Is Believing In God...?

[Aradhus]

Aradhus is simply not arguing about the same thing as most of the rest of us are. I don't want to speak for everyone, but my point is that wars, genocides, and the like that are performed "because of religion" are not actually engaged in because of religion. Rather, religion is the tool used to justify committing these acts. Nationalism is another tool that has been used. In any case, the causes of most, if not all, wars is not religious in nature.
Aradhus, name two wars in the last 500 years that were started because of religion.

Iraq, Afghanistan.

Wow...you couldn't have been further from the truth when you give those two examples. I thought you might have something that was reasonably defensible, but neither of those are, to be honest.

Jesus you're a fucking hypocrite. You have the nerve to criticise me for making inflammatory responses, and then you respond with a disgustingly condescending, dismissive, inflammatory response which consists of zero substance and in essence is basically ' Nope you're wrong nananaaanana'.

I choose Iraq and Afghanistan because they're the most recent, most current, most topical, not because they're the most religious, but there is a huge religious element to them, and that you don't understand that makes me wonder what the f*ck is the point of you commenting on something you seemingly know very little about.

[Woodruff]

Aradhus is simply not arguing about the same thing as most of the rest of us are. I don't want to speak for everyone, but my point is that wars, genocides, and the like that are performed "because of religion" are not actually engaged in because of religion. Rather, religion is the tool used to justify committing these acts. Nationalism is another tool that has been used. In any case, the causes of most, if not all, wars is not religious in nature.
Aradhus, name two wars in the last 500 years that were started because of religion.

Iraq, Afghanistan.

Wow...you couldn't have been further from the truth when you give those two examples. I thought you might have something that was reasonably defensible, but neither of those are, to be honest.

Jesus you're a fucking hypocrite. You have the nerve to criticise me for making inflammatory responses, and then you respond with a disgustingly condescending, dismissive, inflammatory response which consists of zero substance and in essence is basically ' Nope you're wrong nananaaanana'.

I choose Iraq and Afghanistan because they're the most recent, most current, most topical, not because they're the most religious, but there is a huge religious element to them, and that you don't understand that makes me wonder what the f*ck is the point of you commenting on something you seemingly know very little about.

You really should grow up. (Now THAT'S a condescending, dismissive statement for you...but it does contain some substance, if you'd just take it to heart.)

[Aradhus]

You really should educate yourself, before you comment on a topic you apparently know little about.

[thegreekdog]

You really should educate yourself, before you comment on a topic you apparently know little about.

While religion has a part in those two wars, I do not think without religion those wars would remain unprosecuted.

[beezer]

What I think Aradhus is getting at is that the Iraq & Afghanistan wars were waged in response to attacks committed by religious zealots of the Muslim variety. The response might not be that religious but the original attacks were.

[CreepersWiener]

What I think Aradhus is getting at is that the Iraq & Afghanistan wars were waged in response to attacks committed by religious zealots of the Muslim variety. The response might not be that religious but the original attacks were.

Lest we forget, that after the attacks, Bush is quoted:

Mr Bush said: "This crusade, this war on terrorism, is going to take a while."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/1563722.stm

also, Bush named the first military operations: Infinite Justice

Which when, translated into Arabic, is a name that denotes and describes Allah.

Yes, this Middle Eastern war is very religiously motivated.

[thegreekdog]

What I think Aradhus is getting at is that the Iraq & Afghanistan wars were waged in response to attacks committed by religious zealots of the Muslim variety. The response might not be that religious but the original attacks were.

I agree in part, but I wonder if it was religious zealotry as compared to cultural zealotry (which may be the same thing) and/or hunger for power. Further, if the United States was not actively involved in the Middle East for economic (not religious) reasons, would the religous zealotry extend to attacking the United States. Still further, if Israel were not sitting on ostensibly Arab land, would the Muslim terrorists hate Israel, and by extension Israel's supporters, the United States.

[thegreekdog]

What I think Aradhus is getting at is that the Iraq & Afghanistan wars were waged in response to attacks committed by religious zealots of the Muslim variety. The response might not be that religious but the original attacks were.

Lest we forget, that after the attacks, Bush is quoted:

Mr Bush said: "This crusade, this war on terrorism, is going to take a while."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/1563722.stm

also, Bush named the first military operations: Infinite Justice

Which when, translated into Arabic, is a name that denotes and describes Allah.

Yes, this Middle Eastern war is very religiously motivated.

You think that religion motivated President Bush to attack Afghanistan and/or Iraq because he said the above and because the name of the operation describes Allah? I think that's a pretty big jump. I think President Bush did these things to motivate his conservative (and religious) political base, but I don't think that was his justification for going to war.

[CreepersWiener]

Bush said those things to, yes, motivate his religious zealot base.

[thegreekdog]

Bush said those things to, yes, motivate his religious zealot base.

Right, but the question is about whether without religion, those wars would have happend. I contend they would have.

[Snorri1234]

What I think Aradhus is getting at is that the Iraq & Afghanistan wars were waged in response to attacks committed by religious zealots of the Muslim variety. The response might not be that religious but the original attacks were.

Lest we forget, that after the attacks, Bush is quoted:

Mr Bush said: "This crusade, this war on terrorism, is going to take a while."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/1563722.stm

also, Bush named the first military operations: Infinite Justice

Which when, translated into Arabic, is a name that denotes and describes Allah.

Yes, this Middle Eastern war is very religiously motivated.

You think that religion motivated President Bush to attack Afghanistan and/or Iraq because he said the above and because the name of the operation describes Allah? I think that's a pretty big jump. I think President Bush did these things to motivate his conservative (and religious) political base, but I don't think that was his justification for going to war.

I'd say that his religion certainly played a role into deciding on the attacks. I don't think you can separate Bush' political views from his religious ones though.

[thegreekdog]

What I think Aradhus is getting at is that the Iraq & Afghanistan wars were waged in response to attacks committed by religious zealots of the Muslim variety. The response might not be that religious but the original attacks were.

Lest we forget, that after the attacks, Bush is quoted:

Mr Bush said: "This crusade, this war on terrorism, is going to take a while."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/1563722.stm

also, Bush named the first military operations: Infinite Justice

Which when, translated into Arabic, is a name that denotes and describes Allah.

Yes, this Middle Eastern war is very religiously motivated.

You think that religion motivated President Bush to attack Afghanistan and/or Iraq because he said the above and because the name of the operation describes Allah? I think that's a pretty big jump. I think President Bush did these things to motivate his conservative (and religious) political base, but I don't think that was his justification for going to war.

I'd say that his religion certainly played a role into deciding on the attacks. I don't think you can separate Bush' political views from his religious ones though.

Oh, you definitely can. I think the critique of President Bush that he did things for religious reasons is completely misplaced. I think he went into Iraq for economic reasons and into Afghanistan for economic and security reasons. I think religion had literally nothing to do with his decisions. Further, note that Congess went to war, not the president, so we'd have to analyze the religious thoughts of Congress as well.

[CreepersWiener]

Bush said those things to, yes, motivate his religious zealot base.

Right, but the question is about whether without religion, those wars would have happend. I contend they would have.

I never said that wars would never happen, just that there would be fewer wars than what we do have. This particular war would have happened anyway do to its circumstance (but if it was really to fight the people that attacked us, why didn't we invade Saudi Arabia? Why Iraq?), but why use religious tones to go to war? Bush didn't have to say "crusade" and I am sure they knew what they were doing when they named the operation "Infinite Justice". Without religious influence, that part of the political equation would have been negated and we would be left with the real reasons why we needed to go into Iraq (since Iraq wasn't even involved with 911).

Why don't they just tell us that the reasons for going in for Saddam Hussein was because he was the first oil baron to start selling his crude in Euros instead of dollars? Now there are more countries doing the same. Soon (because of the fall of the dollar) many more countries will be trading off their oil for Euros. The whole war with Iraq was to try to protect the American dollar. It is failing, but America puts up the front that they liberated Iraq and have won that war. But the damage was already done by Saddam Hussein. It was all completely economical. So why even mention God, Allah, Crusade? Would people support a war based on oil and money? Nope. But they would support a war based on justice and religion, so Bush and his administration used that to their advantage to convince Americans that we were really fighting for something good in the world.

[BigBallinStalin]

Oh, you definitely can. I think the critique of President Bush that he did things for religious reasons is completely misplaced. I think he went into Iraq for economic reasons and into Afghanistan for economic and security reasons. I think religion had literally nothing to do with his decisions. Further, note that Congess went to war, not the president, so we'd have to analyze the religious thoughts of Congress as well.

Just wondering: Didn't the president declare war first and then Congress approved it?

[muy_thaiguy]

Oh, you definitely can. I think the critique of President Bush that he did things for religious reasons is completely misplaced. I think he went into Iraq for economic reasons and into Afghanistan for economic and security reasons. I think religion had literally nothing to do with his decisions. Further, note that Congess went to war, not the president, so we'd have to analyze the religious thoughts of Congress as well.

Just wondering: Didn't the president declare war first and then Congress approved it?

Techinically speaking, Congress is the only one that can declare war (officially at least).

[thegreekdog]

Bush said those things to, yes, motivate his religious zealot base.

Right, but the question is about whether without religion, those wars would have happend. I contend they would have.

I never said that wars would never happen, just that there would be fewer wars than what we do have. This particular war would have happened anyway do to its circumstance (but if it was really to fight the people that attacked us, why didn't we invade Saudi Arabia? Why Iraq?), but why use religious tones to go to war? Bush didn't have to say "crusade" and I am sure they knew what they were doing when they named the operation "Infinite Justice". Without religious influence, that part of the political equation would have been negated and we would be left with the real reasons why we needed to go into Iraq (since Iraq wasn't even involved with 911).

Why don't they just tell us that the reasons for going in for Saddam Hussein was because he was the first oil baron to start selling his crude in Euros instead of dollars? Now there are more countries doing the same. Soon (because of the fall of the dollar) many more countries will be trading off their oil for Euros. The whole war with Iraq was to try to protect the American dollar. It is failing, but America puts up the front that they liberated Iraq and have won that war. But the damage was already done by Saddam Hussein. It was all completely economical. So why even mention God, Allah, Crusade? Would people support a war based on oil and money? Nope. But they would support a war based on justice and religion, so Bush and his administration used that to their advantage to convince Americans that we were really fighting for something good in the world.

I'm cynical, but I'm fairly sure President Bush and Congress could have come up with other reasons than a "crusade" to go to war with Iraq. I'm sorry, but I think you guys are trying to fit the facts into your theories, rather than vice versa.

[neanderpaul14]

[Woodruff]

You really should educate yourself, before you comment on a topic you apparently know little about.

Yeah, I didn't think you'd take on the substance of my recommendation either. But I had to try, for your sake.

[Aradhus]

Why are you posting in this topic to bait me? Are you that pathetic? Get a grip, you're an embarrassment.

TGD, there has been lots of articles, insider leaks, etc, where it is claimed Bush thought he was doing Gods work by invading Iraq. In fact, if memory serves, Rumsfeld and/or Cheney didn't think Bush would be onboard to invade Iraq if it was only for economical reasons, so they hyped up the religious angle. I'm not very good at searching the internet, but I'll bet someone savvy can find lots of newspaper articles on it.

[Woodruff]

Why are you posting in this topic to bait me? Are you that pathetic? Get a grip, you're an embarrassment.

The irony is palpable.

[luns101]

there has been lots of articles, insider leaks, etc, where it is claimed Bush thought he was doing Gods work by invading Iraq.

Yes, there were lots of articles claiming that. The source for many of those assumptions was a man named Nabil Sha'ath. Sha'ath has been exposed as a liar and myth propagator. Mahmoud Abbas denied that Bush ever made that statement, but that doesn't stop the left from repeating the misinformation constantly. Israeli forces raided PLO offices in Ramallah and found documents proving that Arafat was funding the Al Aksa Martyrs Brigade.

Sha'ath's response: "THOSE DOCUMENTS WERE FORGED!!" Yeah, Nabil Sha'ath...a TOTALLY reliable and objective source

White House denies claim

Mahmoud Abbas denies it was said

[Aradhus]

There were a lot more reports than just from one person Luns. Back in the day, 2006 maybe, it seemed like every second story I read about Bush was somebody attributing him with comments regarding God and Iraq.

[CreepersWiener]

I think Bush said that God told him to run for president. Not sure, I'm no good at looking quotes up on Wikipedia, and you can never rely on the validation of sources from that website.

And, Luns, was that Abbas...or Hammas?

[Phantom Lord]

When it comes down to it, I believe people post topics like this for one of 3 reasons:

1. They like to be an a$$ and ridicule others for what they believe.
2. They are looking for some sort of proof which to some degree they think can be found by reading comments posted by others which are generally based on opinion and have little factual content.
3. They think it is funny to watch people debate back and forth while hurling insults at each others intelligence.

I am a Christian, and my life has been so much better since I accepted Christ and began asking God for guidance. I do not believe because I was told to believe by others. I believe because of several events that have happened in my life. If you wish to believe or not believe, that is your choice. God wants you to choose, that is why he allows the horrible things in this world to happen. If he didn't let them happen then that would be forcing everyone to be good because they had to, not because they want to. That's my opinion base on what I have seen in my life.

[CreepersWiener]

When it comes down to it, I believe people post topics like this for one of 3 reasons:

1. They like to be an a$$ and ridicule others for what they believe.

Nifty little dollar signs, but I am willing to bet I know what that says.

2. They are looking for some sort of proof which to some degree they think can be found by reading comments posted by others which are generally based on opinion and have little factual content.

Looking for proof of what? Unicorns? Faeries? There is more proof that Santa Claus exists, I would be thinking all little Christian children aren't praying to Jesus this time of year...and guess what, all their prayers will be answered too, as their parents run out to get them candy canes and sugar plums and rootie toot toots and rummy tumm tumms. All to keep the facade of delusion over their little cherubs' lives. Why don't Christians follow The Word of God? Isn't lying against God's law or something?

3. They think it is funny to watch people debate back and forth while hurling insults at each others intelligence.

Actually, I think it is funny when you come in here and hurl insults, as proof in your first reason of why I posted this topic. This thread was fairly insult free until your appearance.

I am a Christian,

...doubt it, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.

and my life has been so much better since I accepted Christ and began asking God for guidance.

Okay, this is where you can try to convert me to your cult. I mean how is your life better? Are you finally getting a piece of tail?

I do not believe because I was told to believe by others. I believe because of several events that have happened in my life.

I was deluded into thinking that way too, a very long story, I am not going to get into it here; but let's just say that at one time I was a Christian with the greatest of faith. I spent five years as a devout Christian (and this thread isn't about whether or not Christians themselves are bad, btw) and I thought God was beginning to lead me into Islam. When I started thinking that way, I decided there really was no god, and that we just exist. No invisible spirits swirling around and between us, no Easter Bunnies. We just exist.

If you wish to believe or not believe, that is your choice.

Yep, the whole free will argument is coming, I can just feel it.

God wants you to choose, that is why he allows the horrible things in this world to happen.

And there it is, there you have it. Free will is the reason for all the horrible things in the world (like hurricanes and earthquakes)

If he didn't let them happen then that would be forcing everyone to be good because they had to, not because they want to. That's my opinion base on what I have seen in my life.

Well, I see more good in people as an atheist than I did as a Christian. As a Christian, I found myself disassociating from people that didn't believe in what I believed (the whole brush the dust off your feet thing). To a Christian, the only people that could possibly be good are other Christians. Isn't that wrong thinking? I quit smoking while I believed in Christ, but I am not going to delude myself that Christ had anything to do with it. I really wanted to quit smoking, and I didn't want my daughter growing up and seeing me smoke all the time. I will never, ever pick up another cigarette as long as I shall live, as an atheist or otherwise. And if you thought this thread was to debate over the existence of God or validate your belief in Christ, you were wrong. The point of this thread was to talk about whether or not the fundamental belief in a god or gods is inherently wrong and whether or not the world would be better off without religion. Your opinion is quite obvious. The world is a much better place with Crusades and Inquisitions and Witch burnings.