-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
Isis
- Thread starter jonbrooks
- Start date
ankitj
Well-known member
https://mobile.twitter.com/Jake_Hanrahan/status/1104781125145321472
People can be convinced of anything in the name of religion.
People can be convinced of anything in the name of religion.
hendrix
Well-known member
I mean yeah I agree, but she literally says "I don't know much about Qur'an" in the video
ankitj
Well-known member
Which is why I said in the name of religion. She is just convinced she is following religion or God's path or whatever.
ankitj
Well-known member
Not sure what you are trying to say. Do you similarly obfuscate gender discussions because discrimination can happen along a hundreds of different identity attributes not just gender?
Spark
Global Moderator
My point is that the "in the name of _____" construction is an obfuscation when it's used to suggest anything more than basic partisan motives. Either x is a factor or something or it is not, humans can come up with no end of things "in the name of" that they can use to justify what they have independently or otherwise decided to do.
Last edited:
sledger
Spanish_Vicente
Sounds like as good a description of religion as any tbh.
Ausage
Well-known member
Except it's really not to the people who believe it.
trundler
Well-known member
Dishonest to suggest religion doesn't have a unique ability to make otherwise 'normal' people switch off their moral compass if they are fully convinced of their righteousness.
Spark
Global Moderator
This is cleaaaaarly untrue. Like insanely untrue.
The most destructive ideological/dogmatic forces to human life in the modern era (i.e. post 1789) have not been religious in nature. Indeed several have been anti-religious or at least anti-clerical. Compare all the deaths from jihadism literally ever and compare them to the carnage and destruction caused by rampant nationalism in any given period, for example.
Last edited:
sledger
Spanish_Vicente
Depends how you define religious really. Everyone has some sort of system of beliefs that gives meaning to their lives. This, to me anyway, is inherently religious, whether the system is built around organised religion (e.g. environmentalism) or some political ideology, or whatever.
Spark
Global Moderator
Yeah we've talked about religion substitutes here, but then you aren't really talking about religion any more, but that base psychological impulse that craves that sort of structure/meaning.
Still, the point that organised religion - i.e. Christianity/Islam/Hinduism - is uniquely destructive in terms of turning people into fanatical ideologues with no regard to the common humanity of those who are deemed foes and hence unhuman is hardly true. And, since the Enlightenment, it's not even that effective compared to certain other forces one could name.
Last edited:
ankitj
Well-known member
Because since enlightenment we have forced religion out of social/political lives in most places.
Also pointing to non religious ideologies when topic specifically concerns religious ideologies (truly supported by scriptures or not) is just whatabouttery. Strange that I even have to point it out.
Also pointing to non religious ideologies when topic specifically concerns religious ideologies (truly supported by scriptures or not) is just whatabouttery. Strange that I even have to point it out.
Spark
Global Moderator
Well it kind of does, and it actually goes back to what I was saying about how meaningless the "in the name of" construction is.
You can do everything you like to stamp out organised religion. Your atheist utopia will still be made of humans, and they'll still have the same inbuilt psychological needs. Which, ultimately, will manifest itself somehow, and recent history demonstrates that organised religion is far from the most congenitally malignant force it could be attached towards.
Spark
Global Moderator
"Religion is the most evil force in the world with a unique ability to make people do evil things!"
"Wait, why are you bringing up all those other forces? We're only talking about religion here."
yeah nah.
I mean really.