Middle East Conflict

[BlueAnorak]

'get rid of religion' is to my mind a fairly meaningless statement without acknowledgement of the impossibility of doing so.

Remove that defining feature in people's individual moral view and it would be replaced by something else that would near enough replicate it - whether from cultural or political invention.

There is no utopia for humankind this century where nothing like religion will exist. Swift's Big Enders and Little Enders will always arise to fill the vacuum.

Absolutely - Atheism is actually a religion and Humanism is it's major sect.
Quite often tolerance just isn't there. And that's the big problem - i.e. Non tolerance of others.
Democracy has huge problems this century because of non-acceptance of others opinion.

 

[MillionMilesAway]

Remove religion from state would be a start. People can individually believe whatever gets them through the night.
State and church should be separate though.

It would certainly be a decent place to start.

 

[goalmole]

I think indiscriminately bombing a densely populated civilian area is worse than bad PR pal (not having a pop at you, I appreciate your level headed posts)

But they'll get away with it not because they are right but because somehow the Palestinians don't matter to anyone, they are the orphans of the human race, the children of a lesser God.
The rules and standards that apply to others don't apply to them.
The world condones the Israelis as they gradually ethnically cleanse the Palestinians, pushing them into smaller and smaller spaces and then pushing them out of there as well as we are seeing in Gaza as we speak. The fact that they are besieging and killing civilians is seen as acceptable by the supporters of Israel.
When the Palestinians react, as anyone would, they are labelled terrorist presumably because they are not acting on behalf of a government, presumably because they don't have a state, because they are not allowed to have one and if they fight then they are labelled terrorist because they are not representing a government... It's a vicious circle for them.
What choice remains to them?
The sooner these double standards end, the sooner we will get to a solution where everyone can live in peace.

 

[mexico1970]

Absolutely - Atheism is actually a religion and Humanism is it's major sect.
Quite often tolerance just isn't there. And that's the big problem - Non tolerance of others.
Democracy has huge problems this century because of non-acceptance of others opinion.

I don't agree that atheism is a religion, denying something that hasn't been proven to exist isn't an odd take on things it should be quite a modern take on what our beliefs should be.

 

[arbabarshad]

It would certainly be a decent place to start.

If you remove religion, humans will find something else to vent their frustrations about inequality which will continue to exist.

Religion might seem like the root of the problem but it also keeps a lid on a lot of problems by advocating tolerance against social injustices and inequalities because it makes people believe that hardships are a test and promises good times (this life or the next) to those who are tolerant. Yes it does also state to fight the injustices but not in the name of religion.

Before anyone jumps on this statement, I’d point out that majority of religious people in the world are tolerant people and not everyone wants to kill people who don’t follow their religion. And usually (with exceptions) the people who want to kill others due to their extreme religious views, they are only doing it in the name of religion to hide behind it and their motivations are not religious.

Wanting to kill someone because they killed your family or loved ones is not a religious wish. It’s fighting against social injustice.

 

[Alan Harper's Tash]

I don't agree that atheism is a religion, denying something that hasn't been proven to exist isn't an odd take on things it should be quite a modern take on what our beliefs should be.

Atheism is based on the belief that god doesn’t exist, which makes it exactly the same as all other religions. The Althusser believes they know better than the Christian/Jew/Muslim in the same way a religious person knows better than the atheist.

God will never be proved nor disproved.

I think more and more people are on the don’t give a fuck about god train. The passive agnostics.

 

[The blue phantom]

Atheism is based on the belief that god doesn’t exist, which makes it exactly the same as all other religions.

Where is it recognised that being an atheist is religious, part of a religion?

Or is this just an opinion?

 

[Alan Harper's Tash]

Where is it recognised that being an atheist is religious, part of a religion?

Or is this just an opinion?

It’s obviously an opinion, but atheism being a belief based theory can’t really be doubted.

Is Atheism a religion?

Atheism can truly be defined as a religion, e.g. because it fulfills the 'seven dimensions' of religion set forth by Ninian Smart.

creation.com

 

[robbieh]

I've found the "ethnic cleansing" term thrown about a lot and it's just not accurate at all. The Palestinian population has over doubled since 1990 - so why are people just casually dropping this line in?

Ethnic cleansing does not mean killing people, it means removing them from where they normally live.
The Nakba in 1948 was an example of this. The mandate gave 55% of the land to the Jews and 44% to the Palestinians. Most of the land in the Jewish part was owned however by Arabs for the obvious reason that they'd been living there for centuries.
Hundreds of villages were destroyed and hundreds of thousands of Palestinians moved out of Israel. Some remained and became Israeli Arabs.
This forced removal of people was never going to be a good starting point for the new state. Throw in attacks by neighbouring Arab countries and Israel was only going to survive through military means.
I often think of when the British left India. Moslems and Hindus had lived amongst each other for centuries. Britain organizes partition and all hell broke loose. Muslims in Bombay moving to Islamabad and Hindus doing the reverse trip, all leaving behind jobs, possessions and friends. Madness. Not to mention millions lost their lives.

 

[Ducado]

Ethnic cleansing does not mean killing people, it means removing them from where they normally live.
The Nakba in 1948 was an example of this. The mandate gave 55% of the land to the Jews and 44% to the Palestinians. Most of the land in the Jewish part was owned however by Arabs for the obvious reason that they'd been living there for centuries.
Hundreds of villages were destroyed and hundreds of thousands of Palestinians moved out of Israel. Some remained and became Israeli Arabs.
This forced removal of people was never going to be a good starting point for the new state. Throw in attacks by neighbouring Arab countries and Israel was only going to survive through military means.
I often think of when the British left India. Moslems and Hindus had lived amongst each other for centuries. Britain organizes partition and all hell broke loose. Muslims in Bombay moving to Islamabad and Hindus doing the reverse trip, all leaving behind jobs, possessions and friends. Madness. Not to mention millions lost their lives.

The partition of India was not really much to do with the British although they drew the lines, it was the aspirations some Muslims and Hindus, they just couldn’t get on together, it was a terrible time and neither group came out well