BigP - I cannot believe the amount of silliness that comes form your post.
Do you mean "from my post"? That's a pretty silly typo.
Don't sling insults directed at a person without spellcheck.
First of all, not all wars include weapons, bombs, etc. There are wars against humanity, wars of words, Race wars, and so on. When Republican Reps. are using phrases like "The Great White Hope" coming to challenge Obama, that to me is a war against progression.
Republicans, not Christians. You see no silliness in this? This is a political standpoint, not a unified religious doctrine. Just because some Republicans are Christians and some Republican Reps are using phrasees like "The Great White Hope" doesn't suddenly mean all Christians are racist, evil, and soldiers in invisible warfare.
Also, let me state for a THIRD TIME that all Christians or any religion are not all to blame for the mistakes of the past.
You were clear on that point, but you also stated that the religion is to blame because of some Christian's actions. That's simply not true. You're saying that one Christian's actions make a religion evil, yet a religion doesn't necessarily make a person evil? There's a flaw here.
And what do you think fuels political beliefs? Religion! Religion is the basis of any politicians platform. Why do you think there are few (if any) atheists in government? Religion has always been the backbone of a political parties agendas for centuries. The Catholic Church pays big money to the Republican Party to maintain certain laws, just like the NRA or Insurance companies or any other major system.
But there is too much diversity of political beliefs under any religion to be able to blame politics on religion. Everyone in my exact Christian denomination has very unique views (even one Nadar fan I met). It doesn't necessarily mean that Republican = Christian.
Also, I said Bush's TERM, not the man himself. But yes, he actually signed off on 2 wars. One of which should not have happened. And I don't know about you, but I think that massive incompetence in any high office is evil.
If you meant the wars in Bush's term, why didn't you say so? You said Bush's TERM. Many things happened in Bush's term. Everyone has a different opinion of what incompetence is, but it certainly isn't evil. Maybe evil things can grow out of it, but the incompetent person isn't evil; just incompetent.
We have been discussing the Inquisiton, Crusades, and WW2, along with other major tragedies. These are not stereotypes. These are actual events that happened. The ones I mentioned were the most recent. I do not appreciate the patronizing from someone that cannot even vote yet when I have thousands of years of history backing me up. Billions of my people have been killed off and countless historical documents lost due to political decisions with a religious tendency behind it.
Wow. First of all, I never denied that Christianity has done bad things before, and that
Christians do bad things too. But much like you can't judge people based on their religion, you can't judge religion based on what some of the people of it do, even if they twist interpretations and use their religion to justify their actions. That doesn't make the religion evil, only the people who do the acts. If you were trying to communicate that anyway, then these aren't examples of Christianity starting wars, only Christians.
Second of all, we come here to discuss world events, politics, religion, etc. My first thought when discussing with somebody of a different age than me isn't that they are automatically superior or inferior to me. I just think I should see what they have to say, even if they can't vote. It's insulting and immature to go after someone's age rather than the issue at hand.
Third of all, you've got thousands of years of history, but I was telling you that you haven't persuaded me that wars NOWADAYS were caused by Christians. All you did was remind me of some things Republicans did that YOU don't agree with. In politics, I don't think anybody can really decide what's good and evil if there's but a single person arguing against it.
If you were talking about "invisible" warfare, your first post did make some sense, but I still don't understand why you can blame an entire religion, even if not the followers, but an entire religion based on what some Christians did.
