# What kind of world would be more peaceful?



## TheBishop (Dec 6, 2011)

Just for fun: If one of these beleifs dominated a civilized world which would lead the most peaceful exsistence.


----------



## centerpin fan (Dec 6, 2011)

You left out Hinduism.  It, along with Christianity and Islam, _does_ dominate the civilized world.


----------



## TheBishop (Dec 6, 2011)

So you do not want to participate? 

Those three do dominate,and hows that workin out? 

 If ONE dominated which would be the most peacful to do so? 

I probably should have included hinduism its certainly alot more peaceful than the other major religions.


----------



## JB0704 (Dec 6, 2011)

Before I answer, is this in reference to governing or if everybody believed similarly?  The answer is different for each scenario.


----------



## centerpin fan (Dec 6, 2011)

TheBishop said:


> Those three do dominate,and hows that workin out?



I've got no complaints.




TheBishop said:


> If ONE dominated which would be the most peacful to do so?



The Amish are a pretty friendly bunch.  They're Christian.  OTOH, I've never met an unpleasant Hindu.


----------



## TheBishop (Dec 6, 2011)

JB0704 said:


> Before I answer, is this in reference to governing or if everybody believed similarly?  The answer is different for each scenario.



I'll have to admit I left that part to the imagination.  Lets assume countries retained their sovereignty, and it was just a similiarly held belief among the majority of the populace.


----------



## pnome (Dec 6, 2011)

Any of them.  Take your pick.

If the entire world agreed.  It is the disagreements that cause conflict.


----------



## Huntinfool (Dec 6, 2011)

Peaceful and pleasant would be two different things IMO.  If Islam dominated, then you've got the different factions even among that one religion.

But, say Islam was the one religion of the world and one sub-group remained.  You'd have peace, for sure.  Like Pnome said....no conflicts among religious groups.

Anybody interested in living under Sheria law?  It would be peaceful....but most unpleasant I think.

What if Hitler had achieved world domination?  He'd run the show.  Peaceful....but very unpleasant.


----------



## pnome (Dec 6, 2011)

Huntinfool said:


> Peaceful and pleasant would be two different things IMO.  If Islam dominated, then you've got the different factions even among that one religion.
> 
> But, say Islam was the one religion of the world.  You'd have peace, for sure.  Like Pnome said....no conflicts among religious groups.
> 
> Anybody interested in living under Sheria law?  It would be peaceful....but *most unpleasant* I think.



Indeed.


----------



## TheBishop (Dec 6, 2011)

centerpin fan said:


> I've got no complaints.




Would you consider the world peaceful?


----------



## Huntinfool (Dec 6, 2011)

Of those that have scripture...I know of one that promises peace in the end when that particular religion is foretold to dominate.


----------



## centerpin fan (Dec 6, 2011)

Huntinfool said:


> If Islam dominated, then you've got the different factions even among that one religion.



Yep, Sunni and Shiite despise one another.


----------



## dawg2 (Dec 6, 2011)

Huntinfool said:


> ....  If Islam dominated, then you've got the different factions even among that one religion.....


Christianity has many "factions" and "divisions" within themselves as well.


----------



## centerpin fan (Dec 6, 2011)

TheBishop said:


> Would you consider the world peaceful?



My corner of it is.  Parts of it definitely are not.


----------



## TheBishop (Dec 6, 2011)

pnome said:


> Any of them.  Take your pick.
> 
> If the entire world agreed.  It is the disagreements that cause conflict.



Thats kinda of my point with the excercise.  How many different sects do the major religions have amongst themselves?  They can't even agree when the have similar beleifs.  How many muslim on muslim, christian on christian conflicts have there been throughout history? Bunches.  There is nothing peaceful about organized religion.


----------



## centerpin fan (Dec 6, 2011)

TheBishop said:


> Just for fun: If one of these beleifs dominated a civilized world which would lead the most peaceful exsistence.



I just noticed that this is not an anonymous poll.  Did you do that on purpose?


----------



## dawg2 (Dec 6, 2011)

TheBishop said:


> Just for fun: If one of these beleifs dominated a civilized world which would lead the most peaceful exsistence.



It is a flawed scenario.  You can not account for the fallibility of man, regardless of faith or lack of.


----------



## centerpin fan (Dec 6, 2011)

TheBishop said:


> How many muslim on muslim, christian on christian conflicts have there been throughout history? Bunches.



As I said in another thread, that is inevitable when a state religion is coupled with a monarchy.  Europe had many Protestant/Catholic clashes because of this.  We have avoided these problems because we don't have a state religion, and we don't have a monarchy.


----------



## georgia_home (Dec 6, 2011)

you left out another one: none of the above

people will always fine a reason to fight, and religion is one of the biggest causes, or just a curtain to hide behind.

as often as not, it is just someone's desire to rule / extend power over others. religion is just a convenient curtain to hide behind / mask real intentions.

when you have two groups that follow the same religion, what is the excuse for why they fight? ?indulgences?

so i guess i am agreeing with dawg2 in a general sense.


----------



## Huntinfool (Dec 6, 2011)

> Christianity has many "factions" and "divisions" within themselves as well.



Catholics, as a group, don't typically try to kill Protestants on a regular basis, however.


----------



## centerpin fan (Dec 6, 2011)

georgia_home said:


> when you have two groups that follow the same religion, what is the excuse for why they fight?



Some like Georgia.  Others prefer Georgia Tech.


----------



## pnome (Dec 6, 2011)

TheBishop said:


> Thats kinda of my point with the excercise.  How many different sects do the major religions have amongst themselves?  They can't even agree when the have similar beleifs.  How many muslim on muslim, christian on christian conflicts have there been throughout history? Bunches.  There is nothing peaceful about organized religion.



My point is simply that if the entire world was Sunni Muslim, then there would be peace.  If the entire world was Catholic, you would have peace.

Everyone wants Peace on Earth and goodwill to men.  They just want that peace to be on their terms.


----------



## georgia_home (Dec 6, 2011)

exactly, so the discussion REALLY isn't about religion, it's more about the folks who use religion to cover real motives.

folks who are gonna hate, are just gonna hate, regardless religion of other facts and factors.



centerpin fan said:


> Some like Georgia.  Others prefer Georgia Tech.


----------



## georgia_home (Dec 6, 2011)

im-very-ho... your point is completely incorrect.

even when people are of the same religion, they still fight. religion is just, more often then not, more fuel to throw on the fire. to incite more people to "a" or "the" cause. sunni M's kill each other, Cath's, Prod's, Meth's, Jew's all have massacred each other over time.

there have X-on-X wars multitudes of times over the years. if the fight were not about religion it would be about something else. territory, and associated resources, is one of the most common reasons for warfare, imho.

people may wish to cloud that in something like "we are the rightful heirs to (city of your choice) because our religion" but i believe that to be all smoke and mirrors.





pnome said:


> My point is simply that if the entire world was Sunni Muslim, then there would be peace.  If the entire world was Catholic, you would have peace.
> 
> Everyone wants Peace on Earth and goodwill to men.  They just want that peace to be on their terms.


----------



## pnome (Dec 6, 2011)

georgia_home said:


> im-very-ho... your point is completely incorrect.
> 
> even when people are of the same religion, they still fight. religion is just, more often then not, more fuel to throw on the fire. to incite more people to "a" or "the" cause. sunni M's kill each other, Cath's, Prod's, Meth's, Jew's all have massacred each other over time.
> 
> ...



Good points.  But the question wasn't what would make the world peaceful, but what would make the world "more" peaceful.  No doubt there would still be conflicts over non religious things.


----------



## JB0704 (Dec 6, 2011)

centerpin fan said:


> We have avoided these problems because we don't have a state religion, and we don't have a monarchy.



Exactly!  That's why I asked if it was relevant to governance or beliefs.  Here, we have all kinds of different religions and denominations of those religions and there is very little tension between them.  Contrast that with the parts of the world where religion plays into the government, and you can see how peaceful it is.

Based on just a belief of the population, Following Jesus is peaceful by definition.  Christianity has not followed that template so much.  So if we factor in how men twist and corrupt things, I would have to vote deism.  There would be a belief in a higher power which might lead to a belief that rights are given by God, yet very little reason for religious discord.


----------



## JB0704 (Dec 6, 2011)

Huntinfool said:


> Catholics, as a group, don't typically try to kill Protestants on a regular basis, however.



They all used to kill each other.  Civilization has toned the violence down a good bit amongst Christians.  But, we still have a few idiots left:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/01/us/01michigan.html


----------



## Huntinfool (Dec 6, 2011)

That's why I said "as a group" and typically JB.


----------



## JB0704 (Dec 6, 2011)

.....now that I think about it, though, wouldn't the founding fathers have been considered "militant deists" from the British perspective?


----------



## TheBishop (Dec 6, 2011)

JB0704 said:


> There would be a belief in a higher power which might lead to a belief that rights are given by God, yet very little reason for religious discord.



Thats exactly why I chose diesm.


----------



## ambush80 (Dec 6, 2011)

JB0704 said:


> Exactly!  That's why I asked if it was relevant to governance or beliefs.  Here, we have all kinds of different religions and denominations of those religions and there is very little tension between them.  Contrast that with the parts of the world where religion plays into the government, and you can see how peaceful it is.
> 
> Based on just a belief of the population, Following Jesus is peaceful by definition.  Christianity has not followed that template so much.  So if we factor in how men twist and corrupt things, I would have to vote deism.  There would be a belief in a higher power which might lead to a belief that rights are given by God, yet very little reason for religious discord.



Like sovereign rights?


----------



## Four (Dec 7, 2011)

There are sects within Hinduism & Buhdism that are inherently atheistic. .  just to get that out there, so there is some overlap.

Statistically speaking, there is a negative correlationbetween the peace index of a country, and how religious it is . . .


----------



## JB0704 (Dec 7, 2011)

ambush80 said:


> Like sovereign rights?



...like rights by birth, or natural rights.  Kind-of how the founders framed it "endowed by our creator."  I understand all the atheists tend to be very libertarian (or liberal, but not so much on this forum), but, if there is no creator giving rights, by whom are they established and guaranteed?  The government?  The only defense of natural rights is philosophical and by force....not belief alone. 

The question was which would bring the most peace if the whole world "bought into" one or the other.  I am just saying if everybody was a deist, and believed rights are a birthright, then those rights would be inherently specified and protected.  If there is no creator the right must be specified as such by some body....government, etc.


----------



## dawg2 (Dec 7, 2011)

Four said:


> There are sects within Hinduism & Buhdism that are inherently atheistic. .  just to get that out there, so there is some overlap.
> 
> Statistically speaking, there is a negative coordination between the peace index of a country, and how religious it is . . .


I think you meant "correlation" instead of coordination, but can you provide some of these statistics?


----------



## Four (Dec 7, 2011)

dawg2 said:


> I think you meant "correlation" instead of coordination, but can you provide some of these statistics?



thank you!

Here is the peace index list

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Peace_Index#Global_Peace_Index_rankings

You could go to each country if you like an check the religion and level of secularism. I think you'll find the most peaceful are generally the most secular.

Here is a good reference that shows the religiosity of a country. Also pointing out the violence vs. secularist comparison.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/114211/Alabamians-Iranians-Common.aspx

It also compare the religiosity of states in the USA vs. violence.


----------



## centerpin fan (Dec 7, 2011)

Four said:


> Here is a good reference that shows the religiosity of a country. Also pointing out the violence vs. secularist comparison.
> 
> http://www.gallup.com/poll/114211/Alabamians-Iranians-Common.aspx
> 
> It also compare the religiosity of states in the USA vs. violence.



This is ridiculous.  They actually compare Alabama to Iran:

_The results produce some interesting comparisons -- Alabamians, for example, are about as likely as Iranians to say religion is an important part or their lives._

They somehow leave out the fact that Iran is the chief state sponsor of terrorism in the world and is trying to develop nukes.  To my knowledge, Alabama is not trying to acquire its own nukes.  And, even if they were, Israel would not be the target.


----------



## dawg2 (Dec 7, 2011)

Four said:


> thank you!
> 
> Here is the peace index list
> 
> ...



What I see is the countries that are high on religion are also the poorest.  I don't see religion as the common denominator.  I see poverty, lack of education and countries with low GDP.


----------



## stringmusic (Dec 7, 2011)

JB0704 said:


> ...like rights by birth, or natural rights.  Kind-of how the founders framed it "endowed by our creator."  I understand all the atheists tend to be very libertarian (or liberal, but not so much on this forum), but, if there is no creator giving rights, by whom are they established and guaranteed?  The government?  The only defense of natural rights is philosophical and by force....not belief alone.
> 
> The question was which would bring the most peace if the whole world "bought into" one or the other.  I am just saying* if everybody was a deist, and believed rights are a birthright, then those rights would be inherently specified and protected.*  If there is no creator the right must be specified as such by some body....government, etc.



Yes, but I don't think being a deist is enough, take the Islamic terrorist for example, or any other crazy religious person.


----------



## JB0704 (Dec 7, 2011)

stringmusic said:


> Yes, but I don't think being a deist is enough, take the Islamic terrorist for example, or any other crazy religious person.



Deist, as in, no specific religion just a belief in a higher power. The islamic terrorist has a set system.  

I would have voted Christian, because Jesus preached and practiced peaceful living, but you have the certain religious aspects of Christianity which are not peaceful, and not relevant to Jesus.  Thats why I stuck with deism....no reason to argue about it, but rights are a given by birth not a governmental declaration or philosophical assertion.


----------



## Four (Dec 7, 2011)

centerpin fan said:


> This is ridiculous.  They actually compare Alabama to Iran:
> 
> _The results produce some interesting comparisons -- Alabamians, for example, are about as likely as Iranians to say religion is an important part or their lives._
> 
> They somehow leave out the fact that Iran is the chief state sponsor of terrorism in the world and is trying to develop nukes.  To my knowledge, Alabama is not trying to acquire its own nukes.  And, even if they were, Israel would not be the target.



Yes, comparing alabama to iran is an attention grabbing headline. That being said, in terms of peace index of the USA, Alabama is the 5th LEAST peaceful state in the union and has as high religiosity as Iran, which is one of the least peaceful countries in the world. .  . not a perfect comparison, but not void of relevance.


----------



## Four (Dec 7, 2011)

dawg2 said:


> What I see is the countries that are high on religion are also the poorest.  I don't see religion as the common denominator.  I see poverty, lack of education and countries with low GDP.



That's a good point, countries that are religious are also the poorest, and lease educated, along with being the most violent . .  hmmm


----------



## centerpin fan (Dec 7, 2011)

Four said:


> That being said, in terms of peace index of the USA, Alabama is the 5th LEAST peaceful state in the union and has as high religiosity as Iran, which is one of the least peaceful countries in the world. .  .



Maybe so, but I'd take Alabama over any of the least religious states.


----------



## centerpin fan (Dec 7, 2011)

Four said:


> That's a good point, countries that are religious are also the poorest, and lease educated, along with being the most violent . .  hmmm



... but America is a notable exception to that.  From the article:

_Social scientists have noted that one thing that makes Americans distinctive is our high level of religiosity relative to other rich-world populations. Among 27 countries commonly seen as part of the developed world, the median proportion of those who say religion is important in their daily lives is just 38%. From this perspective, the fact that two-thirds of Americans respond this way makes us look extremely devout._


----------



## Four (Dec 7, 2011)

centerpin fan said:


> ... but America is a notable exception to that.  From the article:
> 
> _Social scientists have noted that one thing that makes Americans distinctive is our high level of religiosity relative to other rich-world populations. Among 27 countries commonly seen as part of the developed world, the median proportion of those who say religion is important in their daily lives is just 38%. From this perspective, the fact that two-thirds of Americans respond this way makes us look extremely devout._



Yup, USA tends to have more education / wealth for it's religiousness compared to other religious countries. Although it's still fairly violent (peace index of 82 out of 153)

regardless, like i said earlier, statistically speaking a country that is more religious tends to be more violent than it's secular counterpart.



centerpin fan said:


> Maybe so, but I'd take Alabama over any of the least religious states.



Kind of irrelevant, the discussion is about what kind of world would be more peaceful. If you personally don't value peace as high as some other qualities so be it.


----------



## centerpin fan (Dec 7, 2011)

Four said:


> Kind of irrelevant, the discussion is about what kind of world would be more peaceful. If you personally don't value peace as high as some other qualities so be it.



I'm not convinced Alabama is that bad.  The chart I'm looking at shows New Jersey and Michigan as being more peaceful than Alabama.  If peace is a concern, who in there right mind would choose Camden, Newark or Detroit over any town in Alabama?


----------



## Four (Dec 7, 2011)

centerpin fan said:


> I'm not convinced Alabama is that bad.  The chart I'm looking at shows New Jersey and Michigan as being more peaceful than Alabama.  If peace is a concern, who in there right mind would choose Camden, Newark or Detroit over any town in Alabama?



Obviously it's a statewide average. Nobody is saying that dothan is more violent than Detroit! I can attest to that, i was just in dothan last month and it was great.


----------



## Ronnie T (Dec 7, 2011)

Four said:


> Obviously it's a statewide average. Nobody is saying that dothan is more violent than Detroit! I can attest to that, i was just in dothan last month and it was great.



Then you must not have driven on the traffic circle.  

.:decorate:


----------

