|
By Steve Weatherbe
IT KEEPS coming up: the contention that more people have been killed over
religion than over any other matter.
A friend of mine advanced it the other day. I’ve encountered it recently on an episode of CSI ; on a rationalist webpage called the Libertarian Defender; and in the book America by TV comedy host Jon Stewart.
The Stewartian variant is the most specific: most wars, he writes, are started
in the name of Jesus Christ, adding,”It’s a fact” - the only claim in his book so amplified.
Discrediting Christianity
Stewart is echoing that eminent historian, George Carlin – who reportedly made this claim in all seriousness in a televised show from
Carnegie Hall in 1977. Now it is repeated as axiomatic. But long before Carlin’s shtick, the propagandists of the Age of the Enlightenment started churning out
the same message to discredit Christianity.
According to Wikipedia, the Thirty Years War between German Catholics and
Protestants is the deadliest religious war in history, and it comes no higher
than 10th in deaths, with World War II leading, followed by some Chinese
conflicts and Mongol conquests, World War I, the Russian Civil War, the Second
Congo War and the Napoleonic Wars.
Put all the religious wars in history together, and you get under half the death
toll of WWII. Confronted by this, advocates of the Carlin fantasy would likely
say: “It’s not the numbers, it’s the principle. Religions inherently lead to intolerance, which leads to war.
Religious belief is inherently absolutist – so it leads inevitably to burning at the stake.”
But many of the early Christians, for example, were willing to die for their
faith, but not to kill for it.
True, institutional Christianity came to espouse other ideas: that wars could be
justified if fought in national self-defence, or to support an ally, or to stop
an unjust war, or to redress a wrong perpetrated by another country. WWII and
the notorious Crusades were fought for some of these reasons.
The Crusades were largely initiated to defend the Byzantine Empire from Muslim
attacks. Admittedly, in their execution, the Holy Land Crusades were sometimes
immoral. Some later crusades in Europe were also waged partly to stamp out
unwelcome beliefs, and also because monarchs used religious differences to
increase their secular power.
Most Christian denominations today, however, would condemn the use of force to
spread belief. Doesn’t this prove religion does not inherently lead to intolerance and war?
The early Christian martyrs arguably had a more extreme faith than the
crusaders, because they were so confident Christianity would prevail they did
not need to fight in its defence. So, religion or depth of conviction, per se,
do not lead to intolerance and war.
Continue article >>
|
Fighting for values
Most people are willing to fight for strongly held values such as the family,
the nation, democracy and equality.
The belief underpinning communism was equality. Should we then condemn equality
as a value because communists were willing to starve multiplied millions for
this noble goal?
Should we condemn patriotism? The Nazis were, after all, motivated by
patriotism. But so was Stauffenberg, the officer who attempted to assassinate
Hitler. Nazi patriots believed Germans should rule the world. Stauffenberg
believed Germany had a God-given duty to protect Europe. Both were willing to
die and kill for their vision of Germany. Should we then outlaw patriotism
along with religion?
The Allies went into WWII believing freedom and democracy were worth fighting
for. Perhaps we should outlaw those values, along with patriotism,
egalitarianism and religion. Is it worse to fight for your beliefs than for the
usual venal reasons for war – power, money, revenge or territory?
Predilection for violence
The root cause of war is the human predilection for violence. We resort to it as
individuals because we cannot control our anger, and because we assign very
little value to other people. This will to violence is a lamentably common
human characteristic, and one not especially related to religion or any
intellectual position. In fact, many religions – such as Christianity – preach against violence.
Of course, religions preach against other things too, like certain sexual
behaviours. This is the real reason, I suspect, that people like Carlin and
Stewart lash out at religions with baseless attacks, and why many others are so
eager to agree.
War is a very distant reality for most of us. But none of us wants to listen
when our personal behaviour is challenged. So we shoot the messenger, with all
available ammunition.
Steve Weatherbe is a Victoria journalist.
September 2009
|
As for Gordon's thesis, I hope he learns to punctuate before submitting it. And as for his statistic, humbug. I'll believe Wikipedia or independent sites put up by disinterested observers with no axe to grind for or against religion way, way before I believe Gordon's numbers. But I notice Gordon's 87 per cent is the number of wars in which "religion played a role."
This is a meaningless criterion. Sure, religion played a role in the Second World War; and so did ice cream and so did venereal diseases.
My article was an attempted refutation of the claim that religion "caused" more wars than all the other causes put together. I've cited my source. Gordon is his own source. Sorry, that doesn't cut it.
So I take it that your calculation does not include WWII itself? Even though one of the main factors of WWII was religion? Well of course you will say that it wasn't a factor, but then again you also are not stating any facts. Fact: Hitler was trying to wipe out the Jewish religion/race. Fact: Countries went to war with the Nazi party partially because of the atrocities that they were committing against the Jewish religion/race. Well what do you know, just off of the first fact WWII all of a sudden comes into light. The fact is that religion played a part in WWII so you can not state as fact that if you "Put all the religious wars in history together, and you get under half the death toll of WWII." because WWII in itself would equal itself in death tolls. Look into every war in history and you will see that religion has played a part in almost every war. If you are going to try to state facts then please do better research on the subject. I am at this very moment writing a thesis paper on the subject of religions role in war. I have looked at every documented war throughout the past 1000 years, and in doing so have compiled a complete statistic. What I have compiled is a statistic showing that 87.2% of wars throughout the past 1000 years have had religion play a role in why the wars were fought. This is all fact, and is well documented. Everything that I have compiled is based on fact and not opinion, and furthermore is easily accessible by anyone willing to look it up. For the percentage of wars that, in the history books, did not mention religion there has still been strong religious ties. So get your facts straight or don't write about something until you do. Ignorant people are what is wrong with this world today.