Jump to content
Mayhem Requiem

Pakistani Christians Burned Alive Were Attacked by 1,200 People


Melech

Featured Posts

well, still my church doesn't attack a country or creates war, so you argument is invalid 

he said religion as a whole and not your church specifically, so you don't have an argument at all.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 37
  • Created
  • Last Reply

he said religion as a whole and not your church specifically, so you don't have an argument at all.

Well, but my church is part of a religion and practices a religion. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Didymus

he said religion as a whole and not your church specifically, so you don't have an argument at all.

 

How does one separate politics with religion in those cases of religious terror, though? Is there really any point in trying to pretend that religious conflicts don't have any connections with politics and social structures? There is a mass of academic literature on religious conflicts and all efforts point to the contrary: religion is a tool in social/political projects.

 

And let's not forget the religious currents that have tried to, sometimes militantly, fight back oppressive regimes.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, but my church is part of a religion and practices a religion. 

it's not a difficult point to get, that one part of something is not the same as the whole thing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

it's not a difficult point to get, that one part of something is not the same as the whole thing.

 

it's still part of it. See you can't generalize religion like rways did. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

How does one separate politics with religion in those cases of religious terror, though? Is there really any point in trying to pretend that religious conflicts don't have any connections with politics and social structures? There is a mass of academic literature on religious conflicts and all efforts point to the contrary: religion is a tool in social/political projects.

 

And let's not forget the religious currents that have tried to, sometimes militantly, fight back oppressive regimes.

 

do you have to separate them? i'm not pretending that at all. same goes in reverse, is there any point in denying that harmful political aims are greatly enhanced to the detriment of everyone else and unified through serious belief in a sky god and holy scripture and life after death? it's completely false to presume that there's no such thing as political religions or that religions can't have anything to do with politics, or only a way that politics are the true driving force controlling everything (... religion?). we want to move away from religious fervour, even if it is in the form of political actions. that you can see politics in something doesn't mean that it wasn't the religious part that bolstered the politics. look at the communist regimes. those appear secular... but are completely religious. that's the kind of religion we want rid of too.

it's still part of it. See you can't generalize religion like rways did. 

you can accept that something has some good parts while still wanting rid of it and thinking that overall it is not worth having.

Link to post
Share on other sites

SychosSoChic

Religion can also be an individual practice, obviously. Stop trying to derail the thread, this is totally unnecessary.

 

Did you seriously not see the religious debates coming?  :usrs:

Life ain't Hollywood for any one of us.
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

you can accept that something has some good parts while still wanting rid of it and thinking that overall it is not worth having.

just stop :smh: you have no idea what you are talking about 

Link to post
Share on other sites

just stop :smh: you have no idea what you are talking about 

thanks for that great input. you may leave the adult's table.

Link to post
Share on other sites

rude

if you don't like it then don't post laughing emoticons and say "just stop" (rude) and "you have no idea what you're talking about" (rude when you don't qualify or include anything to show me the apparent error of my ways). i mean i understand that you feel i intellectually backed you into a corner (hence not responding to what i said) but you don't have to be silly about it. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

if you don't like it then don't post laughing emoticons and say "just stop" (rude) and "you have no idea what you're talking about" (rude when you don't qualify or include anything to show me the apparent error of my ways). i mean i understand that you feel intellectually backed you into a corner but you don't have to be silly about it. :)

Oh please, get of your high horse now 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh please, get of your high horse now 

it's funny that you accuse me of doing the things you just do right after i call you out on doing them. but hey, you're the christian, not me! turn the other cheek! 

Link to post
Share on other sites

it's funny that you accuse me of doing the things you just do right after i call you out on doing them. but hey, you're the christian, not me! turn the other cheek! 

i never called you intellectual backwards :) 

Link to post
Share on other sites

i never called you intellectual backwards :)

nor did i. can you either read what i said again or have someone who speaks german and better english than you translate my sentence into german? because that's a pretty crappy thing for you to say that i called you. and a lie if you stick with it. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Shadow locked this topic

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...