Religion, what's the point?

In regards to the Paris attack. I said that human nature was the cause, but religion was the justification. @Red Dreams responded with the following.

Red Dreams said:
so Islam is to blame?
Click to expand...

Not an easy question, and honestly, probably not one I'm qualified to give an answer to.

Whether Islam is to blame or not, it definitely plays a part (albeit passively).
 
Tommy said:
In regards to the Paris attack. I said that human nature was the cause, but religion was the justification. @Red Dreams responded with the following.



Not an easy question, and honestly, probably not one I'm qualified to give an answer to.

Whether Islam is to blame or not, it definitely plays a part (albeit passively).
Click to expand...

Aye, it's much more nuanced than "religion is the problem and Islam is to blame" vs "religion has nothing to do with it, they weren't real Muslims". Neither of those arguments are correct, though I'm sure they'll quickly dominate this thread.
 
Red Dreams said:
so Islam is to blame?
Click to expand...
Not really Islam as a whole, but rather the Saudi/Qatari sponsored Wahhabi strain of it. Those cnuts are the root of much of the violence in the Middle East and its exports. I really don't understand just how they're still our allies.
 
Tommy said:
In regards to the Paris attack. I said that human nature was the cause, but religion was the justification. @Red Dreams responded with the following.



Not an easy question, and honestly, probably not one I'm qualified to give an answer to.

Whether Islam is to blame or not, it definitely plays a part (albeit passively).
Click to expand...
Religion is to blame. It doesn't matter if you can find different reasons for the same thing to happen. The cause is still the brainwashing power of religion. You can argue and say that if there wasn't a religion something else would come instead. You couldn't proof it because religion is to prevalent. The fact of the matter is that when people collectively move across borders and kill other people it's because they want something that's beyond that line of imagination or there's someone there that's not really thinking about the same god/gods as you.

The reason this is happening is because those old books that people still believe in were so shoddily written that it's easy to manipulate it. History is full of charismatic people capable of manipulating others. Religion is a very simple tool for them to use because you already have millions of followers. The terrorists are the "chosen few" that are punishing people for swaying from the book. Most of them already have a violent inclination that was easy to trigger with enough people to help you out. Peer pressure works at any level.

The current extremism a big part of the world is dealing with has reached the levels that the only people that can solve this are muslims themselves. Why would a person believing in Islam and the Koran listen to someone that doesn't? That won't happen just yet. Muslims kill way more other muslims each year for being a "different" kind of muslim.

Discounting religion all together is however silly no matter how you look at it.
 
Religion is one of the worst things in the world and causes some of the most horrific events throughout history.
 
My views on religion (Islam especially) are often harsh, with a pretty infamous thread kicking about somewhere that I still stand by entirely. The world would be a better place if religion were to fade away, and if given the option, I'd flip that switch in an instant...

But religion isn't wholely to blame, just as it isn't completely absolved from blame. The truth lies somewhere in the middle. Religion, in this (and most other) case(s), Islam, is the justification. It's not pulling the trigger, but it's being interpreted by some to mean that it's okay to pull the trigger.
 
Tommy said:
My views on religion (Islam especially) are often harsh, with a pretty infamous thread kicking about somewhere that I still stand by entirely. The world would be a better place if religion were to fade away, and if given the option, I'd flip that switch in an instant...

But religion isn't wholely to blame, just as it isn't completely absolved from blame. The truth lies somewhere in the middle. Religion, in this (and most other) case(s), Islam, is the justification. It's not pulling the trigger, but it's being interpreted by some to mean that it's okay to pull the trigger.
Click to expand...

You really can't lay the blame on religion though. Has there ever been a Budhist terrorist or a Shinto terrorist? People are the problem. I agree with whoever said religion is the justification not the real issue
 
MoBeats said:
Maybe not Islam, but Islamists probably. If there's a difference.
Click to expand...

And what doesn't help here is the clear lack of leadership coming from the most important branches of Islam. If each of the major branches had a leader who make it very clear about what is right and what is not while considering the overall reality, those extremist groups would have been regarded as nothing more than antisocial pariahs who are not worth supporting long ago. Fecking hell, I sometimes have that strange impression that Islam is a free-for-all place for interpretations compared to the number of neo-Christian shit-talking preachers in the US who interpret the Bible in their own way to justify sick shit.
 
Swaters16 said:
You really can't lay the blame on religion though. Has there ever been a Budhist terrorist or a Shinto terrorist? People are the problem. I agree with whoever said religion is the justification not the real issue
Click to expand...

There has.
 
Swaters16 said:
You really can't lay the blame on religion though. Has there ever been a Budhist terrorist or a Shinto terrorist? People are the problem. I agree with whoever said religion is the justification not the real issue
Click to expand...

Budhists have been pretty bloodthirsty in Myanmar in the recent past...
 
Killing civilians is flat out forbidden in islam, it's in quran and hadith, whether you're a Sunni or a Shiite, it's something pretty much agreed upon and the instruction couldn't have been more clearer. People will come up with verses from quran about killing infidels etc, you need context to understand those verses, and even if you take it as an order to wage an all out war on the none muslim world, the instruction about not killing civilians still stand, there're no exceptions here, even suicide is flat out forbidden, with no exceptions.

So why do people do this? there's a law in islam that states that necessity permits what is forbidden, muslims have used this law for centuries only in life or death situations, like if you're about to starve to death and there's only none halal food or drinks etc, lunatics have used this law to justify pretty much anything, they kill our civilian so we kill theirs, and so many other batshit crazy fatwas you may have heard of.

But what's the source of all this radical nonsense? as @ctp has pointed out, it's the rise of the wahhabism in suadi arabia.

Not only have saudi arabia exported this nonsense to the islamic world, they're still actively adhering to this radical version, funding those who promote it, while fighting all attempts at democracy in the arab world.
 
Swaters16 said:
You really can't lay the blame on religion though. Has there ever been a Budhist terrorist or a Shinto terrorist? People are the problem. I agree with whoever said religion is the justification not the real issue
Click to expand...
I'm not sure I understand your point. You seem to contradict yourself here. To paraphrase you, religion is not to blame yet it is used as justification for terror'. Sounds like religion is to blame then...
 
If tonights attacks were foreign terrorists, then religion cannot solely be blamed by anyone.

The US and it's allies are bombing IS
Kurdish forces are fighting IS and Syria
Russia is bombing Kurdish forces and IS
Syria are fighting IS and Kurdish forces

and finally; IS are fighting Kurdish and Syrian forces and trying to bomb Russia, the US and its allies.

It's a hellish situation, possibly without parallel. A (at least) three way fight with (at least) two super powers taking a supportive role.

If they are home grown religious fanatics, well maybe that is slightly different.
 
Swaters16 said:
Of course but you hardly see the same kind of radicalization of people that other religions bring.
Click to expand...

Saying "people are the problem" is as empty a generalization as saying "life is the problem", "the world is the problem", or "biology is the problem". It means nothing.

From the point of view of someone like me, religion causes all sort of problems with violence being an extreme example of it.

I don't think it's wrong to say that religion causes violence. As an analogy, it's like saying that unprotected sex with multiple partners causes HIV transmission. It's a rare event in some places and circumstances, a major cause in other places and circumstances, and there are other non-related causes that lead to HIV transmission.
 
Last edited:
Red Dreams said:
looked up what this Wahhabism means. Fundementalism right?

These puritanical views worry me.
Click to expand...

It's a Puritan movement within Islam with its origins in 18th century Arabia, specifically the Najd region. For most of its history it has been confined to that remote, isolated part of the Muslim world. However, a combination of the Saudis hitting it rich with oil and secular ideologies across the Islamic world failing to solve any of the region's problems have given it a global following.

Having said that, similar movements have arisen in places like West Africa and India at different times, and have also contributed to the spread of this extremism among Muslims, so the problem runs deeper than just Wahhabism.

IMO it has more to do with the general reaction to the ascendence of Western power in the world from the late 18rh century onwards. This is something all civilisations, whether Islamic, Chinese, Russian, Hindu, etc., have had to come to terms with. So it's not something unique to the Islamic world although the forms the response has taken reflect distorted applications of traditional Islamic concepts to the modern world. And of course the relationship of the Muslim world with the West has been of a different and probably more traumatic nature than the other civilisations have experienced.
 
Last edited:
Arruda said:
Saying "people are the problem" is as empty a generalization as saying "life is the problem", "the world is the problem", or "biology is the problem". It means nothing.

From the point of view of someone like me, religion causes all sort of problems with violence being an extreme example of it.

I don't think it's wrong to say that religion causes violence. As an analogy, it's like saying that unprotected sex with multiple partners causes HIV transmission. It's a rare event in some places and circumstances, a major cause in other places and circumstances, and there are other non-related causes that lead to HIV transmission.
Click to expand...

I'm saying, eradicate religion and these people are going to kill for some other cause. Religion is being paraded around as their current justification but the people are responsible. Take away religion and do you think extremists are suddenly going to become moderate, law abiding citizens? The answer is obviously no. With or without religion, the people choosing to kill will always have a reason to do so.
 
Shocked by this:

“We pray for the victims and the wounded, and for all the French people. This is an attack on peace for all humanity, and it requires a decisive, supportive response on the part of all of us as we counter the spread the homicidal hatred in all of its forms.”

This is from the Vatican.
 
Swaters16 said:
I'm saying, eradicate religion and these people are going to kill for some other cause. Religion is being paraded around as their current justification but the people are responsible. Take away religion and do you think extremists are suddenly going to become moderate, law abiding citizens? The answer is obviously no. With or without religion, the people choosing to kill will always have a reason to do so.
Click to expand...

You don't really know that. I can understand the stereotype of the power hungry leader with personal interests who uses his prominence to manipulate others and achieve his goals, or the random psycho, filled with hatred, that finds in it a platform for violence. I admit these, or analogous sorts, might represent a fair share of people involved in religious violence, and that many of them could find other escapades that would end with equally upsetting results.

Thing is, I think religion contributes to violence in more subtle and widespread means. Mainly by leading to intolerance, inhibiting critical thinking, by promoting rigid frameworks of thought where concepts like punishment and judgement abound, etc. I think it delays humanity progress. I'm talking about organized religions as institutions, obviously. The magnitude of this impact varies, of course, through time and location.

Also, even when you consider that it only provides a "justification", a justification or sense of righteousness may very well be the difference between acting or not acting in plenty of circumstances.

To some degrees it can even be just self-inflicted, or just psychological. But it's negative nonetheless. Having been born in a deeply catholic place and having been subject to all kinds of attempts at indoctrination by family members and community, I have a very vivid memory of my childhood as a catholic. I'm fully aware of the difference of going to bed feeling guilty, resentful, or afraid, due to some completely unjustified bullshit that would have no bearing in my life if I had just been educated in a "normal" way. I'm glad I got over it spontaneously and very young, and sometimes I dread what would become of me if that hadn't happen to me. All I know is that I was a lot more free and a lot more tranquil when I stopped believing. Fortunately this was all in a very "mild" environment, but I can only imagine in more fanatic mediums it being much worse.

And it provides a seeding ground for much worse things, that may or may not happen. We sit here and we all agree that things like ISIS caters to disenfranchised youth in Europe for example, and look how many thousands of those have joined them. Now try to picture the world without religion, and try to imagine something with a similar impact. I can't really think of anything that would lead to such an enormous amount of people joining a bloody and sadistic war at a whim. Would they travel to some far away country, completely unrelated to them, to fight for a political cause? Or to Mexico to join the cartels? I really doubt it, I can't think of a phenomenon that ticks these boxes so randomly as religion does.

I'm also drunk. So I apologize if anything is confusing.
 
Last edited:
senorgregster said:
Shocked by this:

“We pray for the victims and the wounded, and for all the French people. This is an attack on peace for all humanity, and it requires a decisive, supportive response on the part of all of us as we counter the spread the homicidal hatred in all of its forms.”

This is from the Vatican.
Click to expand...
Why are you shocked? Seems like a measured statement to me. What else can any world religious leader say?
 
Penna said:
Why are you shocked? Seems like a measured statement to me. What else can any world religious leader say?
Click to expand...
I think I overreacted to the statement, but, even this morning, it does leave me a little uneasy. It is because it is so measured and yet uses the word decisive. I associate that word with all out war and it's as if the Vatican is giving the world powers their blessing to do so. Perhaps I'm reading too much into it.
 
senorgregster said:
I think I overreacted to the statement, but, even this morning, it does leave me a little uneasy. It is because it is so measured and yet uses the word decisive. I associate that word with all out war and it's as if the Vatican is giving the world powers their blessing to do so. Perhaps I'm reading too much into it.
Click to expand...
Yeah I read it that way too and the way things are going, war is on the cards. I have no idea who is going to do what to attempt to stop it, if at all. War on 21st century on basis of religion will be the worst thing to ever happen to human race.
 
I think it's very important that people are aware of the "no true Scotsman" fallacy



The people who commit these acts are religious, and in this case Muslims. They do not represent all Muslims as their are many sects and people have different levels of belief like any other religion. Just wanted to throw this out there, and I know that this is a significant minority within the religion however the actual number of extremists is still too high. What is good is that the Muslims who do not condone this vastly outnumber those who do.
 
Swaters16 said:
I'm saying, eradicate religion and these people are going to kill for some other cause. Religion is being paraded around as their current justification but the people are responsible. Take away religion and do you think extremists are suddenly going to become moderate, law abiding citizens? The answer is obviously no. With or without religion, the people choosing to kill will always have a reason to do so.
Click to expand...

But without religion, people will have one less reason to do so. I am not sure if this is a right analogy, but its similar to the gun control argument in US. "People can commit massacres even without Guns". It doesn't mean that we cannot blame the easier access of guns for the massacres.
 
Snow said:
Religion is to blame. It doesn't matter if you can find different reasons for the same thing to happen. The cause is still the brainwashing power of religion. You can argue and say that if there wasn't a religion something else would come instead. You couldn't proof it because religion is to prevalent.
Click to expand...

Can't you prove it by the fact that there has been many mass murders in recent history that have been distinctly nonreligious in nature? Or that war has taken place in secular societies, with the source of the conflict being political and economic instead of religious?

That said, I do agree religion is an incredibly powerful tool to influence the masses and it has been shown throughout history that this power can and will be corrupted to carry out atrocities. As a result the world could well be a better place without religion now. I just don't necessarily agree that something wouldn't replace the void. It might not replace it fully and thus the net result would be positive for the world, but that power to influence the masses will always exist and it will always be corrupted.
 
Sparky Rhiwabon said:
Can't the mods change the title of this thread? It's unfair to tar all religions with the same brush.
Click to expand...

What does this mean? All major religions have been at the heart of atrocities at various points throughout history. The question is much wider than just the violence that's being attributed to it anyway. It's a perfectly valid question at a general level, hence why it's generated over 200 pages of discussion in its current form.
 
Brwned said:
What does this mean? All major religions have been at the heart of atrocities at various points throughout history. The question is much wider than just the violence that's being attributed to it anyway. It's a perfectly valid question at a general level, hence why it's generated over 200 pages of discussion in its current form.
Click to expand...
I'm not talking about history.
 
Sparky Rhiwabon said:
I'm not talking about history.
Click to expand...

What are you talking about? If you read this thread you'll see why it should stay as it is. Trying to put the focus on one issue with one religion to avoid looking at the bigger picture and answering the more important questions is a bit odd, to me...and odd is putting it kindly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.