There is no reason that people of different religions or none could not live together without conflict. Is there?
There are reasons. We fight over our belief systems. However, we can combat this in multiple ways I think by preaching universal moral truth, actively listening to others and allowing room for new interpretations of religion that revitalise and sustain it.
No, there is not reason........but there is one about having the pic of an assassin as avatar.
Ernesto "Che" Guevara was an assassin from Argentina paid by Fidel Castro.
I still don't get the "Che Chic" thing.
@DUCHESSA
I damn certain know about him. What I don't understand is the fascination. A few years ago I was in a discount store that was selling socks w/ a Hammer&Sickle label. Guevara watched children being executed through a peep hole and he eventually died like the coward he was. I understand ignorance, I just don't understand how people who consider themselves educated buy into the mystique. T
@Terence57 No educated person buys "into him". He was a psychopath. Not even other members of the SOB Fidel Castro liked him.
He was as SOB as he was rich: Ernesto Guevara (Lynch) de la Serna.
At that time, along with Castro, he was seen as the "poor people liberator" by those gullible enough to think both these SOB were better than Batista.
The people of Cuba was ignorant enough as to think a right hand dictatorship is bad and a left hand one is the best
Well NODD, there's no panacea. With religion, w/out religion, whatever. Human beings are determined to find their unhappiness as their opportunities present themselves. For instance, we in the U.S. are, by and large, experiencing the greatest furtherance of our economic situation in my entire lifetime. Yet, the need to find unhappiness about material things is as great as it's ever been. A real shame---like the person who can't stay married no matter what.
I like romanticizing about the old pagan days as much as the next guy, but it's tough to get warm and fuzzy over Wicker Men and Dionysian cults where women would tear men limb from limb. It isn't all fun and games out there. Wotan was alright with warriors killing an adversary by slitting him open and pulling his lungs outside of his body---gives a whole new meaning to "I need some air..." BTW, that particularly gruesome maneuver is called the Butterfly. Remind me not to order the shrimp in
850.
Personally, I like to go by what I read and what I see. No kidding about the Koran. They're all about the "infidel." That's someone following the rules. On the other hand, you can call yourself a Christian and screw your neighbor, which isn't following the rules. And then, people think that Buddhists can be nothing but mellow. Not so. Just type in 969.
Whatever life offers, you can play your part in it. Happily, unhappily, or whatever.
The trend shifts from Centralization to Decentralization in obvious ways such as protestantism.
Once one convinces everyone that he (or she) alone speaks for God, and once all the others fall in line or else, with plenty of examples of what is meant by "or else," then Centralization reaches a peak.
All power produced by all flows to the one, and there are no exceptions allowed, as per God, says the one.
Statism, run by someone and their fellow statists, is a Religion, once called The Cult of Personality, as exemplified in the "secular" Russian crime spree, under the false flag of a Bolshevik government.
History leaves evidence of times and places where conflict resolution has peaked, 2 noteworthy examples are those times in England after the Roman Empire collapsed, when the Saxons imported The Law of the Land, and before the Divine Right of Religious Kings CON swung in favor of Centralization.
The other noteworthy example was the time in America between 1774 and 1789, when the Law of the Land was recognized as the method by which conflicts are peacefully resolved the lawful way.
Depends: if beheading infidels is part of the dogma, then fuck ‘em.
A religious world view always creates an us vs. them mentality. So, I would say that, ultimately, it will come down to we’re good, you’re evil.
For instance, the contemporary left.
None at all, all the worlds religions are for tolerance, (except Islam which is a cult).
The Qu'ran teaches tolerance.
@Header I suggest you check out the history of the Crusades, just for your own information. The Christian Dark Ages were called that for a reason and it was Islam that re-introduced science, mathematics, astronomy, navigation and free trade into European "Civilisation". The modern barbarisms you rail against can easily be traced to Imperial projects and colonisations of the Europeans in the Americas and beyond.
@N0DD is this tolerance? [iraqinews.com]
@Conservative What's the question?