Middle East Crisis

[William the White]

Marvellous, so to sum up: these cxnts all lined up and sliced the living heads off of a random selection of Syrians because -
(Monty) they want more oil
(WtW) they don't want to cause war, this is self evident
(Hoboh, bish, Bobo, Worthy) they're just trying to demonstrate their affinity to the rest of humanity.

Nothing to do with their allegiance to the Islamic State, nothing to do with being Muslim, nope nothing at all.

I certainly didn't say anything like that. I said that in the case of ISIS this is entirely evident - religion is their ideological motivation. They want war and are powerfully motivated by a belief that God wants them to do it...

I don't believe that religions 'cause' war - but, historically, they offer a powerful ideological motivation for them, and, in the case of ISIS, this is entirely evident. The entire ideological discourse is couched in religious terms and the state desired is one without physical boundaries, a Caliphate of the faithful. The borders of this 'state' are less physical than ideological - the borders are 'belief', 'faith' the 'will of the lord'.

[TANGODANCER]

They want war and are powerfully motivated by a belief that God wants them to do it... ]

I'd have that read" They want war and are powerfully motivated and led by the noses by those in power who instill a belief in them that God wants them to do it... ]

Have any of them thought ahead to what they're actually going to do when they've, blown-up, beheaded or converted everybody? Going to live lives of prayer, peace and prosperity are they? Hmmmmm.

[William the White]

They want war and are powerfully motivated by a belief that God wants them to do it... ]

I'd have that read" They want war and are powerfully motivated and led by the noses by those in power who instill a belief in them that God wants them to do it... ]

Have any of them thought ahead to what they're actually going to do when they've, blown-up, beheaded or converted everybody? Going to live lives of prayer, peace and prosperity are they?

Hmmmmm.

Well... They'll either be in heaven with multiple beautiful virgins or in the heaven on earth that is the Caliphate where God has organised most aspects of life for them...

Where else do you expect them to be?

[Montreal Wanderer]

Marvellous, so to sum up: these cxnts all lined up and sliced the living heads off of a random selection of Syrians because -
(Monty) they want more oil
(WtW) they don't want to cause war, this is self evident
(Hoboh, bish, Bobo, Worthy) they're just trying to demonstrate their affinity to the rest of humanity.

Nothing to do with their allegiance to the Islamic State, nothing to do with being Muslim, nope nothing at all.

Not quite - I think I said they want oil and political power. The first gives them some of the means to the second. Sure, they also use Jihad or re-establishment of the Caliphate as a rallying cry. And Terror. These are all means of obtaining power and control IMHO.

[Prufrock]

It's not that science has fixed everything, but that we're at the point that science means we don't need religion anymore. The "good stuff" religion could do or was needed for has shrunk massively.

That doesn't mean science won't lead to discoveries that bring about the end of us, can't be used for terrible things, or that power won't corrupt it, but keeping religion isn't going to stop that. And, crucially, science exists! It's easy to stop power corrupting religion - get rid of religion; it's based on a man made of imaginary straw. It's not as easy to stop power corrupting science. The stuff that science comes from is real!

given the tendency of humans to invent/turn-to religion over millenia - I suspect it is not at all easy to stop power corrupting religion - because it simply is not that easy to get rid of religion - humans still very much appear to want/need it...

as for your other point about the civilised west not being very violent in this new scientific age... all I can say is - utter toshbags!

now... hmmmm... as for leaning on the virtues of science to lessen the number/scope/death-toll of wars.... forgive me if I am wrong - but is it not true that by FAR the biggest science budgets across the world are dedicated to military research?? Even a massive proportion of the yummy space-budget was/is motivated by America's ongoing desire to militarise space!! I'm sure you won't be leaning on the old "it's not weapons that kill people" argument just now - will you? thanks for the weapons, science! and for all the tasty peace-loving new ones - biological/chemical/remotely operated that you are so busy inventing for us right now - but don't worry about it, Pru loves his i-phone!

(now don't get me wrong - I love science - I have a science degree - I am a bachelor of science no less (go me!) - but I don't share your misty-eyed view that science is the answer to the human predicament of violence and aggression, any more than religion is...)

Change 'easy' for 'possible' then.

You're misunderstanding me, though that may well be my fault.

I wholly accept that the things bad people could do with science are far worse than they could do with religion. North Korea is a horrible place which is a scar on humanity with its pseudo-theological necrocracy. If they got hold of nuclear weapons though, Christ on a bike.

I don't think religion is the worst or biggest or most dangerous cause of problems in the world, but it's up there with the most unnecessary. You can't do away with people's need to get resources, or their wish to hold power over each other, or their need to try to find out why the world around them is the way it is. You can do away with needing to invent imaginary characters to fill voids. There'd still be wars, but they wouldn't have the pointlessness to them that religious conflicts do. "Easy" was lazy, but it's not impossible to get rid of in the way that other motivators of bad things are. I live quite happily (despite impressions to the contrary) without a god. I don't know of anyone who lives happily without food and water, shelter or land.

I take your point that it's not necessarily easy, but it doesn't seem coincidental that as western society has become more secular, it's become more liberal, more prosperous and less violent (within itself). I accept that it hasn't been perfect, but if it does come to a choice over the worldview of the Americans or the Taliban, or Britain and Suddam Hussein, then I'm utterly convinced that liberal secular democracy is the *right* one. In the same way that I'm uneasy about Dresden but wholly convinced that the Allies were the *good guys*.

As for a conflict between science and religion, I wasn't trying to say that (generally) there is one; and I'm sure you'll agree with that as a vicar with a BSc.

One has gods created in man's image that take on human characteristics and can be given 'voices' by people who want to use it for their own ends. One is a neutral way of looking at the world. Science can be used by bad people, but it doesn't itself give a motivation to bad people. In the same way that atheists have done terrible things but hardly ever *because* they're atheists.

[Prufrock]

Sooooo. We've outgrown religion and science has got its shxt together, hey. Oh goody, a major triumph for the world's two per cent of atheists.

No agreement will ever be reached for a very simple reason, and it's nothing to do with religion which has never been a cause of war but always a handy excuse for one. The simple reason is people. On here alone we have:

The believers in God, call us (well, me then) The Votives, a following who hold a firm belief in God, the after-life and the power of prayer and get off on the smell of candle-wax, incense, confession and celebrating Christmas and Easter. Maxims ( at least in principle) are not to murder anybody or covet their neighbours wives. Unfortunately, "The road to Hell is paved with good intentions etc," oft applies.

The non-believers, call them The Sinatras (I'll do it my way) who deny the need for Christmas or Easter, but are quite happy with the chocolate eggs and presents. They'd probably like all Churches, Mosques and Synagogues to be turned into antique and second-hand furniture venues or curry palaces. Maxims : "If I want to covet my neighbours wife it's nobody's business as long as I don't get caught".

The Agnostics, call them The Prudentials, who commit to no view because they can't prove or disprove either so they take out an insurance policy by sneakily uttering a silent prayer or two, just in case, and carrying both a Bible and a copy of The Blind Watchmaker in their briefcases. They have no maxims because they're not sure what they are.

And you think we'll find agreement or solutions?

2%? Unfortunately lots of people in the world aren't free to say that they're atheist; some other folk don't like it. I can't see any secular society that doesn't let someone say they're religious.

And of course we don't need to agree, it's just if it's an atheist you're disagreeing with, there's no chance they're going to cut your head off for it. Some religious people like to complain that atheists are intolerant and don't respect their views. Damn right their views don't get respect. Views don't deserve respect; people do. I don't know any atheists, not even offence-o-gram Richard Dawkins, who would argue that someone should be imprisoned or killed or cast out of society because they believe in a god. Of course not all religious people would argue that those punishments should be inflicted on atheists, but *some* do. Some whole countries even.

Religion has "never" been a cause of war? Same question to you, do you not think that religion has caused, or made worse, a single war? I really can't believe people try to take that point. By all means argue that, despite causing and aggravating some wars, religion as a whole does more good than harm. That's an arguable point, but "never caused a war"? Come now.

This Sinatrist would like churches mosques and synagogues to become museums to the disproved traditions that shaped human history along with the brilliant art and architecture they resulted in, along with the recognition of the often terrible things that happened in their name. Something about learning from history.

You still haven't answered where you think morality comes from

[Prufrock]

Religion, the ones that I know and practised by the ones that I know certainly aren't anything like the ones you see associated with atrocities.

Idiots are out there but to suggest or even think that everyone who follows a religion wants to or has the potential to start beheading, killing etc, is quite frankly idiotic.

It's surely a relief then that no-one has suggested that.

[thebish]

I don't think religion is the worst or biggest or most dangerous cause of problems in the world, but it's up there with the most unnecessary.

what do you think is/are the worst or biggest or most dangerous cause of problems in the world, then?

also - religion - unnecessary? You might say that - but I think you are being (again) wildly optimistic and naive if you think there is some groundswell of liberal secular science-ised Westerners eager to step into the huge breach of simple social care and community development that would be left in your (strangely illiberal!) church-purged paradise!

to take a personal example... the fact that my local churches pay me (out of their own pocket) so that I have the luxury of not having to go out to work - I had the time yesterday to spend significant time with the following..

1) a man dying of throat cancer in Newton Abbot hospital who has no family
2) a man with fairly severe learning difficulties in a care home in Torquay - who is dying of stomach cancer and can't understand the pain he is in
3) a younger woman whose 6yr old child died last year from leukemia.

none of these people are necessary and their needs are unimportant to people who are only interested in the world making them a shiny new gadget - but to me - and my church - they are immeasurably important and the time we give them is immeasurably important. You may argue that they would simply be catered for by paid professionals - nurses, doctors, psychiatrists - that science would help... and in some ways it does - but that doesn't even begin to cover half the story of what they really need...

i don't believe that church people are as individuals more compassionate than anyone else per se - but - the existence of the church (in my opinion) fosters and encourages a level of local community care and compassion that often goes totally unseen by those who will not look... the world would be a much poorer place without it...

today I am not due to see anyone who is dying - though I am helping a family think through a funeral for their mother this evening - so maybe I'll find time to go out and start or encourage a war somewhere instead!

[William the White]

I don't think religion is the worst or biggest or most dangerous cause of problems in the world, but it's up there with the most unnecessary.

what do you think is/are the worst or biggest or most dangerous cause of problems in the world, then?

also - religion - unnecessary? You might say that - but I think you are being (again) wildly optimistic and naive if you think there is some groundswell of liberal secular science-ised Westerners eager to step into the huge breach of simple social care and community development that would be left in your (strangely illiberal!) church-purged paradise!

to take a personal example... the fact that my local churches pay me (out of their own pocket) so that I have the luxury of not having to go out to work - I had the time yesterday to spend significant time with the following..

1) a man dying of throat cancer in Newton Abbot hospital who has no family
2) a man with fairly severe learning difficulties in a care home in Torquay - who is dying of stomach cancer and can't understand the pain he is in
3) a younger woman whose 6yr old child died last year from leukemia.

none of these people are necessary and their needs are unimportant to people who are only interested in the world making them a shiny new gadget - but to me - and my church - they are immeasurably important and the time we give them is immeasurably important. You may argue that they would simply be catered for by paid professionals - nurses, doctors, psychiatrists - that science would help... and in some ways it does - but that doesn't even begin to cover half the story of what they really need...

i don't believe that church people are as individuals more compassionate than anyone else per se - but - the existence of the church (in my opinion) fosters and encourages a level of local community care and compassion that often goes totally unseen by those who will not look... the world would be a much poorer place without it...

today I am not due to see anyone who is dying - though I am helping a family think through a funeral for their mother this evening - so maybe I'll find time to go out and start or encourage a war somewhere instead!

I agree with this totally. You don't need God to show compassion. And you don't need God to be a murderous bigot either. But God furnishes both the compassionate and murderous with all the ammunition they need.

Well, 'god' doesn't. but religions do.

[Lord Kangana]

Has anyone asked god what he thinks about it?

[Hoboh]

It's not that science has fixed everything, but that we're at the point that science means we don't need religion anymore. The "good stuff" religion could do or was needed for has shrunk massively.

That doesn't mean science won't lead to discoveries that bring about the end of us, can't be used for terrible things, or that power won't corrupt it, but keeping religion isn't going to stop that. And, crucially, science exists! It's easy to stop power corrupting religion - get rid of religion; it's based on a man made of imaginary straw. It's not as easy to stop power corrupting science. The stuff that science comes from is real!

given the tendency of humans to invent/turn-to religion over millenia - I suspect it is not at all easy to stop power corrupting religion - because it simply is not that easy to get rid of religion - humans still very much appear to want/need it...

as for your other point about the civilised west not being very violent in this new scientific age... all I can say is - utter toshbags!

now... hmmmm... as for leaning on the virtues of science to lessen the number/scope/death-toll of wars.... forgive me if I am wrong - but is it not true that by FAR the biggest science budgets across the world are dedicated to military research?? Even a massive proportion of the yummy space-budget was/is motivated by America's ongoing desire to militarise space!! I'm sure you won't be leaning on the old "it's not weapons that kill people" argument just now - will you? thanks for the weapons, science! and for all the tasty peace-loving new ones - biological/chemical/remotely operated that you are so busy inventing for us right now - but don't worry about it, Pru loves his i-phone!

(now don't get me wrong - I love science - I have a science degree - I am a bachelor of science no less (go me!) - but I don't share your misty-eyed view that science is the answer to the human predicament of violence and aggression, any more than religion is...)

Change 'easy' for 'possible' then.

You're misunderstanding me, though that may well be my fault.

I wholly accept that the things bad people could do with science are far worse than they could do with religion. North Korea is a horrible place which is a scar on humanity with its pseudo-theological necrocracy. If they got hold of nuclear weapons though, Christ on a bike.
I don't think religion is the worst or biggest or most dangerous cause of problems in the world, but it's up there with the most unnecessary. You can't do away with people's need to get resources, or their wish to hold power over each other, or their need to try to find out why the world around them is the way it is. You can do away with needing to invent imaginary characters to fill voids. There'd still be wars, but they wouldn't have the pointlessness to them that religious conflicts do. "Easy" was lazy, but it's not impossible to get rid of in the way that other motivators of bad things are. I live quite happily (despite impressions to the contrary) without a god. I don't know of anyone who lives happily without food and water, shelter or land.

I take your point that it's not necessarily easy, but it doesn't seem coincidental that as western society has become more secular, it's become more liberal, more prosperous and less violent (within itself). I accept that it hasn't been perfect, but if it does come to a choice over the worldview of the Americans or the Taliban, or Britain and Suddam Hussein, then I'm utterly convinced that liberal secular democracy is the *right* one. In the same way that I'm uneasy about Dresden but wholly convinced that the Allies were the *good guys*.

As for a conflict between science and religion, I wasn't trying to say that (generally) there is one; and I'm sure you'll agree with that as a vicar with a BSc.

One has gods created in man's image that take on human characteristics and can be given 'voices' by people who want to use it for their own ends. One is a neutral way of looking at the world. Science can be used by bad people, but it doesn't itself give a motivation to bad people. In the same way that atheists have done terrible things but hardly ever *because* they're atheists.

Do you get out much?

[Harry Genshaw]

Comedy. That's what we need. More laughs.

Cartoons of Mo should help.

[TANGODANCER]

You still haven't answered where you think morality comes from

Well, it's all a bit Alexander Armstrong anyway isn't it? How about we ask why the Ten Commandments were necessary at all? See, we're bound to come up with different answer, you not believing there's a God to deliver them anyway. It's generally accepted that the Old Testament books were written many centuries before the birth of Jesus. If you want to believe morality was just something that happened, fine. I have no problem with that because it's pretty obvious to a believer that God saw it necessary to put a stop to the lack of it by producing the Commandments. Not much morality hanging about in Sodom and Gomorrah was there?

You still seem to believe that religion is something at the end of the yellow-brick road that some Dorothy can confront and turn off. The only voice religion has is a belief in a supreme deity who doesn't decide to start wars for any reason whatsoever. Men do that and religion is just, in quite a few cases, a convenient excuse used for it.

Amen...again..

[William the White]

Sooooo. We've outgrown religion and science has got its shxt together, hey. Oh goody, a major triumph for the world's two per cent of atheists.

No agreement will ever be reached for a very simple reason, and it's nothing to do with religion which has never been a cause of war but always a handy excuse for one. The simple reason is people. On here alone we have:

The believers in God, call us (well, me then) The Votives, a following who hold a firm belief in God, the after-life and the power of prayer and get off on the smell of candle-wax, incense, confession and celebrating Christmas and Easter. Maxims ( at least in principle) are not to murder anybody or covet their neighbours wives. Unfortunately, "The road to Hell is paved with good intentions etc," oft applies.

The non-believers, call them The Sinatras (I'll do it my way) who deny the need for Christmas or Easter, but are quite happy with the chocolate eggs and presents. They'd probably like all Churches, Mosques and Synagogues to be turned into antique and second-hand furniture venues or curry palaces. Maxims : "If I want to covet my neighbours wife it's nobody's business as long as I don't get caught".

The Agnostics, call them The Prudentials, who commit to no view because they can't prove or disprove either so they take out an insurance policy by sneakily uttering a silent prayer or two, just in case, and carrying both a Bible and a copy of The Blind Watchmaker in their briefcases. They have no maxims because they're not sure what they are.

And you think we'll find agreement or solutions?

Do you believe masturbation is a sin? And does it condemn you to hell? Or do you opt out of this element of belief? Cos your church is a mix and match shelf.

[bobo the clown]

Why do we feel the need to question & ridicule other people's beliefs ? Now THAT is the route to wars on a macro scale & to personal feuds on a micro one.

Believe what you want but don't ridicule beliefs you don't agree with and don't contemplate getting inside someone's head on their own thoughts and processes. Certainly don't do it from a position of ignorance .... in some cases pig ignorance and the desire to seem intellectually sound and seek acceptance.

Attacks like this will never, ever lead to the killer comment which change people's fundamental views. They have to do that themselves.

[TANGODANCER]

Do you believe masturbation is a sin? And does it condemn you to hell? Or do you opt out of this element of belief? Cos your church is a mix and match shelf.

I think I already stated "The road to hell is paved with good intentions", Will( so I won't be getting any nominations for Catholic of the year" ) and a church, just like religion is an inanimate object. It's people and their beliefs who do the deciding on either, not bricks and mortar.

[thebish]

Has anyone asked god what he thinks about it?

he's a bit busy getting the team ready for the Blackpool game and umming and ahhing over whether to sign Eidur and/or bin Lofty...

[Montreal Wanderer]

You still haven't answered where you think morality comes from

Well, it's all a bit Alexander Armstrong anyway isn't it? How about we ask why the Ten Commandments were necessary at all? See, we're bound to come up with different answer, you not believing there's a God to deliver them anyway. It's generally accepted that the Old Testament books were written many centuries before the birth of Jesus. If you want to believe morality was just something that happened, fine. I have no problem with that because it's pretty obvious to a believer that God saw it necessary to put a stop to the lack of it by producing the Commandments. Not much morality hanging about in Sodom and Gomorrah was there?

You still seem to believe that religion is something at the end of the yellow-brick road that some Dorothy can confront and turn off. The only voice religion has is a belief in a supreme deity who doesn't decide to start wars for any reason whatsoever. Men do that and religion is just, in quite a few cases, a convenient excuse used for it.

Amen...again..

This might depend on whether you think homosexuality and oral sex are immoral. We did once, but the times they are a-changing.

[TANGODANCER]

You still haven't answered where you think morality comes from

Well, it's all a bit Alexander Armstrong anyway isn't it? How about we ask why the Ten Commandments were necessary at all? See, we're bound to come up with different answer, you not believing there's a God to deliver them anyway. It's generally accepted that the Old Testament books were written many centuries before the birth of Jesus. If you want to believe morality was just something that happened, fine. I have no problem with that because it's pretty obvious to a believer that God saw it necessary to put a stop to the lack of it by producing the Commandments. Not much morality hanging about in Sodom and Gomorrah was there?

You still seem to believe that religion is something at the end of the yellow-brick road that some Dorothy can confront and turn off. The only voice religion has is a belief in a supreme deity who doesn't decide to start wars for any reason whatsoever. Men do that and religion is just, in quite a few cases, a convenient excuse used for it.

Amen...again..

This might depend on whether you think homosexuality and oral sex are immoral. We did once, but the times they are a-changing.

Ah, must have got it wrong then. I thought gang-rape was the issue....

[Prufrock]

I don't think religion is the worst or biggest or most dangerous cause of problems in the world, but it's up there with the most unnecessary.

what do you think is/are the worst or biggest or most dangerous cause of problems in the world, then?

also - religion - unnecessary? You might say that - but I think you are being (again) wildly optimistic and naive if you think there is some groundswell of liberal secular science-ised Westerners eager to step into the huge breach of simple social care and community development that would be left in your (strangely illiberal!) church-purged paradise!

to take a personal example... the fact that my local churches pay me (out of their own pocket) so that I have the luxury of not having to go out to work - I had the time yesterday to spend significant time with the following..

1) a man dying of throat cancer in Newton Abbot hospital who has no family
2) a man with fairly severe learning difficulties in a care home in Torquay - who is dying of stomach cancer and can't understand the pain he is in
3) a younger woman whose 6yr old child died last year from leukemia.

none of these people are necessary and their needs are unimportant to people who are only interested in the world making them a shiny new gadget - but to me - and my church - they are immeasurably important and the time we give them is immeasurably important. You may argue that they would simply be catered for by paid professionals - nurses, doctors, psychiatrists - that science would help... and in some ways it does - but that doesn't even begin to cover half the story of what they really need...

i don't believe that church people are as individuals more compassionate than anyone else per se - but - the existence of the church (in my opinion) fosters and encourages a level of local community care and compassion that often goes totally unseen by those who will not look... the world would be a much poorer place without it...

today I am not due to see anyone who is dying - though I am helping a family think through a funeral for their mother this evening - so maybe I'll find time to go out and start or encourage a war somewhere instead!

I'm not on about banning it or purging it. I just wish those involved would realise it's not real and sack it off. You could do all your good stuff on Sundays too then .