do not use religion to fight wars. Like, I get that there needs to be some kind of motivation to the hate that isn't intrinsic to the religion itself, but then why is it religion that is so often used as an excuse? I think India has to be the classic example of religions feuding even though Pakistan and India aren't actually that much more impoverished than each other.
I'm the main developer for the site. If you have any problems, ideas, questions or concerns please send me a message.
Let's revive the forums!
nzlockie
By nzlockie | Jul 14 2014 4:20 PM
admin: MY biggest complaint about the american chick's picture is that she's hung the flag backwards. #Fail.
nzlockie
By nzlockie | Jul 14 2014 4:21 PM
Damn. my bad again. Pushed submit twice.
Blackflag
By Blackflag | Jul 14 2014 8:13 PM
nzlockie: So? The flag was hung like that on purpose, although it violates the US conduct for flag owning. Fortunately, it's illegal to enforce the Flag Act.
admin
By admin | Jul 14 2014 8:23 PM
Blackflag: Fair warning: I've learned nzlockie is VERY passionate about his flags.
I'm the main developer for the site. If you have any problems, ideas, questions or concerns please send me a message.
Let's revive the forums!
Blackflag
By Blackflag | Jul 14 2014 9:28 PM
admin: So am I, but I don't get emotional over them. I am interested in designs and how they embody millions of people, but that's about it.
nzlockie
By nzlockie | Jul 14 2014 11:18 PM
Blackflag: The American flag, like many national flags, should be hung with the stars in the upper left (as you face it)
That section is referred to as the "hoist" and is traditionally reserved for the most important aspect of the flag. She's effectively hung it upside down here, which indicates a national crisis. This could legitimately be her intent in this case, but if that were the case, she'd have done better to do so with it done horizontally. And without smiling.
Tophatdoc
By Tophatdoc | Jul 15 2014 2:37 AM
admin: I have yet to learn of a monotheistic religion that exists that is not violent. If it does exist, it must have a small amount of followers. Monotheistic religions are the most dogmatic. Zealots will be created from such ideas that claim nirvana exists through the belief of one god. Religions or sects of religions that encourage relationships with god are personal rather than shared tend to be more peaceful. This one of the reasons why I like the Anglican Church. Their relationship with their god is supposed to be quiet and private rather than wild, obstreperous, and loud. Zealots are a problem in every major monotheistic religion that tells their practitioners to control the public whether it be shouting Evangelicals damning people to hell or an Imam praying for the destruction of the West.
"Don't respond to my posts. Don't read my debates. Don't read my messages. Thanks for reading this message. " A Quote from Tophatdoc
Blackflag
By Blackflag | Jul 15 2014 6:44 AM
nzlockie: LOL, alright, but I see people hang the US flag like that all the time. Every man from Newark to San Fransico owns a US flag, so no one freaks out when they see the flag like that.
Blackflag
By Blackflag | Jul 15 2014 6:45 AM
Tophatdoc: That's not an Anglican church thing. That's an every church thing, given the words "Relationship with god should be done privately" popping up a dozen times in the bible. The Anglican's are actually a more catholic like version of most protestant sects, as are the baptists
ADreamOfLiberty
By ADreamOfLiberty | Jul 15 2014 7:24 AM
admin: The answer is actually very simple.

In religion, unlike other ideas; the abdication of reason is seen as a virtue. In a purely political movement or culture, no one says "you have to have faith" - [that I would be a better leader for this country] and everyone just goes "ohhh yess" and bows their heads ashamed to even have asked.

It is simply an evolutionary process. People hate, or otherwise hold negative unsupported beliefs, in the course of human events lies are exposed and they are left for only one excuse for their harmful delusions. Religion, because only in religion is the unsupported valued as mystical truth.
nzlockie
By nzlockie | Jul 15 2014 7:48 AM
I agree with the above in broad strokes. Religion is the cause of this kind of violence in the same way that guns are the cause of violence.
Basically I see people's sinful nature as the ultimate cause of violence. Hate, pride, envy etc etc. Religion gives them something they can use to justify their actions, although as others have said, their justification in that regard is baseless.

Abolishment of religion would not solve this nature, it would only force them to rely on other justifications. If anything, one could argue that what it needs is better education, (or indoctrination, depending on where you sit!) in religious doctrine. Of people were down the truth of their religion, then perhaps they would better understand it. .. Or else perhaps they would just go and find another excuse.
Tophatdoc
By Tophatdoc | Jul 15 2014 8:20 AM
Blackflag: No, the Catholic Church is totalitarian and they don't encourage religion to be private either. This is why there are over a billion Catholics in the world. The Anglican church has rarely ever attempted to tell the government or leaders what to do. Unlike the Catholic Church and most evangelical protestants who want to shove religion down people's throats and tell governments what to do.
"Don't respond to my posts. Don't read my debates. Don't read my messages. Thanks for reading this message. " A Quote from Tophatdoc
ADreamOfLiberty
By ADreamOfLiberty | Jul 15 2014 8:34 AM
Tophatdoc: The Anglican church was made to not tell governments what to do :P
Tophatdoc
By Tophatdoc | Jul 15 2014 8:38 AM
ADreamOfLiberty: YES! Or as a southern Evangelical would say "AMEN!" But then again Southern Evangelicals hated the Anglican church for not being loud and wild so they decided to revolt in Great Awakenings.........
"Don't respond to my posts. Don't read my debates. Don't read my messages. Thanks for reading this message. " A Quote from Tophatdoc
Blackflag
By Blackflag | Jul 15 2014 5:26 PM
Tophatdoc: No, you're right, but I wasn't aware that's what we were talking about. The anglican's are "private" in their religion, but that's not exclusive to their church. That's taught as a requirement in the bible. That religion should be private, and it is a sin to boast of piety (all the catholics do is boast). The catholic church was a side note, as the Anglican church forms its art, rituals, and traditions like the catholic church. Unfortunately, the main body of the Anglicans, which is in Britain, does have a leader, known as Queen Elizabeth. But there are Anglican churches that don't have her as their head. It's more of a denominational thing. The Anglicans and Baptists both look and act like the Catholics, but follow protestant beliefs like you stated.
Page: 12345Most Recent