Home Original Content Funny Pictures Funny GIFs YouTube Funny Text Funny Movies Channels Search

hide menu
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
User avatar #2 - keiishiyama (03/20/2013) [-]
Because letting people harmlessly place faith in an omniscient, omnipotent being is so fucking criminal.
#54 to #2 - anonymous (03/21/2013) [-]
youre overreacting, no one said it was a crime, they just said its not true.
User avatar #21 to #2 - ivoryhammer (03/21/2013) [-]
But some people don't do the "harmlessly" part, EG, Westboro Baptists, Islamic extremists, the idiot republican fundamentalists ruining America, the Vatican sheltering pedophiles and doing nothing to stop children getting raped/molested.
User avatar #48 to #21 - Crusader (03/21/2013) [-]
You are judging the many by the actions of the few.
I could just as easily say letting people place their faith in democracy is evil and it leads to horrible things.
Look at the election that led to Hitler, or those that led to crazy dictatorships in the Middle East.
To which the opposing side would say "Yes, but those are rigged or people were ignorant of what was actually happening" Which is the same thing with those minorities. They are perverting religion for their own goals.
#18 to #2 - RageGuyyourmom (03/20/2013) [-]
harmlessly is no big deal, when you try to promote it as fact then we have problems
#11 to #2 - anonymous (03/20/2013) [-]
Human create religion to lessen their burden so it is fine to put in faith but when they start spreading it to others who dun want it protest start and than it might lead to riot and in the end if it is not control or handle properly war so you get what i am trying to say
#10 to #2 - anonymous (03/20/2013) [-]
if they keep it to themselves and not forcing it even to the point of appearing like a cult
#9 to #2 - pimpsandwich (03/20/2013) [-]
Harmless. Yeah.
User avatar #3 to #2 - mrgoodlove (03/20/2013) [-]
You know there are religious wars right?
User avatar #49 to #3 - Crusader (03/21/2013) [-]
If you can find me ONE
ANY purely RELIGIOUS war, I will applaud you.
Most "religious wars" are actually for land, political power, resources, etc.
User avatar #59 to #49 - SonofChuck (03/21/2013) [-]
The Huguenot Wars.
User avatar #326 to #59 - Crusader (03/21/2013) [-]
You mean the civil wars fought by the nobles in order to gain more land and money?
That "purely religious war"
User avatar #346 to #326 - SonofChuck (03/21/2013) [-]
Albigensian Crusade
Boxer Rebellion
St. Bartholemew Massacre
Shimabara Revolt
Sikh uprising
Spanish Inquisition
Thirty Years War

Now before you say anything I'm not doing this to defend atheism nor am I defending religion. I'm doing this purely for the fun of it.
User avatar #348 to #346 - Crusader (03/21/2013) [-]
Any Crusade or war started by the Catholic church, may look like it has religious intention, but the Catholic Church is as much a political power as it is a Religious one, and war fought by them is not just for their religion to be strongest, but for their grasp on the world, and so they would get paid, making it about 50/50 as to why they fight, the soldiers may fight because they believe in their God is best, but the Church sends them out for political power.
Like the Thirty Years War was political. The Catholic church was worried about those lands becoming protestant and not paying taxes to the Church, and therefore not actually religious, it was done for monetary and political power. You can tell it's not purely religious since France (a catholic state) was siding with Protestants.
The Boxer Rebellion was equally against the influx of Christianity, and was opposing the idea of foreign imperialism like they had seen before, it was fought for a nation, not a religion.
The Sikh Uprising information I have found is hardly a war, it seems like more of a hostage situation and a few attacks meant to seek the creation of a free Sikh-based state much like Pakistan is to Muslims. Again, religious, but also Political.
Again, the St Bart. Massacre was a single incident, the French Wars of Religion was again, about religion, but also for political control of the aristocratic houses that lead the forces.
The Shimabara Rebellion was mainly due to harsh taxes, not really religious because the Dutch were also Christian, it was more of class war than a religious one.
Spanish Inquisition, like the Thirty Years war, largely religious, but again, was still for political control, they wanted to oppress the other forces so the Church could maintain power.

While all good examples and have to do with Religion, none of these were truly Religious wars fought SOLELY for religion, most of them are wars that were fought under the guise of religion or divided by religion.
User avatar #349 to #348 - SonofChuck (03/21/2013) [-]
Cool, you really seem to know what you're talking about, I'm impressed.
User avatar #4 to #3 - keiishiyama (03/20/2013) [-]
Because people, like this dumbfuck above, believe their belief is so superior.

Let everyone practice whatever faith they want.
User avatar #5 to #4 - mrgoodlove (03/20/2013) [-]
I'm pretty sure he has no beliefs in any religion.
#35 to #5 - anonymous (03/21/2013) [-]
Atheism is defined as belief.
#8 to #5 - sirthomasburr (03/20/2013) [-]
maybe not, but belief, religious, political, social, racial etc, is still the driving force
 Friends (0)