There is a difference between fighting for freedom, rebelling against the government, and terrorism by killing civilians.

But terrorism is basically a threat that plants the idea in a person's mind that they too are not safe.

It makes the statement that not just soldiers will die or be tortured, but anyone, even women and children.

The act of invaders in any country who terrorize civilians and rape women is not "war." Those are war crimes and terrorism. But that is the kind of war and sometimes the kind of enemy that we are defending ourselves against.

In war, a guy you don't know orders you to whack another guy you don't know, and you get paid for it. We may be expected to believe that we are defending our country, but often we are just no better than mercenaries fighting for THE COMPANY whose agenda is globalization.

If we are religious and have principles, then we may be expected to believe we are fighting for a Godly cause.

A preacher who expounds upon graphic details of the tortures of Hell and damnation is spreading fear. Many Christians have confessed to me that their thinking is, "Why not get saved and be sure?" What have they got to loose?"

It's like an insurance policy or like paying an extortionist for protection.

Is terrorism the new religion ??

On point: No. Terrorism is just terrorism.

It is a tool of the government/COMPANY for the purpose of war. Most terrorism is government sanctioned and sponsored. It is carried out by mercenaries, paid assassins, and black Ops.

Pay close attention and you will be able to see the difference between terrorism and revolution.

Castro was a revolutionists. They wore uniforms and showed their faces. They over threw the current army in power.

Terrorists will wear black hoods or helmets and masks. They will wear uniforms that cannot be identified. They will kill civilians.

Underground resistance (insurgents) will target the enemy military, not usually civilians.

If you take to killing or torturing civilians, you have stooped from military to terrorist.

Not making a direct judgement on the person in mention. Just on the way you said it, this person sounds like they are not sure and just believe for the heck of it. This is not truly believing, for they are doing it just for the heck of it, thus is in vein, thus is not truly ment. We are not judged purely on our actions we take in life, but our faith as well.

Again, not making a direct judgement on anyone in particular, only stating a few "general" things.

And yes, that form of preaching would be spreading fear, not all preachers do this, nor do they do it all the time. And again, it's not really to put "fear" into people, merely informing one of the consequence of certain things.

And again lol, this form of preaching will definitely not work on a none believer, for they don't share the faith, thus they believe it's a lie, thus the words of the preacher would go in one ear and out the other, thus would be pointless to preach the word like this.

No, there's no fundamental difference unless you look at it from the Westerner's biased view. If you were in a third world country defending yourself from invaders with high-tech weapons, you'd use "terror" tactics too. (the Americans during the Revolutionary war-as well as every other war-used plenty of tactics that would be called "terror" when turned against the US)

No. I wouldn't.

Yes, there is a difference.

No matter who my commanding officer was, I would not resort to purposely targeting or sneaking around and killing, bombing, or torturing civilians, women and children. I would not sanction the systematic rape or torture of women and children.

These are war crimes and terrorism.

Religion is fear based, Terrorism is fear based, so yes to the Original Question...

religion that is fear based could be similar to terrorism

just as politics that are fear based

or media, blogging, reporting that is fear based

or junk science that is fear based

of secular standards that are fear based


but most individuals dont choose religion, or politics, or science, or secular standards out of fear,, just out of what makes the most sense to them,,,

1. The premise is wrong. Religion is not based on fear in general and
almost half of all religious adherents have a religion which doesn't
even believe in "hell". Religion is really based on the belief in a
higher power at work in the creation and working of the world and on
a philosophical understanding of our existence, right and wrong and
truth and beauty. Some religions do have the concept of eternal
punishment but this is not the same thing as blowing people up who
disagree with you or killing people randomly without even knowing their
beliefs in order to coerce others.

2. Terrorism is blowing people up who disagree with you and killing
people randomly without even knowing their beliefs in order to coerce
others and publicize the terrorist agenda and message. Terrorism has
no component of religious thought - no concept of kindness to others,
no weighing of the morality of terrorist actions, no thought about
our common origin or value.

Rationalization of the slaughter of innocent people is not religion.
It is tragically true that much terrorism is currently based on a
misguided and misanthropic obsession with radical Islam but many
other forms of terrorism exist such as political causes, economic
missions, ecological extremists etc. It must be pointed
out that every religion teaches that terrorist tactics of killing
innocent people for any reason is morally wrong. So it is more
appropriate to say that terrorism is the OPPOSITE of religion.



Just sayin...

But if they weren't RAISED to think that way would they still? You cannot discount that in this discussion. Often what makes sense to them, only makes sense because it's what they've been fed. Their minds are boxed into that way of thinking subconsciously, to where they can't see beyond it.

For slowhand,,,


Thank you,,,

I do so tire of the sentiment that religious must be 'stupid', 'crazy', or 'afraid' or 'brainwashed or 'under evolved', or 'illogical', or,,,,

you get my drift, IM sure,,lol

I dont discount it, considering I was raised with four siblings, ALL exposed the same in childhood to religions, but not ALL choosing later in life to be religious.

WE all found what made sense to US,, exposure to religion was an added experience we had to choose from.

Yes, but you have to wonder just how many actually can break away from the ways they were taught, and how many just stay in that box. That's my whole point, how we are raised can and for a lot of people does effect how they think later. If someone is taught that belief x is the absolute truth without any doubt, they are gonna be inclined to believe that later in life, vs. another belief that goes against it.

Even if they don't "break away" from what they have been taught,
ALL religions believe that killing innocent people is wrong and
immoral so religion is the OPPOSITE of terrorism.

Of course, that happens with any situation people grow up with. How many grow up where the dad abuses the mom and some think that is how it should be and others are exposed to enough OTHER things to realize at some point that it isnt?

or How many grow up with parents who treat them as 'equals' and 'friends' , hanging out with them instead of giving them guidance and good examples and some grow up thinking thats how it should be an others dont.

THATS LIFE.

Our experiences, matched with our 'intelligence' and adaptability help us grow and learn. The fewer experiences we have (Whether they be isolated in religion or isolated in secularism) the less of an arsenal we have for making sound choices.

THe more experiences we have, the better capable we are of having more substantial CHOICES.

I just tire of the assumption that the religious have automatically been brainwashed, and that they havent had the same access as the non religous to have MANY experiences from which they still CHOSE religion.

I understand that, but you have to factor into that how the family may view them if they DON'T follow what they have been taught to follow. One can be cast out, ostracized, I'd know, I've gone through it and I am sure I am not the only one. This fact by itself can discourage a person from stepping outside of their particular box they grew up in. You can have all the access to other choices in the world, but if you are being pressured by those around you to choose one thing over another, you cannot tell me that does not have an influence. The group think mentality can be very dangerous in that way.

I agree, but that is a FAMILY dynamic, not a religious one

I was not PRESSURED to make one choice over another, I Think my parents were pretty smart actually and would have considered it much easier not to expose me to anything but the choices THEY wanted if they only wanted me to choose those things.

But they gave us CHOICES all through life,, by exposing us to as many (unharmful) things as they could and letting us choose our way between them. We ate many types of food and chose what we liked, we went to many types of environments and chose what we liked, we experienced many cultures, and chose what we liked,, we similarly were exposed to different christian AND non christian environments and got to choose which we liked.....


its family dynamics that create fear, and how the family uses religion within the dynamic

it isnt religion on its own,,

Ask yourself where most religions get their power.

Do people go to church and join a religion because they want to learn how to be a better person? I don't think so.

What are people afraid of?

Death.

What does religion teach?

Life after death.

So, the main draw for religions is the fear of death and the promise of eternal life.

If we lived forever, and there was no hell, only a paradise, would we be concerned with religion or flocking to churches? I don't think so.

Therefore, religion is fear based and that fear is death.

People do go to church to become better people. To be inspired
and to be encouraged. These people fear nothing and do not need
to be afraid.

We all err. That is human. But forgiveness is divine.

Clicked twice. Nobody's perfect!



Religion teaches peace and forgiveness, tolerance and kindness,
virtue and inner strength. All religions teach this in direct
opposition to the tactics of terrorism.

I like what you say, the religions you mention such as buddhism and taoism are not inflicted with a thirst for war such as christianity and islam (the crusades). They are more concerned with true spiritualism.
However, terrorism is not about islam, I am English and we have had Irish terrorists here for years. Eta was a Spanish terrorist organisation, look them up, im sure they are not islamic either. Terrorism is just war waged indirectly or covertly by a group (I may not have used the best words, but it is not face to face fighting). I would argue that alough some Islamic people may like a bit of terrorism there are surely some Islamic people who dont want to kill christians, As there are Irish who dont give a damn about what the English did 40 years ago or 200 years ago.