1. Religion & Spirituality
Send to a Friend via Email

Discuss in my forum

The enormity and near-incomprehensibility of the terrorist attacks on the United States in September, 2001, provided a serious challenge to Christians' ethical and intellectual consistency. The question which they had to face was: should they support violent retaliation, or should they advocate peace? If they chose the latter, were they guilty of treason?

Read Article: Is Pacifism Treason?

November 15, 2012 at 2:25 pm
(1) Sharif says:

My principle is that those who start wars must fight them themselves – namely, the greedy and the clergy. If this was adhered to strictly, warfare will simply cease to exist.

There’s not a single armed conflict of any scale that wasn’t initiated by neither, resources can be shared, there’s no reason to fight over them. The problem is those who can’t or won’t understand the concept of “enough”. While the latter cause conflicts with their imaginary crimes (sodomy, adultery, blasphemy, etc.)

If religious cranks hate Jews so much, maybe they should go kill them themselves, if the greedy want more land and resources, maybe they should go acquire them themselves. The mystery remains why so many people listen to agitators and form armies?

Hopefully someday most people will grow beyond such primitive displays of emotionalism (my parents fought in this, my uncle fought in that)

Leave a Comment

Line and paragraph breaks are automatic. Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title="">, <b>, <i>, <strike>

©2014 About.com. All rights reserved.