[Guest]

Sign up to peace club in the sign-up thread!

This thread is for discussions on what you think about peace.

I haven't said where I stand yet, so I'll start off.

Not long ago I was one of those cynics who thought peace "ain't gonna happen", and that you need war to really feel the true value of proper peace. But it was easy for me to say that because I've never had to live in a wartorn country in fear for my life. In the past few few weeks my view has changed a lot. I think if we can stop our wars with our fellow man, let's. War is unnecessary.

Edited August 13, 2008 by lemonymelon

[akaslickster]

Been trying to find where this expression came from,

Society shows us what we are

Solittude tells us what we should be

Its easy to say the right things on forums and be PC, but it's another to practise it ... regarding over population - as usual Ploper makes a great points and Unreality too - Nature is not gomma give us a pass into the next round - unfortunately testostorine is the controller of human nature - interesting to see what would happen if this was reduced or it's effect removed .. would that make us a better human or un/in-human??

Seaking a god or seaking peace, first seak truth - LIS/Phil O'Sophy

Why are people using the PC acronym that is= Personal Computer, for what I have no idea what they are saying. I think this abbreviation talk is getting out of hand.

Not sure about the quote above though I would look under famous quips or quotes in Wiki.

I don't mind what was said about mulitplying. I can say that I will never get a vasectomy!

Edited August 23, 2008 by akaslickster

[Guest]

Why are people using the PC acronym that is= Personal Computer, for what I have no idea what they are saying. I think this abbreviation talk is getting out of hand.

Not sure about the quote above though I would look under famous quips or quotes in Wiki.

I don't mind what was said about mulitplying. I can say that I will never get a vasectomy!

Well in a moment of levity I will say if you do have a vasectomy where a suit - if you're gonna be impotent you may as well look impotent (important)

but who ever said what ever it was - the point is truth is hard thing to accept when it does not agree with your needs or expectation

[Guest]

are we still talking about peace?

because I was thinking about religeon and war, and no, religeon can't be the underlying cause of war. how can I make this statement? well think about it this way. if EVERYONE in the whole world were all athiests...would you seriously think that the amount of war would decrease? possilby some. but deffinately there would be war.

[Guest]

I can say that I will never get a vasectomy!

You might consider it if you were to actually date someone who has not yet been through monopause!

[unreality]

are we still talking about peace?

because I was thinking about religeon and war, and no, religeon can't be the underlying cause of war. how can I make this statement? well think about it this way. if EVERYONE in the whole world were all athiests...would you seriously think that the amount of war would decrease? possilby some. but deffinately there would be war.

If everyone on earth was an atheist, there would be MUCH less war. Or if everyone on earth was under the same religion- then there would be much less war too. It's not religion that causes the war, but differences in people's religions. And before you say anything, atheism is not a religion. It's a lack of religion

ploper: I agree... but overpopulation is no excuse for war. There are other ways, as well as nature course-correction, etc. In biology, when a species exceeds its 'population limit' (I forget what the exact term is, or maybe that's it), factors cause it to drop back down again... but those factors aren't necessarily pretty. That's why, in the other thread, I essentially suggested we make the factors ourselves (such as keeping the birth rate low) so that we don't have to face the ugly ones later (war, famine, disease)

[Guest]

ploper: I agree... but overpopulation is no excuse for war. There are other ways, as well as nature course-correction, etc. In biology, when a species exceeds its 'population limit' (I forget what the exact term is, or maybe that's it), factors cause it to drop back down again... but those factors aren't necessarily pretty.

I believe the term is 'carrying capacity.' Hehe, I remember that from my Biology class last year.

[Guest]

why does this thread have less posts than the sign up thread... Come on people! I like this thread, post in it.

as usual Ploper makes a great points and Unreality too

lol, I barely ever really make good points at all, my last post was just someone else's point.

That's why I wonder why I'm even still tolerated on this forum

are we still talking about peace?

because I was thinking about religeon and war, and no, religeon can't be the underlying cause of war. how can I make this statement? well think about it this way. if EVERYONE in the whole world were all athiests...would you seriously think that the amount of war would decrease? possilby some. but deffinately there would be war.

On top of what Unreality said, I don't think anyone here is claiming that religion is the cause of ALL war. So yes, there would definitely still be some war. But MUCH less than before.

ploper: I agree... but overpopulation is no excuse for war. There are other ways, as well as nature course-correction, etc. In biology, when a species exceeds its 'population limit' (I forget what the exact term is, or maybe that's it), factors cause it to drop back down again... but those factors aren't necessarily pretty. That's why, in the other thread, I essentially suggested we make the factors ourselves (such as keeping the birth rate low) so that we don't have to face the ugly ones later (war, famine, disease)

Yes, I did come off as saying that overpopulation is excuse for war, did I?

I don't think we should kill people because of overpopulation... But we shouldn't try to best nature and (oooh, I'm gonna sound like a bad guy here.) save people from the natural things that bring us down, such as famine and disease.

However, like Slick said. We should make our decisions... descicions... ahh, I shoulda just spell-checked it, after the problem of war is over with.

Perhaps if we find a way to thin out the population density of.. well.. Earth. Or start living on other planets. Then we can live in world peace afterward.

Well, if I couldn't say I'd learned anything, then there wouldn't be a point for me to post in this thread, would there?

EDIT: Put the wrong kind of "then." (I put than)

Edited August 24, 2008 by Ploper

[Guest]

Hey, my first post in Peace Club Discussion.

I think it is very hard to have all the people in the world to become atheist. I think the important factor to have peace is that everyone in this world understand there is difference. No matter the differences are from religious, races, believing etc; Understand them, Accept them and Respect them, as long as the difference doesn't harm any single person.

It is very dull to have mono-tone, that's why our earth is enriched with colours.

thanks

[unreality]

exactly

[Guest]

Hey, my first post in Peace Club Discussion.

I think it is very hard to have all the people in the world to become atheist. I think the important factor to have peace is that everyone in this world understand there is difference. No matter the differences are from religious, races, believing etc; Understand them, Accept them and Respect them, as long as the difference doesn't harm any single person.

It is very dull to have mono-tone, that's why our earth is enriched with colours.

thanks

exactly

I second that second - I do practise respect of others beliefs (not the Others form Lost), everyone has good points and can add to their own belifs rather than take it all away - it's probaly too much to ask to leave them feeling abandoned by their friends should they 'turn away'.

Lets accept/respect all sorts n thoughts - but watch out for the antagonists

[Guest]

I agree- many religions are based upon peaceful ideals. Many more aren't. Buddhism and Taosim are based on peace- and you don't see Buddhist or Taoist terrorists. Now take Islam, Christianity, etc- those claim to be based on peace, but one look at their holy books and it's really not. It doesn't matter whether they're right or wrong, what matters is that they advocate peace... but only toward your fellow believers. Toward your fellow Israelites (in the case of the OT). Everyone else burns in hell and deserves to die in bloody crusades. Those crusades still continue today, just the means change, from open wars to terrorism, from swords to explosives & guns. A major step toward world peace would be to "calm down" the religious warfare and religious leaders and sects and holy land claims

I agree- people have to let go of the labels and superstitions in which they hold themselves as somehow "better" than other people. I am an atheist, but I respect theist. I don't respect their beliefs, and usually they were just told to do this from a very young age, but I DO repsect them. We need more mutual respect and more love in this world

You haven't offended me at all. I enjoy conversations about religion, with both other atheists and religious people (helping them become more self-aware in what kinds of things they actually believe in)

Unreality, you're too cynical about religion, and a bit hypocritical too: you want theists to respect your beliefs though you don't respect theirs and you act very arrogantly in matters about which, if any, religion is right.

Anyway the stuff about Islam and Christianity etc only wanting peace for their fellow believers is not entirely true. I don't know about Christianity but in Islam, everyone is encouraged to respect and live in harmony with everyone else. the Prophet Muhammad (S.A.W.) said, "There is a reward for kindness to every living animal or human." True, in Islam, we believe that this life on Earth is just a trial before the next realm of existence, a test for each individual for the life after death. We believe that non-believers will not go to Paradise (of course, everything is always up to Allah though: not everything is guaranteed) but that's what has been said by Allah, so don't hate me for what I believe. If you think I'm wrong, that's your decision: everyone has their own beliefs but we can still live in harmony on Earth.

If everyone on earth was an atheist, there would be MUCH less war. Or if everyone on earth was under the same religion- then there would be much less war too. It's not religion that causes the war, but differences in people's religions. And before you say anything, atheism is not a religion. It's a lack of religion

One of the worst things about me is that I don't find it easy to be nice a lot of the time. But I try to be as much as I can to please God and because of my faith. If I were an atheist, I doubt I'd be a good person at all.

I think that one religion would result in less war than everyone being atheist. Atheists are all different with their different views but people of the same faith should have the same views.

I personally don't think that religion is the cause of all war: the war in Iraq doesn't have anything to do religion at all. If you're not religious it's easy to shove the blame onto something you're not a part of.

Anyway, we should stop talking about religion so much: the idea of this topic was to promote PEACE without bringing religious beliefs into it.

Lets accept/respect all sorts n thoughts - but watch out for the antagonists

I agree with the respect and acceptance, but what do you feel is so wrong with antagonists?

Edited August 25, 2008 by lemonymelon

[Guest]

Unreality, you're too cynical about religion, and a bit hypocritical too: you want theists to respect your beliefs though you don't respect theirs and you act

I was being a bit unfair with the above statement and I'd like to retract it. Sorry I said it, Unreality and to everyone else: It wasn't very peaceful.

[Guest]

I agree with the respect and acceptance, but what do you feel is so wrong with antagonists?

was actually looking for the right word - and that came out - but the cloaked cell 'advesary' the ones that get close to you by being agreeable and use you - i guess that's a terrorist cell actually. Not keen on anyone antagonising LM, so my advice stands - watch out for them!

[Guest]

was actually looking for the right word - and that came out - but the cloaked cell 'advesary' the ones that get close to you by being agreeable and use you - i guess that's a terrorist cell actually. Not keen on anyone antagonising LM, so my advice stands - watch out for them!

you know what, i was thinking of a different word. I was thinking of agnostic, which rreminds me that i think i used the word antagonist instead of agnostic in a pm to someone yesterday but i can't remember whether i did or not. but ignore me, it wasn't important anyway.

Edited August 25, 2008 by lemonymelon

[Guest]

One of the worst things about me is that I don't find it easy to be nice a lot of the time. But I try to be as much as I can to please God and because of my faith. If I were an atheist, I doubt I'd be a good person at all.

Anyway, we should stop talking about religion so much: the idea of this topic was to promote PEACE without bringing religious beliefs into it.

I agree with your second statement. Might I invite you to discuss this in Religious debate though? And perhaps some other stuff I noticed you said.

If not I understand, I just enjoy discussing religion... (A bit too much, probably )

Hey, my first post in Peace Club Discussion.

I think it is very hard to have all the people in the world to become atheist. I think the important factor to have peace is that everyone in this world understand there is difference. No matter the differences are from religious, races, believing etc; Understand them, Accept them and Respect them, as long as the difference doesn't harm any single person.

It is very dull to have mono-tone, that's why our earth is enriched with colours.

thanks

exactly

I second that second - I do practise respect of others beliefs (not the Others form Lost), everyone has good points and can add to their own belifs rather than take it all away - it's probaly too much to ask to leave them feeling abandoned by their friends should they 'turn away'.

I second that seconding of a second.

[akaslickster]

you know what, i was thinking of a different word. I was thinking of agnostic, which rreminds me that i think i used the word antagonist instead of agnostic in a pm to someone yesterday but i can't remember whether i did or not. but ignore me, it wasn't important anyway.

I thought that was what you meant (agnostic). I chose not to be categorized whatsoever. Oh, but I have to be something? OK, I was a catholic for a long time. I do not practice anymore as expected. I do not feel immoral or any different. I do believe if you are a loving person who dislikes being labeled and you are good people,then your time in life was well spent. The video in my profile is not what I preach but, it is a very peaceful thought. I will just say that I am non religios without the label.

Now if the religios debate is over then we can begin the PEACE DISCUSSION as planned. If this is more in regards to religion than peace, then it defeats the entire purpose of this thread.

I have said it before that people who don't separate one goal from another, get carried away and allow other issues to become an obstacle in the way of achieving our topic of discussion.

There is no reason to constantly argue over the same unwelcome issue in this thread. Let's start over and do it right.

[akaslickster]

I just for the heck of it, went to Tom Riddles Diary, and it said that the cause of war was, " reductionism". I thought wow , this thing is so simple minded. I will need to complain about that some day.

[Guest]

[Guest]

AHHH! I hate Pink Floyd!

[grey cells]

Is it?

Unless I have my 5th form History wrong

Look into the history of Palestine and you will see that there were a number of agreements after WW2

One promised it to the Jews (who had been mistreated during the War)

One promised it to the Palestinians

One claimed that Britain/America should split it between themselves

Look into Ireland. North Ireland was created because the British feared the potential of someone else using Ireland as a staging post to attack. They attacked Ireland. Ask an South Irish person if they have any love for England and you will know what I'm talking about.

Iraq - Oil

Basically they dress up greed and fear and hate really nice to sell them.

"We are liberating people"

"We are opposing tyranny"

"I do it because of our shared beliefs or passions" (be they religion or not)

The crusades and Spanish inquisition were built out of fear (they were dressed up really well)

What gets blamed for all this? Someone else's belief or passions (never our own)

The catalyst gets blamed

Sorry for replying so late, Phaze. But recently I have been in one big Daze.

You are right in saying that these wars were not started with Religion as a basis. But there are other wars, wars within a country, which are seemingly mini-wars, which are started as a part of internal political struggle. Some of these wars are started by pitting people of different religions. I don't know if such wars are widespread, but I can state an example. From my country, India.

I know I am touching a delicate nerve here, but I have to express my views. A few years ago, in this same century, in a state of India called Gujarat, riots broke out. This started with the burning of a train, allegedly by Muslims. 50 -100 innocent Hindus were killed. This was due to some disagreement which broke out between VHP(Vishwa Hindu Parishad) activists and a group of Muslims. This in turn led to the Hindus slaughtering innocent Muslims.

Now I ,as many others would agree with me, would say that the government could have prevented this nasty affair. This I believe was one of many such instances, where religion has been used as a pawn for internal political struggle.

Now the important word, here is innocents. And sadly the Muslims were the ones who had to face the dire consequences.

Now here, neither the Muslims nor the Hindus are to be blamed. It is only the government to blame, using religions to it's strength.

Now without indulging into the religious debate, we can carry on the discussion peacefully.

EDIT : Italics

[akaslickster]

Sorry for replying so late, Phaze. But recently I have been in one big Daze.

You are right in saying that these wars were not started with Religion as a basis. But there are other wars, wars within a country, which are seemingly mini-wars, which are started as a part of internal political struggle. Some of these wars are started by pitting people of different religions. I don't know if such wars are widespread, but I can state an example. From my country, India.

I know I am touching a delicate nerve here, but I have to express my views. A few years ago, in this same century, in a state of India called Gujarat, riots broke out. This started with the burning of a train, allegedly by Muslims. 50 -100 innocent Hindus were killed. This was due to some disagreement which broke out between VHP(Vishwa Hindu Parishad) activists and a group of Muslims. This in turn led to the Hindus slaughtering innocent Muslims.

Now I ,as many others would agree with me, would say that the government could have prevented this nasty affair. This I believe was one of many such instances, where religion has been used as a pawn for internal political struggle.

Now the important word, here is innocents. And sadly the Muslims were the ones who had to face the dire consequences.

Now here, neither the Muslims nor the Hindus are to be blamed. It is only the government to blame, using religions to it's strength.

Now without indulging into the religious debate, we can carry on the discussion peacefully.

EDIT : Italics

I see what you mean. The train was burnt, probably by the same type of Muslim people of terrorist decent that did up the twin towers in New York, (9/11), as we call it. They seem to claim that their god expects them to die if needed to kill others unlike them such as Christians. I personally have never known any Hindus to be instigators. Of course, there is good and bad in all religions.

Besides the religious part, is the people who are thick-headed and believe the only tradition of their kind and stick with it like glue.

This includes senseless slaughter, or any means required to do what they were conditioned to believe is moral.

One of the keys to peace I think, is to convince them that it is wrong. It could be like talking to a wall.

Edited August 27, 2008 by akaslickster

[Guest]

AHHH! I hate Pink Floyd!

na - ye dont! ye just dont know em ..... Shine on you crazy diamond - Carlos Santana any better? Hotel California (acoustic) or anything by Queen - Brian May (awesome and self effacing too, nicest person you could ever wish to meet).

Back to peace club - lets hold a peace concert, support fom Dylan to Floyd, Well have a ho-down and square dance, Ye - hah!

We can probably get youtube members to bring it in - so many want to be in the limelight the may pay.

I'll for go my usual $0.02 charge on this occasion

[Guest]

I see what you mean. The train was burnt, probably by the same type of Muslim people of terrorist decent that did up the twin towers in New York, (9/11), as we call it. They seem to claim that their god expects them to die if needed to kill others unlike them such as Christians. I personally have never known any Hindus to be instigators. Of course, there is good and bad in all religions.

Besides the religious part, is the people who are thick-headed and believe the only tradition of their kind and stick with it like glue.

This includes senseless slaughter, or any means required to do what they were conditioned to believe is moral.

One of the keys to peace I think, is to convince them that it is wrong. It could be like talking to a wall.

Slick you may be spot on! IDK, but you seem to be presumptive here - not al muslims are extreme, or even terrorists. They may be badly informed and have no warm feelings for infedels - but your brick wall remark is just taring everyone with the same brush

It's not your usual style old chap - this won't lead to peace in my humble opinion.

[akaslickster]

Slick you may be spot on! IDK, but you seem to be presumptive here - not al muslims are extreme, or even terrorists. They may be badly informed and have no warm feelings for infedels - but your brick wall remark is just taring everyone with the same brush

It's not your usual style old chap - this won't lead to peace in my humble opinion.

You are not understanding to whom I was referring to...>>>terrorists. I underlined type as not all Muslims and not all one kind of people that won't listen to reason.

[akaslickster]

na - ye dont! ye just dont know em ..... Shine on you crazy diamond - Carlos Santana any better? Hotel California (acoustic) or anything by Queen - Brian May (awesome and self effacing too, nicest person you could ever wish to meet).

Back to peace club - lets hold a peace concert, support fom Dylan to Floyd, Well have a ho-down and square dance, Ye - hah!

We can probably get youtube members to bring it in - so many want to be in the limelight the may pay.

I'll for go my usual $0.02 charge on this occasion

Wrong thread my pal.