Vote
30 Total Votes
*grabs popcorn*
@utherpenguin, given that the vast majority of religions have been responsible for wars and all kinds of other violent things, how are the majority of them nonviolent?
@Texas14 Examples?
Christianity advocates killing your neighbor for working on Sunday as well as killing homosexuals. Judaism shares many of Christianity's Old Testament teachings. Islam advocates for the slaughter of infidels. There are Bhuddists in Myanmar right now that are incredibly violent because of religious doctrine. Greek mythology has a lot to do with the violent wrath of the Gods. I could go on.
@Texas12 Citation?
http://america.aljazeera.com/opinions/2015/2/myanmars-buddhist-terrorism-problem.html
http://biblehub.com/exodus/35-2.htm
http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/pages/quran/violence.aspx
http://classroom.synonym.com/violence-greek-creation-mythology-13546.html
@Texas14 Does Buddhism explicitly preach violence against religious minorities (not to justify the persecution), how are you sure that it's the religion of Buddhism at fault for said violence and not the fault of the Burmese who are actually engaging in the persecution? I'm no Bible expert so I can't really comment on the BibleHub link. I can't take a word seriously from the trash site "thereligionofpeace.Com" (Numerous and *blatant* factual errors made about Islam, other people have pointed it out endlessly, so I can't make a comment on that). Thirdly, was Hellenism used to justify any religious violence in ancient greece, that does not make the religion inherently violent.
Its really hard to find any innate violence in jainism
@utherpenguin, you can double check those quotes if you actually read the holy books. The point I'm trying to make is that virtually every religion except Jainism has been used to justify violent acts.
@klaralein, atheism and agnosticism aren't religions.
Atheism is a religion like not collecting stamps is a hobby - Penn Jillette
If the religion even mentions once about killing somebody (self-defense as an exception) then it is not violent.
Non-violent*
@tajshar2k, totally agree. If a religion ever advocates for violence, it is by definition violent.
@Texas14 So if I do one bad thing, I'm automatically a bad person?
No, but if you're holy book teaches one violent thing, it is violent. But we shouldn't really be debating that because the holy books teach way more than one violent thing.
Christianity does not teach any form of violence and Buddhism is centered around peace. Jainism is not the only one.
Christianity and Bhuddism have both been violent. Sure, most of the teachings of Bhuddism are peaceful, but like I said earlier, there are Bhuddist monks in Myanmar today that are commiting atrocities in the name of their religion. Christianity, however, straight up advocates for violence. There are quotes that advocate for killing homosexuals, killing your neighbor for working on Sunday, condoning and even advocating for slavery. There's also violent stories where God does violence himself such as performing abortions, flooding the world, etc. How can you read the Bible and still maintain that Christianity is nonviolent?
Violent Buddhists do not follow their religion. All the "Christian" teachings that you say are violent are actually ancient Jewish laws. According to Christianity, these teachings should not be followed.
Whether the Bhuddists are following the teachings or not, they are doing violence in the name of Bhuddism. As for Christianity, you're saying that Christians shouldn't follow the Old Testament?
If Buddhists are violent in the name of Buddhism, that does not make Buddhism a violent religion, especially considering that violence contradicts the religion's teachings. Also, I'm not saying that Christians shouldn't follow the Old Testament, but the teachings of Jesus contradict its violent aspects.
So you do value the teachings of Jesus over the teachings of the Old Testament, correct?
If you do though, wouldn't you be in favor of gay marriage? Because Jesus taught "love thy neighbor" and letting gay people get married would seem to follow that.
Christians should value the teachings of Jesus over the Old Testament because Jesus is the founder of their religion and the foundation of its teachings. And how does loving gay people mean you have to allow them to marry?
Let me put it this way. Do people have a human right to marry who they want?
No.
Does supporting the death penalty count as being violent?
@Bob13, wow. Yeah we're going to disagree on that.
@Texas14, No. Marriage is not a right. It is an institution(religious/spiritual/etc) and/or contract (between the state/government/ruling body/etc).
It's a right under the universal declaration of human rights.
@Texas14, No idea where you got that, but I'd bet from some lunatic organization. Probably the same type of organization that would have the world's largest human rights violators in charge of maintaining human rights.
@Heterodox, it's from the UN's official website.
Http://www.Un.Org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights/
I realize that this only pertains to straight marriage, but I'm advocating that it be changed to any two people.
@Texas14 Not to get all pessimistic, but the UN Declaration of Human Rights has no weight behind it. Every country breaks at least one of its "rights" and it has no relevance in legal disputes. Its a nice sheet of paper, nothing more.
@Texas14, I stand by my statement, "...Some lunatic organization...".
Portions of this page are reproduced from or are modifications based on work created and 