oooh.. you want deathcounts?

This website is amazing... http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/warstats.htm


Here is his top 20...

I did a quick look on thate site and from 1981-1998 11 Million people died from aids alone. Thats a lot more than most wars that lasted the same amount of time. (Such as the american Civil war)

Killing is not the only 'immoral' action that exists.

There is an amusing satirical site about some of the implications of christian fanaticism, the something baptist church... but I won't look it up and post because it could be offensive.

Daganev, your death counts conclude nothing. All of those figures are estimates, some of which could be +15-20 million people off. Furthermore, they aren't even correct. If the Mao Zedong Dynasty is going to be considered because people died from famine, where the hell is Bubonic plague, which was the result of the sickening living conditions forced upon the poor. And Bubonic plague killed more than -any- of those - something like 33% of all humans on earth at that time.

These are the general estimates:

1000 - 38 million deaths
1100 - 48 million deaths
1200 - 59 million deaths
1300 - 70 million deaths
1347 - 75 million deaths
1352 - 50 million deaths

Why do numbers count? Why, honestly, why? It doesnt matter how many people die, one person dieing is -wrong- period. Numbers cant tell us how horrific it was, no, only someone who was there, who saw what happened can give the truth. Numbers are just facts that the main population is givin because they cant take the actual truth behind what true anguish in war means.

Disclaimer: I have never been in war, I have no military family, this is a personal opinion and its not just mine.

edit: What I mean to say is..People are dead, people are being slaughtered now..why do we do this? Why do we continue? One persons death...a broken heart at least, mind numbing grief that isnt easily broken. Death is difficult..death is hard..we arent all able to deal with it. So why do we constantly hurt ourselves? Why is it that its right for some people to say that its okay for their followers to kill people? Death is death no matter who you follow, death means you wont be seeing that person ever again or for a very long time depending on your beliefs. Maybe..Im just being silly but it seems wrong that we continue, that we dont stop..

and the spanish influenza. that was worse i think, although i'm not certian.

Erm. Numbers do tell you a lot. I'm going to go ahead and say that the second world war was a worse event (event with a larger negative effect) than my grandparents dying last year, even if the latter affected me (noticeably) more than the first one did.

They matter because we aren't trying to argue right or wrong. However, I do think 50 million people dying = more wrong than 1.

I'm mostly just lurking in this thread, but I think it's worth noting that sanitation is an American discovery. 20th century. Famine, however, can be very human-created, and we've always known that people suffer and die if you raze all their fields.

EDIT: Mid 19th century. Still American, though. Meh.

deleted because I dont want to argue, I dont want to even talk on this thread anymore.

1 person does not equal 50 billion, I didnt mean to imply that. All I meant to say was it was wrong. And Im gone from this thread.

You know, a nice bloody war between the over populated countries masquerading as a religious dispute would probably fix them right up..

Narsrim, feel free to go to that website, its VERY well researched and has many explanations about how it achieved all its facts...

Before you try to discredit something look into it...

The bubonic plague nor the spanish flu, were man made events.. there is a large list of death tolls by natural disasters on that website also.

I was bringing up that list because of the claim that "relgion has been the number one cuase of death since time began"

The facts say otherwise.



@elryn: I don't think I ever implied that death was the "only immoral" act... However the forums do like to clump all posts made by the same person together... and that "baptist church" your talking about is actually a cult. A very well known cult that everyone says is nuts. I don't need to see wacco websites to know what is written in the old testimant. I can read the old testament for that. And I have read all 24 books cover to cover, some books I've even studied in depth.

How is famine anymore of a man-made event than plague?

While yes, you could argue that X group did Y action that caused Z crops to die out, you could likewise argue that X group did Y action that caused Z living conditions that reinforced the spread and growth of disease.

Hehe, no no, not those psychos who do the picketing at peoples funerals.

Um... let me try and find it. Landover Baptist. Its interesting to see what they pick on, but be aware it is intended to be satirical and mock the extreme fundamentalist aspects of Christianity. Please don't visit if you don't want to be offended.

From the Landover Baptist site:



:worried:

Homosexually inspired colours? Talking about rainbows? Does this Baptist have a thing against rainbows....? Odd you would think that he would know that in the bible God showed Noah a rainbow as a sign of his promise that He would never again destroy the world by water.


*Loves Rainbows*

Silly Baptist


Edit: Why can't there be a rainbow smile

I have very ultra-christians Jehovah's Witnesses as neighbours. Said people would let their kids die before allowing for a blood transfer to save them because due to some strict reading of a part of the bible that would condenm their children (seems that killing said children doesn't make the father into a murderer, though).

So, even if the basis of christian religion are "love each other" (Studied in a catolic school, from what I was told that sentence overrides the previous jew religion for the christians) and that's all good and nice, the way you can abuse it to make a father allow his son to die is what makes religion so dangerous. Not to talk about the incredible amounts of money that some people is able to siphon from the believers accounts (as the catholic church did a few centuries ago, where handling your worldy posessions to church was a safe way to heaven adn eternal life) also justified by the orders given by a superior Being. The circus that some specifical "Saint" places are where people go expecting a miracle to happen, while being drained dry of their money by merchants is just another example.

So, as I said, religion is a way too dangerous tool to justify anything (also to inspire art to extremes, I won't negate it, or great sacrifices for the greater good). It's not evil in itself, it's just the man who makes it evil, or good.

Regarding religion in north america, I beg your perdon but at least in central america there were some pretty advanced ritualistic religions, just not monoteist in most cases (exactly as the easter civilizations, wich weren't monoteist either), and I think those were the same tribes that moved up and down north-central america until the british came to "enlighten" them.

Its difficult to challenge cause its perty dam true.

People want hope when there getting kicked around and organised religion is perfect for it.

Almost all religions have encouraged violence to convert people to their own religion, christians and muslims definatly have encouraged violenced to promote there own religion.

Im just saying religion has cased so much more pain and damage to the world theres no way I can see it as being right. I believe in god but its just so bleh I dont even know what to say religon kills so many people now days I just dont see the point.

You can measure deaths, but can you measure abstract concepts like hope or happiness? 'Religion' may have caused a lot of death and suffering, indirectly. But how can you weigh out negative consequences while ignoring positive consequences? How many people have found peace, fulfilment and solace in their God? The God people reject?

The figures ignore the millions through the ages who have chosen to live entirely selfless, humble lives dedicated entirely to the service of others and their God. Or of knowledge. For example, the many throughout history who have lived out quiet, monastic lifestyles. The wars may fill history books, and the negative news have more of an impact than the positive (it always does), but letting it influence some utilitarian calculation of whether religion is a force for 'war or peace' is fatuous.

And what about the benefits religion brings to the lives of so many 'normal' people?

Maybe tomorrow's headline will read:

20 MILLION PEOPLE WORK IN CHARITABLE OR VOLUNTARY RELIGIOUS ORGANISATIONS! FIGURES HIT NEW HIGHS!

Why are people trying to gauge whether religion is a force for good or bad by comparing the amount of deaths caused by 'religion' with the amount of deaths caused by 'non-religious' events?

Yanno Am, you coulda saved a whole lot of anguish by just pointing that out in the first place That's the point I've been waiting for you to make for 6 pages

He's correct. In addition, I'm yet to see an argument here that justifies calling Religion a force for war. Yes it's caused war. But that doesn't make it a force for war.

I distrust those who blindly do things because they believe some higher being, whom they have no factual evidence even is there, told some person thousands of years ago. "This is the way it is to be!"

Now, who sounds more foolish out of the two of us?

Wow... do you actually listen to yourself talk?

That is the most arrogant thing I've ever heard in my life, and I've listened to the America President speak, often.



So you will remain ignorant because you choose not to read something, fine, that's your own loss.

However the bible is propaganda(emotive and illogical in many places) as well, and somehow you fail to see this.


I can agree with that. I can also agree that another problem is people who dissagree with those statements.


Christian Europe developed guns; the Native Americans developed more advanced agriculture.

Who is to say who was more advanced?

..because one was able to destroy most of the other? That was mostly the Europeans own folly, diseases.


Amen

There are also repressions of freedoms as well.


I could play devils advocate here and say that religion is good, because it makes people hate each other, and they go to war, and war is good because it's a population controll...


Nope, but they wanted to sneak the word Homosexual in there to equate cute little children with some sort of EVIL GAY stereotype they have built up, to further spurn their members on to do the things that the person writing that wants them to do.



The figures also ignore those who never actually -killed- anyone by were able to act mean/violently or discriminate against people because of religion.'

Weren’t you just ignoring the crimes against the 'normal' people earlier because of those they placed on a pedestal so they could do great things?

Charity is not confined to religion either. The greatest amount of charity work I've done was in my fraternity in college, as we constantly raised funds for the under funded music programs in our school.

Programs that bring happiness/solace/comfort to people, without that comfort coming from a church, and we didn't discriminate against anyone from joining the programs or teach them to think less of people while doing so.

I had a friend in high school, who was roman catholic, who believed that anyone who wasn't also a roman catholic would go to hell forever, and there was nothing we could do about it, because it was to late because we weren’t raised roman catholic. There is a serious problem with people who think that way. Amaru seems to, in his statement about Aiakon's religion, and yet I consider myself as different from Aiakon then he is from Amaru, in terms of views on religion. When a Religion teaches you to think less of others, you can also think less of the things you do to them, or the things you deny them.

I live in America where it is said we have the freedom of religion. I, however only find this to be half true, because even though we have the freedom to practice the religion we wish to (within certain logical limits, if your religion says you must kill 20 people per day, of course there’d be problems), we do not have the freedom to be unaffected by the religious spawned discriminations of others.

If my character Zenji was in the real world he'd be very religious, and conservative. A person like -me- would consider him extreme at times. Lusternia is different then real life though, in Lusternia there ARE gods, this is a fact. Things like national affiliation and race matter on deeper levels, such as being bound to a nexi.