All the religious wars that have caused blood to be shed for centuries arise from passionate feelings and facile counter-positions, such as Us and Them, good and bad, white and black.
Sentiment: POSITIVE
In the long term we can hope that religion will change the nature of man and reduce conflict. But history is not encouraging in this respect. The bloodiest wars in history have been religious wars.
Religious conflict can be the bloodiest and cruelest conflicts that turn people into fanatics.
Today a new faith is stirring: the myth of blood, the faith that along with blood we are defending the divine nature of man as a whole.
We're all sick of holy wars and bloodshed because religion is supposed to give us life and a better life and is supposed to bring out our best self. When it results in mass destruction and hatred and anxiety, it's the antithesis I think of what religion was designed to do.
Once blood is shed in a national quarrel reason and right are swept aside by the rage of angry men.
Time and again we see leaders and members of religions incite aggression, fanaticism, hate, and xenophobia - even inspire and legitimate violent and bloody conflicts.
Racial history is therefore natural history and the mysticism of the soul at one and the same time; but the history of the religion of the blood, conversely, is the great world story of the rise and downfall of peoples, their heroes and thinkers, their inventors and artists.
Religious wars are not caused by the fact that there is more than one religion, but by the spirit of intolerance... the spread of which can only be regarded as the total eclipse of human reason.
I honor religion except when it gets into shedding blood.
My church has an historical emphasis on peace, but we can't enjoy peace without honoring the blood our soldiers shed for it.
No opposing quotes found.