
Gary Lawrence Murphy said:
> >>>>> "S" == Stephen D Williams  writes:
>     S> A) Which religion is it that can claim no foul actions in its
>     S> past?  Certainly not Christianity, Islam, etc.
> Rastafari.
> That is, if you concede that of the two founding branches, only the
> one founded by the Nyabingi were legit and the others were
> thinly-veneered anti-colonial hooligans.  
> There is also Vietnamese Buddhism, unless you count setting fire to
> oneself as a "foul action".What about Tibetan Buddhism BTW?  They seem like an awfully nice bunch
of chaps (and chapesses).> When we launched the Native Net in 1989, one of the first things we
> noticed on networking aboriginal groups around the world is that the
> British Army, with the US Army as a proxy by extension, were the
> common thread.  Where neither was present (physically or through
> influence) there /tended/ to be less violence.
> 
> The issue in Ireland is complex, but rest assured that religious
> aspects are only a co-incidence of the invader/colonials being
> predominantly members of the Royal-headed Anglicans and the aboriginal
> population being predominantly members of the Pope-headed Catholics.
> The conflict itself has nothing to do with ideology or practice, since
> the Anglican Church is a near-identical clone of Catholicism.
> 
> (now I bet that's going to attract some healthy debate ;)Man, I'm not going *there* again ;)  I'll agree, though, that the ideology
or practices of the religions have very little to do with the conflict.> The same is true of street-gangs: When people are disenfranchised,
> it's easier to offer them the Triad as a new family.  You get
> cellphones, cars, a dry place to live.  Triad, biker gangs, mafia, the
> IRA, Al Queda ... we've been fighting the War on Terrorism for as long
> as there's been commerce, so you'd think we'd /realize/ that
> escalation of violence is not a solution.Well said!--j.
