Incorrect. They define their ideals. Hello?! Ideals are pondered, thought out, and recorded/defined by men, not vice versa. Their ideals might help people to understand them on a very very basic level, but they do nothing more than that.
That is the most absurd thing I've ever heard. It seems you haven't thought this out at all... A person's ideals don't make them, a person makes their own ideals. Religion cannot be a cause of murder lest you are denying free will. If you're denying free will and are arguing based off of some bizarre abstract "philosophy" (one in the minority) that humans do not think for themselves, then that argument may very well work--for you. Not for the rest of the world though. We've been through this. Religion and ideals can be a contributing factor to events and actions, but nothing more. Do all Muslims believe in violent martyrdom while killing innocents just to fight western culture and get across a message? No. Why? Because that's not the Islamic religious ideal.

That actually violates the principle of the Islamic religious ideal--which is clearly defined. The individual committing such acts has skewed that ideal into something different for themselves, therefore the individual has created individual desires and goals that branch off and can no longer be attributed directly to that original ideal... Islam is clearly defined as an ideal. Violent martyrdom while killing innocents is not Islam, nor is it even caused by Islam, it's caused by the individuals who have their individual goals and created a new set of principles which can no longer even be considered Islam. If you "interpret" something like Islam that doesn't really have room to be "interpreted" then you are no longer following it in the first place.

If you still wish to try and put as much blame on religion as possible--something I don't doubt--you could still, I suppose, associate Islam as a contributing factor, but only to the extent that the individuals completely branched off from it and violated the principles and ideals of it to try to attain their very individualistic goals... To try and blame an abstract ideal directly for the choices of men is to negate free will and choice, which is to say you have no conscious choice or that your choice is always limited to one thing--which is a fallacy and an absurd theory (hence why it is rarely accepted as a theory).
Obviously not as "simple" as you think. You're delving into a topic on which it seems your arguments are rather uninformed. Hitler was not confirmed to be a Christian, it's a debate that still goes on today. Why? Because at times he commended Christianity and at other times he condemned Christianity. It would seem you should perhaps do some reading before throwing out material in a rather quick attempt to support your argument:

Adolf Hitler - Christian, Atheist, or Neither?

First we have the issue that Hitler was a liar. He manipulated people. It's quite obvious that he used Christianity to gain the support of the people through his incredibly seductive oratory abilities. How can a man like Hitler be taken at his word? He can't. End of story. Secondly, there are just as many quotes of his in which he spits at Christianity and condemns it as there are of him commending it. There's no way that can be used as objective material in this debate because there will never be a way to verify it either way. Secondly, the cause and effect here was the cause--Hitler's individual choice, and the effect--the suffering of the many people because of that choice. Yes it's simple, but not in the way with which it seems you'd like to try and pawn all these scenarios off on religion. People make choices. Things happen--consequences are felt because of those choices. Choices can be influenced by a person's own idea of a religion and an ideal, but unless the religion actually says "go out and kill a lot of people for this religion" then the religion can't be blamed for the murderous genocidal actions of individuals. That's illogical and goes against the grain of humanity. Ironically, that's the kind of bigoted and judgmental mindset (seemingly vindictive scapegoating and blame-placing) that causes large conflicts of interest around the world.

__________________
Political Diplomacy Game Map
Forum Diplomacy Game Discussion Thread
__________________
"Ask not what your country can do for you; ask what you can do for your country."
-John F. Kennedy

"Education begins the gentleman, but reading, good company and reflection must finish him."
-John Locke

"What worries you, masters you."
-John Locke

There is also the fact that Judism is a religion.
And what were the jews doing during THE "RELIGIOUS " Hitler's reign?

Good point. The religious people who were actually following their doctrine and ideals--not skewing the meanings and creating something vile and completely different from it--were the ones suffering because they didn't retaliate with violence and they were the only ones in that scenario (the Holocaust) who can truly be considered to have been following their true religious principles--in this case the principles of Judaism.

__________________
Political Diplomacy Game Map
Forum Diplomacy Game Discussion Thread
__________________
"Ask not what your country can do for you; ask what you can do for your country."
-John F. Kennedy

"Education begins the gentleman, but reading, good company and reflection must finish him."
-John Locke

"What worries you, masters you."
-John Locke

First of all, define logic. Define reasoning. Those are about as subjective of terms as it gets--and your idea of "logic" and "reasoning" is not applicable in this debate. In fact, one could argue that logic is more so defined by the majority and since you can't really prove otherwise, there's no real concrete argument you can make against the majority's definition of logic. You're the minority in terms of what you believe to be "logical" and there's nothing you can do to "prove" otherwise.

Secondly,you don't seem to understand one key point here. No religion "calls" for people to "adhere blindly to a faith and disregard logic and reasoning." Why? Because people aren't forced to accept the ideals of religion, people aren't given ultimatums. People fully choose to accept them. Why? Because they believe in them. People don't "blindly" accept religion, and they aren't supposed to--even on their religious terms. I'm religious and I think outside the box. I think about all kinds of different ideas and I ponder philosophies that negate God, even. It sure as hell doesn't mean I believe in them, because I don't--but I don't "blindly" accept anything, like you so arrogantly and ultimately stated that you see religion as calling people to do. Not only that, but the majority of this Earth's population believes it to be a logical application of faith and they believe religion to be a source of not only morality but of purpose, and there's nothing you can say or do to refute their beliefs. You may as well just give up with your absurd and bigoted religious intolerance. It won't accomplish anything productive.

__________________
Political Diplomacy Game Map
Forum Diplomacy Game Discussion Thread
__________________
"Ask not what your country can do for you; ask what you can do for your country."
-John F. Kennedy

"Education begins the gentleman, but reading, good company and reflection must finish him."
-John Locke

"What worries you, masters you."
-John Locke

A good point, but basicaly we're talking about choices here not blind faith.
A person can have blind faith in God ,or a Big Bang and if they choose but if they choose to work, provide for themselves and maybe help other people if they need it and not bother anybody.
Or the same person that has blind faith in God or the Big Biang can go on a killing spree, stick up a liqour store, and kill anybody that doesn't agree with hm
That is what I like to call the "human factor"i.
Of course I tend to go with the first choice.lol,lol

I think the world could unite in that most people want peace, all they have to do is pray for peace. It is one common thing that most people would like to see.

Thats very unkind of you to say Locke, that simply becuase were in the minority our 'logic' doesnt mean shit. We obviously shouldnt talk about things that matter because we are too few to know anything. Thats really an unkind thing to say.
I could say the same thing about your logic in this debate, citing that since i 'believe' since your clouded by your faith that your reasoning doesnt matter much in a logical based debate.
Did the majority logic in the 1800s believe slavery was wrong,? NO, they thoght it was right. or in the 60s that civil rights for other races was right? Again, no. Its was the minority that knew it was wrong. People thought they were still wrong, but will you stand up right now and say there wrong still. No, because a minorities logic back than was more reasonable than the majority.
Just because a majority believes one thing does not make it right.

Do the muslims in the middle east have freedom of religion? You may not have been force feed religion but that doesnt mean plenty of others haven't.
Didnt i already say majority logic means shit. Majority logic once believed it neccesary to enslave millions of people because they could. Morality. Regardless of whether its religions fault or the religious. Leviticus says to stone people who work on Sunday. thats no very moral considering God says not to kill. Purpose, i dont believe my purpose in life is to blindly follow anything without question, not my parents or my country. Theres very few things i trust in my life. My purpose is what i make of it, not what some books says it should be.
No, i can't refute your belief, because you don't want to question that or try to grow above that with which you are. You say you asked questions which negate your god, but how can i believe that when you have so clearly followed your faith with blind devotion time after time by attacking mine and Bronze Medals logic.
WWJD? Would he say my logics flawed because i'm in the minority? wasnt he in the minority in the beginning as well?

__________________
"For every man there is a purpose he sets up in his life, let yours be the doing of all good deeds." - Qur'an
Give every man your ear, but few thy voice. Take each man's censure, but reserve thy judgment.[Hamlet] -Shakespeare, William
Where there is doubt, there is freedom -Latin Proverb

I believe this to be wrong, faith does not ask you to disregard logic. People of faith also question things, and look for reason. Also our laws come from our religious beliefs, if there was no religion there would be anarchy. If there was no religion there would be more killing today than there is presently. People who commit acts of murder are wrong and no religion justifies murder.

We are talking most of the average,common people right wether they pray or not right?
BY THE WAY THIS IS AN INTEROGITIVE SENTANCE FROM A PERSON WHO BELEIVS IN GOD.LOL

I know most people want peace, but how many actually pray for it. How many ask for it (ask and you shall recieve) I think if as many people as possible from all round the world and prayed for peace this would have a massive impact on our global society. However the trick is to get enough people to take part in the idea, why not help me advertuise it. Look at the start of this thread to get all the details. I am not a crackpot, well maybe some think I am.