"Overtly Satanic, but tastefully so."

[taiwan_girl]

@doctor-phibes said in "Overtly Satanic, but tastefully so.":

Personally, I don't see why religious organizations should get benefits that the rest of us don't get.

There's nothing particularly special about god.

I agree.

I read somewhere that "more wars have been fought in the name of religion than anything else."

[Doctor Phibes]

Nobody ever went to war over Marmite, even though it tends to excite very strong emotions, both positive and negative.

[Aqua Letifer]

@taiwan_girl said in "Overtly Satanic, but tastefully so.":

@doctor-phibes said in "Overtly Satanic, but tastefully so.":

Personally, I don't see why religious organizations should get benefits that the rest of us don't get.

There's nothing particularly special about god.

I agree.

I read somewhere that "more wars have been fought in the name of religion than anything else."

I never liked that quote. It's a finger pointing to the moon.

We didn't invade Afghanistan over religion. Or Iraq. Or Korea. Or Vietnam. Or Normandy, for that matter.

Most wars start over deeply felt but incompatible ideologies. In the past, many of those ideologies were religion, but they don't have to be.

[Catseye3]

Maybe. Or maybe it's a matter of, "I want what you got." Even when the you is a runner-up to the real target.

[Doctor Phibes]

In reality, religion is often just an excuse.

And if we're invading France, it's probably a good excuse.

[taiwan_girl]

@aqua-letifer said in "Overtly Satanic, but tastefully so.":

@taiwan_girl said in "Overtly Satanic, but tastefully so.":

@doctor-phibes said in "Overtly Satanic, but tastefully so.":

Personally, I don't see why religious organizations should get benefits that the rest of us don't get.

There's nothing particularly special about god.

I agree.

I read somewhere that "more wars have been fought in the name of religion than anything else."

I never liked that quote. It's a finger pointing to the moon.

We didn't invade Afghanistan over religion. Or Iraq. Or Korea. Or Vietnam. Or Normandy, for that matter.

Most wars start over deeply felt but incompatible ideologies. In the past, many of those ideologies were religion, but they don't have to be.

Yes, I semi agree. Look at Afganistan. I believe that the US invaded because to the Taliban. Why did we want to stop the Taliban? Because they were imposing their strict brand of religion, which included promotion of terrorism.

I am not saying that the only cause was religion, but it was kind of a big reason.

But, it probably is like John D'Oh says - it is just an excuse to do or not do something.

[Aqua Letifer]

@taiwan_girl said in "Overtly Satanic, but tastefully so.":

Why did we want to stop the Taliban? Because they were imposing their strict brand of religion, which included promotion of terrorism.

I would argue that we cared a great deal more about their complicity with the group that killed 2,977 civilians in a terrorist attack. The war in Afghanistan wasn't a religious war by any stretch from our perspective. We weren't trying to spread Christianity.

[taiwan_girl]

@aqua-letifer I agree with you 100% that the US would not care less about religion in Afganistan.

I was going back a step. The basis for the Taliban was religion. That was the "trunk" of the tree.

[Jolly]

@taiwan_girl said in "Overtly Satanic, but tastefully so.":

@aqua-letifer I agree with you 100% that the US would not care less about religion in Afganistan.

I was going back a step. The basis for the Taliban was religion. That was the "trunk" of the tree.

And if it was a religious war, it would be convert or die.

[George K]

@taiwan_girl said in "Overtly Satanic, but tastefully so.":

The basis for the Taliban was religion.

If I recall, "Talib" meant "scholar" or "student," particularly with respect to religion.

"Taliban" is the association of such scholars.