So the Pope is a marxist.... (wait for it)

[shoju]

It is hard to understand outside of the context of that time. In many ways the Caliphate brought it upon themselves by mistreating non-Islam believers and destroying or seizing all the Churches. The pope gave a speech. Many years later 20,000 peasants marched to the Holy Land unprepared for any battle and were mercilessly slaughtered. And, you know how these "for justice" things build. In that age, warfare was considered a glorious opportunity to improve your lot in life. It was not considered to be the horror we ascribe to it now.

You are correct. But you are still missing the point. This was, asked for, agreed upon, and "sponsored" by the church. It was "ordained" by the church, in a sense. This was bloodshed, with God's Blessing, and it wasn't "that long" ago, in a "historical sense" this is post AD here.

Some self proclaimed "religious" people say and do horrible things. Why? Because they are people. I would hazard to say that if you examined the population for crime, drug abuse, etc. that a person religious affiliation has little meaning. Just because you claim to be a horse, doesn't make you a horse.

I see this type of rationale quite often. And it's always when someone is bringing up the horrors of Christian Terrorist / Extremists. Are you willing to say then, that this same opinion applies universally, even to those of Muslim faith, who are decried by their peers? Are you willing to accept that Extremist Muslim sects are no more true Christian than the likes of David Koresh, the Christmas Day Bombers, the Rape the Gay Away Pastor, etc...?

And, "Focus on the Family" is promoting violence? People like Worley still have the freedom to speak their mind, even when it is hateful. Now, people will judge his words and gather to protest him.

I didn't say that they specifically promoted violence. I said that if I wanted to convict millions of christians for doing awful shit, I could bring up Focus on the Family, there work with repression therapy, conversion therapy, their "shun, and isolation" stance for parents towards LGBT youth. In an age when suicide is the #3 cause of death for teenagers, (and while not explicitly supported by in depth analysis, because of the sketchy details in suicides, perceived to be higher in the LGBT teen population) they have a lot to answer for. We can start here if you would like.

The record of at least 3 anecdotes who made the press. But, again, you think "Focus on the Family" is promoting violence?

I don't know if an ordained pastor being convicted, and 2 later backtracking and apologizing count as anectdotes, and like was previously pointing out, I was referring to "they" in a much broader sense. We can focus on the problems in the US, the mission field, where ever you would like, if you want more news. But that wasn't the point.

I started with talking about violence, and sort of veered off into the other shitty things like Focus on the Family when talking about "convicting millions". Because while Christian Extremism leading to violence may be a smaller pool of crazies than what Islam has, (and there are easily identifiable societal constructs that prevent that), it does have a very large pool of crazies.

The extremists who would see LGBT people killed, assaulted,
The extremists who believe that the USA should be a Theocracy
The extremists who subscribe to the Prosperity Gospel
The extremists who subscribe to creationist math
The extremists who shun modern medicine in favor of praying the illness away, and watch their children die
The extremists who believe that every new piece of technology is a sign of the trials and tribulations
The extremists who believe that anything they don't understand is witchcraft
And on, and on, and on, and on, and on.

My main point, was that Christianity is not very pacificistic in nature. And we can point from the Crusades, to England / Ireland, to bombings, to assaulting people who are different Orientation, race, etc... as evidence, that throughout even modern, recent history, Christianity doesn't have a good track record of being pacifist in nature. But, at least in my opinion, that gets glossed over, as just a few crazies, because we live in it, while we point the finger at other religions, and say "SEE! SEE! THEY ARE VIOLENT!, when going by the numbers they aren't really that much more violent than 'murica's pet religion.

My neighbors divide into factions, but not on religious grounds. My co-workers divide into factions, but not on religious grounds. When I was in high school, we were divided into factions, but not on religious grounds. Cliques or tribes are innate behavior for us. " Humans evolved to be innately prepared to commit to the institutions and projects of their tribes but culture dictated how to recognize who belonged to the tribes, what schedules of aid, praise, and punishment was due to tribal fellows, and how the tribe was to deal with other tribes — allies, enemies, and clients. " [Richardson]

And I still personally feel that sectarianist behavior, and attitudes, pushes this to the extreme. Sectarianism takes the tribe mentality that humans have developed throughout history, and pushes it to a "finding a reason to be superior, searching for faults, searching for the differences" mentality that looks to create rifts between a populace.

For me, it's just as unacceptable as the bullying we all witnessed in high school, but it takes place on a much more grand level. We used Sectarianist behavior to start, fund, and rationalize over a decade of "war against terror".

I think the myriad of belief systems makes that a hard judgement between black and white. I can't say that all Islam inspires violence, while clearly some sects are very violent. Or, maybe it's the interpretation of the Koran by specific clerics who's flock then take matters into their own hands. Sound familiar? A narrow reading of the Geneva convention, and a room full of word smithing lawyers enabled our government to justify "enhanced interrogation techniques", but we'd not want to call it torture. Whether one is blowing up a market filled with women and children, or water boarding the person suspected of doing it -- somewhere the knowledge of right from wrong was lost -- the inspiration for their justification is the very thing that positive philosophies seek to change.

People have brains, and mouths, and ears, so they will use them to spread their opinions and philosophies. How are you going to influence that for the better? (see also; Terror Management Theory, although I believe it is more complicated than this.) People will subscribe to a world view (Weltanschauung), and so language and reason are our tools for convincing each other of the "truth" of our world view, and the "falsity" of others. But, then, people seldom accept the whole bushel basket of beliefs in the belief system resulting in changes over time -- some good, and some bad. A world view can be "Christian", or it could be "Enlightenment", or "Marxist", or "Nazi Third Reich". We all have one, and according to Leo Apostel, they encompass; an explanation of the world as it is, a plan for the future (Where are we going?), a system of ethics/values (What should we do?), a theory of action (How do we attain our goals?), epistemology (what is true and false?), and etiology, or an account of origin and building blocks.

The bottom line is; There are 7 billion people in the world, and the more homogeneous our world views, the better we will get along with each other.

I will completely agree with this. For me? I'd love to see it all gone. All the religion, the politics, the bullshit as I'd call it. I'd love to live in a world where people could be trusted to "be civil", and work together to make a better world for those who will inherit it from us. I raise my children with that in mind. I raise them to evaluate things based on the idea that every person has value, and that value isn't found in their religion, their orientation, their politics, their skin color, or any other "box" that we can categorize people with. I want them to have a world view, in which we don't have the tribe mentality. Because it's a flawed outlook to have. The Tribe mentality leads to those who are with you, and those who are against you. It's crippled this country's political system. It's crippled discussion here on the lounge.

Obviously, people will disagree, but that doesn't mean that it should devolve into a "they disagree because they're a [insert some BS categorical adjective here]". It drives me insane, and it's something I've been guilty of as well.


EDIT:

I saw a snippet of another post of yours

Individuals are held accountable for their crimes. My point is that we don't convict groups of people for the aberrant actions of individuals, unless there is a conspiracy to commit a crime.

Oh, if only that were really the case, things would be a lot different right now.