Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site cadre.ARPA
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!unc!mcnc!idis!cadre!jay
From: jay@cadre.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.religion,net.flame
Subject: Re: Is religion bad for you?
Message-ID: <255@cadre.ARPA>
Date: Fri, 8-Feb-85 14:48:49 EST
Article-I.D.: cadre.255
Posted: Fri Feb  8 14:48:49 1985
Date-Received: Mon, 11-Feb-85 06:53:08 EST
References: <293@decwrl.UUCP> <398@pyuxd.UUCP> <237@cadre.ARPA> <1102@amdahl.UUCP>
Reply-To: jay@cadre.ARPA (Jay Ramanathan)
Followup-To: <1102@amdahl.UUCP>
Organization: Decision Systems Lab., Univ. of Pgh.
Lines: 36
Xref: watmath net.religion:5577 net.flame:8299
Summary: 

In article <1102@amdahl.UUCP> Gordon Moffett  writes:
> People fight wars because of political beliefs, as a defensive strategy,
> for trade and economic reasons, or because they have nothing better to do.
> Disposing of religion will not change this situation.  The major wars of
> this century were all politically and economically motivated.  Religion
> played a minor part in these, if it were a factor at all.  
> 
> Why must religion be the whipping-boy for these problems?

I wonder how "minor" a part religion is playing in the middle east and
Northern Ireland?  Or maybe these are not "major" wars according to you.

In this context, I'm reminded of someone's observation:
 If the third (nuclear) war were to come about, there is a high chance its
 origins would be in the middle east.
And I guess the nuclear war wouldn't be "major" at all!!
Granted, wars do have a lot of political, economic factors in them.  But
I suspect they often start off with religious differences. (Didn't even
the first world war have religious beginnings? Or am I wrong?)
Of course, once the war has been started, the politicians have to carry 
it on.  They have beliefs too, you see!

Jay Ramanathan



"You all follow different religions!"
"Yes," shouts the crowd
"No, please no, let me be a human", pleads the lonely creature.