From the IRA in the UK, the LRA in Central Africa, Al Qaeda in the Middle East, to all other groups who use violence as a means of expression, they all back their actions by laying claim to one scriptual text or the other. What are your views on the use of violence in the name of religion?

It don't mix.

religious books are some of the most WIDELY read in the world

its expected they will be often referenced

either in relevance or irrelevance,,,

we do the same thing in america with the 'constitution'

its what we have to know from a young age, so it will often be cited
different societies have different documents they try to build their lives upon,,, those documents will serve as a common 'go to' to argue or justify beliefs and actions,,,

Exactly

Violence has been done in the name of both religion and secular ideoligies. Religion is not special, it is just more widely available to be used to justify violent actions. If there was no religion people would just look for other sources to justify violence

"When you call yourself an Indian or a Muslim or a Christian or a European, or anything else, you are being violent. Do you see why it is violent? Because you are separating yourself from the rest of mankind. When you separate yourself by belief, by nationality, by tradition, it breeds violence. So a man seeking to understand violence does not belong to any country, to any religion, to any political party or partial system; he is concerned with the total understanding of mankind" - J. Krishnamurti

I don't care what it's in the name of, I hate it. I can no longer watch the news because the violence, death and destruction in the world devastate me and make me cry like an inconsolable infant.

The only violence that I understand is self-defense. I am no pacifist who will lay down and let someone hurt me or my family. But the wars fought today have nothing to do with self-defense. Nothing.

Bull ****.

Religion /doesn't matter which one / is the most ancient and naturally-built and sly political system .
And politic is violence itself , doesn't matter how acceptable sounds their ideas .


Pls check :
Niccolo Machiavelli*

I all bogus on mr krishna




I Call myself female, because of my biology. that has notthing to do with my understanding of mankind accept the part that understands that mankind STARTED someplace and then branched off into a billion counterparts with different cultures, beliefs, features,,,etc,,,

people call themself inidan or muslim because of their set of beliefs or the country they are most closely attached to

people are all part of mankind but they are all also seperate INDIVIDUALS

aknowleding what makes us individual is not violent

its honesty

What Mr. Krishnamurti is warning you about is creating an "us/them" mentality.

is it a mentality, or is it ingrained into our language and therefore our perception?

why have the third person in our language at all?

It is a twisted mind that excuses its actions through religion.

For some reason, I want to go into a dissertation on Martin Buber's "I and Thou". However, I am an egghead and would go on for hours. There should be clearer explanations on the web somewhere; if I have understood your question correctly and if you want it answered. Buber was the first thing to pop into my mind.