[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Random Chaos [/i]
[B]Tyvar, while I agree that Religion is imperative to initially establishing culture (and due to how cultures work, inherently moral values), it do not believe it is necessary for relivion to exist once these cultural values are entrenched. Further, I do not believe it is necessary for religion to exist (and may even be detrimental) for these moral values to [I]evolve[/I] into a more refined and advanced moral system.[/B][/QUOTE]
Evolve how? What do you have to work with in atheism? sit back and think about it, what atheism actually entails. Whats a notion of justice to built from? what establishes prohibitions on behaviors, and exemptions to those prohibitions?
I think that part of the problem is most people dont understand that religion doesnt have to be Judasim, Christianity or Islam, or even Buddhism most of the later moral theories that have been advanced have been humanist or diest in nature. These are agnostic moral theories at their weakest, and many of them themselves do fit the criterion for religion. The positing of some sort of normative value, that can not be readily explained in strictly scientific terms, is in fact a religious belief.
Check websters unabridged dictionary, Id like to point out parts 6 and 7 of the defenition of religion. 6 a: a personal awareness or conviction of the existance of a supreme being or any supernatural powers or influences controling one's own, humanitiy's or all of nature's destiny
7 a: a cause, principle, system of tenets held with ardor, devotion, conscientiousness and faith : a value held to be of supreme importance.
Many would argue that the religion of america starting in 1776 was not that of christianity, but that of lockian democracy, this was especially the case with many of our more "beloved" political elites, such as Jefferson and Madison.
Next the notion of freedom of religion has been sharply yanked out of context. In 1787 when the constitution was first drafted, something like 11 of the 13 colonies had official religions. The 1st ammendment, in fact all the bill of rights, were implaced to hedge against the powers of the federal goverment versus the state. Because we live in a [I]Federation[/I] of 50 states, where constituionaly vast powers are still reserved to the states.
The current situation we find in where we think of the "goverment" as being the federal goverment is a fairly recent development. You have to rember, The federal constituion was not made applicable to the states until 1868 with the 14th ammendment, prior to that, the states could violate your civil rights all they wanted.
In fact if the 14th ammendment was repealed, the federal goverments power to inforce civil rights legislation would disapate, you would have to rely upon your state constituion for protection.
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by bobo [/i]
[B]Clearly, religion has proved a greater moderator of impulsive personal behavior than people left to their own moral compass.[/B][/QUOTE]Right... just like in Middle East!
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by A2597 [/i]
[B]I'll agree there can be slight flaws in translations, which is why I'm happy I took latin. [/B][/QUOTE]
If you're reading the latin version, you're looking in the wrong place.
While you can say that the original King James version of the Bible was written in Latin, the first bible (from which most of the King James version is written), was originally written in Hebrew and Aramaic (Old Testament) and Greek (New Testament).
Random ChaosActually Carefully-selected Order in disguise
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by bobo [/i]
[B]OK, lets stop perpetuating this 'common knowledge'. The holocost was not about religion, it was about power-building and racism (not even specifically anti-semitism, but pro-arianism, since other religious and ethic groups were targetted (polish, gyspises, etc.).[/B][/QUOTE]
Let me find some references, but I'm pretty sure I remember reading that the Vatican discreetely supported what was going on until it all backfired (Germany lost) and they had to denounce it.
EDIT:
I'll refer you to the wiki article about this, which shows initial ambivilance and possible support turning to a "politically advisable" denunciation of the Holocaust as the war continued, so potentially both sides can be claimed to be "true" and the Wiki article starts off with the statement, "His leadership of the Catholic Church during World War II and the Holocaust remains the subject of continued historical controversy."
But even with what you referenced, it was not a belief in God that caused WWII. Sadly, a group of people took advantage of this situation to further their own agenda's, and I believe they're answering for that now.
But to the original point, the largest war of the twentieth century was [i]not[/i] about religion.
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Random Chaos [/i]
[B]Let me find some references, but I'm pretty sure I remember reading that the Vatican discreetely supported what was going on until it all backfired (Germany lost) and they had to denounce it.
EDIT:
I'll refer you to the wiki article about this, which shows initial ambivilance and possible support turning to a "politically advisable" denunciation of the Holocaust as the war continued, so potentially both sides can be claimed to be "true" and the Wiki article starts off with the statement, "His leadership of the Catholic Church during World War II and the Holocaust remains the subject of continued historical controversy."
Claiming the vatican "supported" is itself a misnomer, what happened was the vatican, realizing like the Swedes did that it was powerless to defend itself decided to roll over. Much in the Same way the Vichy french did after the fall of Paris. Even the Belgians and dutch in truth basicly put up token resistance.
Dispite what people think wars do not end when capitals are taken, Hell the british burned ours down once and that didnt even really bother us.
What was going on is that the pope and catholic church was too cowardly to stand up to the nazis in the face of certain destruction. which while a valid critism, you can also level it on most of Europe. Anyways how does this get you anywhere near to catholicism or even christianity being a root cause of WWII even a major component?
Comments
[B]Tyvar, while I agree that Religion is imperative to initially establishing culture (and due to how cultures work, inherently moral values), it do not believe it is necessary for relivion to exist once these cultural values are entrenched. Further, I do not believe it is necessary for religion to exist (and may even be detrimental) for these moral values to [I]evolve[/I] into a more refined and advanced moral system.[/B][/QUOTE]
Evolve how? What do you have to work with in atheism? sit back and think about it, what atheism actually entails. Whats a notion of justice to built from? what establishes prohibitions on behaviors, and exemptions to those prohibitions?
I think that part of the problem is most people dont understand that religion doesnt have to be Judasim, Christianity or Islam, or even Buddhism most of the later moral theories that have been advanced have been humanist or diest in nature. These are agnostic moral theories at their weakest, and many of them themselves do fit the criterion for religion. The positing of some sort of normative value, that can not be readily explained in strictly scientific terms, is in fact a religious belief.
Check websters unabridged dictionary, Id like to point out parts 6 and 7 of the defenition of religion. 6 a: a personal awareness or conviction of the existance of a supreme being or any supernatural powers or influences controling one's own, humanitiy's or all of nature's destiny
7 a: a cause, principle, system of tenets held with ardor, devotion, conscientiousness and faith : a value held to be of supreme importance.
Many would argue that the religion of america starting in 1776 was not that of christianity, but that of lockian democracy, this was especially the case with many of our more "beloved" political elites, such as Jefferson and Madison.
Next the notion of freedom of religion has been sharply yanked out of context. In 1787 when the constitution was first drafted, something like 11 of the 13 colonies had official religions. The 1st ammendment, in fact all the bill of rights, were implaced to hedge against the powers of the federal goverment versus the state. Because we live in a [I]Federation[/I] of 50 states, where constituionaly vast powers are still reserved to the states.
The current situation we find in where we think of the "goverment" as being the federal goverment is a fairly recent development. You have to rember, The federal constituion was not made applicable to the states until 1868 with the 14th ammendment, prior to that, the states could violate your civil rights all they wanted.
In fact if the 14th ammendment was repealed, the federal goverments power to inforce civil rights legislation would disapate, you would have to rely upon your state constituion for protection.
[B]Clearly, religion has proved a greater moderator of impulsive personal behavior than people left to their own moral compass.[/B][/QUOTE]Right... just like in Middle East!
[B]I'll agree there can be slight flaws in translations, which is why I'm happy I took latin. [/B][/QUOTE]
If you're reading the latin version, you're looking in the wrong place.
While you can say that the original King James version of the Bible was written in Latin, the first bible (from which most of the King James version is written), was originally written in Hebrew and Aramaic (Old Testament) and Greek (New Testament).
[B]OK, lets stop perpetuating this 'common knowledge'. The holocost was not about religion, it was about power-building and racism (not even specifically anti-semitism, but pro-arianism, since other religious and ethic groups were targetted (polish, gyspises, etc.).[/B][/QUOTE]
Let me find some references, but I'm pretty sure I remember reading that the Vatican discreetely supported what was going on until it all backfired (Germany lost) and they had to denounce it.
EDIT:
I'll refer you to the wiki article about this, which shows initial ambivilance and possible support turning to a "politically advisable" denunciation of the Holocaust as the war continued, so potentially both sides can be claimed to be "true" and the Wiki article starts off with the statement, "His leadership of the Catholic Church during World War II and the Holocaust remains the subject of continued historical controversy."
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Pius_XII#The_Holocaust[/url]
But to the original point, the largest war of the twentieth century was [i]not[/i] about religion.
(edited typing mistakes)
[B]Let me find some references, but I'm pretty sure I remember reading that the Vatican discreetely supported what was going on until it all backfired (Germany lost) and they had to denounce it.
EDIT:
I'll refer you to the wiki article about this, which shows initial ambivilance and possible support turning to a "politically advisable" denunciation of the Holocaust as the war continued, so potentially both sides can be claimed to be "true" and the Wiki article starts off with the statement, "His leadership of the Catholic Church during World War II and the Holocaust remains the subject of continued historical controversy."
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Pius_XII#The_Holocaust[/url] [/B][/QUOTE]
Claiming the vatican "supported" is itself a misnomer, what happened was the vatican, realizing like the Swedes did that it was powerless to defend itself decided to roll over. Much in the Same way the Vichy french did after the fall of Paris. Even the Belgians and dutch in truth basicly put up token resistance.
Dispite what people think wars do not end when capitals are taken, Hell the british burned ours down once and that didnt even really bother us.
What was going on is that the pope and catholic church was too cowardly to stand up to the nazis in the face of certain destruction. which while a valid critism, you can also level it on most of Europe. Anyways how does this get you anywhere near to catholicism or even christianity being a root cause of WWII even a major component?