Would you say that there have been more wars fought in the name of religion than for any other reason?
by 
60s Rock
ANSWERS: 12
-
That's certianly a fact, yes.
-
I would say that nearly every war has a religious Tie to it
-
Not really. Religion and God always provide a convenient reason, but when the facade is stripped away, most wars are fought because one side has resources and/or property the other side wants - and they believe they can take whatever they want by force.
-
People say that they are fighting for religion, but it all comes down to politics in the end. Just look at the Thirty Years War. Perfect example.
-
no, Religion was just an excuse, greed and power is what all wars are fought over
-
YES! I have said this a million times...
-
Yes and no. A lot of the religious wars were out of greed and politics. -In the service of the Master. Thank you and God bless you!
-
I would tend to agree with that assessment, unless you include every little tribal scuffle since the beginning of time in which case the cause seems to shift a little towards Food.
-
Humans were responsible, they used religion as an excuse.
-
Greed is at the heart of war. One side has something the other side wants. Land, resources, people, power, whatever. Religion and God are convenient excuses. In the words of General S.D. Butler, two-time Congressional Medal of Honor winner, "War is a Racket." It's always been that way. You can read Gen. Butler's thoughts here: http://www.lexrex.com/enlightened/articles/warisaracket.htm
-
Religion was and is used by the leaders of various nations as a tool to manipulate the populace into doing what they want. The Church and the was as responsible as the leaders because the church at the minimum aided and abetted the leaders committing atrocities. For instance, Hitler was aided and abetted by the Pope in his slaughter of the Jews during WWII. Truly, religion is all about having power over the people.
-
Greed and power cause wars. Religion is often used to justify the greed of the leaders. But it is not the cause". Human nature is. Genghis Khan was not a "religious" man, yet he committed genocide from China to Central ASia. Stalin was an atheist, yet he killed millions of his own people, to keep himself in power. Pol Pot, likewise, was an atheist, yet he murdered 1/3 of his own people, the Cambodians, to establish a new order without any religious influences. We can all agree that Cambodia under Buddhism was a nicer place than Cambodia under Pol Pot.
RELATED QUESTIONS
Copyright 2023, Wired Ivy, LLC