On Anti-Religious Sentiment
Ya know, at school, whenever someone mentions religion, there is always a crowd of people who are like, “Religion, bah, nothing good has ever come out of religion. Why would anyone believe in religion? All religion does is divide people and create war.” or “You shouldn’t mention religion in school. It’s discriminatory to promote religion!”
Yeah, well I’ve had it with this. In my little essay here, I will state my opinion on Religion, the bum wrap it’s getting in society, and whatever I feel like saying. However, unlike most of the in“duh”viduals out there who don’t have any reason at all for why they believe what they do, I will provide evidence to support my point of view. Forgive me if this gets bloody, this is the vent.
Oh, and also, since you probably don’t want to read everything I write, I have given each section a title so you can skim what I have to say and find whatever you want to find.

Religion as a Cause for War

Seriously, how many times in a day do you hear this? When Christianity is mentioned, people point to the crusades or something, or to the jihads waged by some modern day followers of Islam.
First, for Christianity. As far as the crusades are concerned, there was little to no religious involvement in this war. It was designed to take over the Holy Land from non-Christians, sure, but the real reason the crusades were waged was basically an early form of European expansionism and colonialism. Religion and “retaking the Holy Land from the heathen” was used as an excuse to make war justifiable, but in the end it was all about power and control.
Another example commonly used to say that religion causes war is the “religious wars” in Europe. The most famous example here is the Thirty Year’s War, which took place in the early 1600s. I don’t deny that religion was one of the causes of the war, but I want to take a look at it a bit closer. Here is an explanation of the war written by yours truly.
===============================
Philip II of Spain (catholic) dreamt of building a second armada after being crushed by the English, and Henry IV of France was in the process of reconstructing France from the ruin brought upon it by religious division, esp. in the nobility.
The Peace of Augsburg in 1555 had served as a temporary settlement, but later in the 16th century, Catholics began to grow alarmed as Lutherans were acquiring German bishopries. However, the Peace of Augsburg had stated that a prince determined the religion of his subjects.
The advent of Calvinism further confused the issue. As the Peace of Augsburg had applied to only Catholics and Lutherans, Calvinists saw everyone as a fair conversion opportunity. The Jesuits also began to convert Lutheran princes to gain the Catholics control of more territory.
The Lutherans felt as if they were being undermined by Calvinist and Catholic advantages, and formed the Protestant Union in 1608. The Catholics retaliated with the Catholic League in 1609.
There are four sections generally defined in the Thirty Years’ War:
The Bohemian Period 1618-1625
In 1617, Ferdinand of Styria, the new Catholic king of Bohemia, closed some Protestant churches. On May 23, 1618, two of his officials were hurled out a window by Protestants, landing in a heap of dung and escaping with minor injuries. (ain’t history wonderful) The rebels chose a new king, Fredrick, the elector of the Palatinate.
The Bohemian Period was characterized by civil war in between the Catholic League, led by Ferdinand, and the Protestant Union, headed by Frederick. It resulted in Catholic victory, and within ten years, Bohemia was completely Catholic.
Result: Catholics: 1 Protestants: 0
The Danish Period 1625-1629
Albrecht of Wallenstein, a Catholic, scored several victories against the Protestants. He used his riches to build an army of 50,000 men and seemed more interested in carving out an empire for himself than helping the Catholic cause. He even spoke out against the Catholic League, and eventually wandered away from the Catholic church. In any case, the Jesuits persuaded the emperor to issue the Edict of Restitution, which stated all Catholic properties lost to Protestantism since 1552 were to be restored and only Catholics and Lutherans were to be allowed to practice their faiths.
Result: Catholics: 2 Protestants: 0
The Swedish Period 1630-1635
Swedish King Gustavus Adolphus arrived in Germany and became a champion for the Protestants, winning two major battles, one in 1631 at Breitenfeld, and the other in 1632 at Luetzen. He was fatally wounded in the latter.
Though Catholic, the French supported the Swedish Protestants, as they wanted to undermine the Hapsburgs.
Result: Catholics: 2 Protestants: 1
The French Period 1635-1648
In 1635, Catholic Cardinal Richelieu, essentially the French leader at the time, declared war on Catholic Hapsburg Spain and sent additional financial and military assistance to the Swedes and German Protestants. The war dragged on until October 1648, when the Peace of Westphalia was signed.
==============================
Ok, so maybe that was a bit too in-depth, (heh, AP Euro History class) but I would like to argue a few points here. The war was undoubtedly started over religion, but, as far as the Catholics, and even the Lutherans were concerned, they were not concerned with “saving souls” but rather with gaining land. The reason the Lutherans even existed is because of how secularized the Catholic church had become. However, at the beginning of the thirty year’s war, people were not concerned with faith and religion but rather with power.

Also, almost immediately, this war turned into a war of dynastic ambition. Albrecht von Wallenstein, from the Danish period, though fighting for the Catholics, was really not concerned with religion at all. He was more interested in becoming a war hero and creating his own little empire.

Also, in the French period, Richelieu, who was practically in charge of the French throne, declared war on militantly catholic Spain and allied with Protestant Germany. The funny thing about Richelieu? He was a Cardinal in the catholic church! How’s that for not caring about religion. The reason he supported his religious opposites? Because he was more interested in making sure Hapsburg Spain did not become too powerful. Thanks to this crafty political move, France was the major European power after the war.

‘ya know, this can almost be tied into the Islamic fanaticism today. There are always these people you hear about in the news who blow up buses and stuff, and they say they do it to spread their religion or as retaliation. Are they really that different from the Catholics and Protestants in 17th century Europe? Not really.
And they have good reason to be mad at us. You remember the crusades? All of Christian Europe slaughtered them! Though it may be time to “forgive and forget,” it’s understandable that the hatred of the western world this fostered has not yet died out. Sure, I don’t agree with what they’re doing, and that doesn’t make it okay, but they’ve at least got a reason.

And why does some random person over here in the US (where this doesn’t affect us) care about religion. Well, it’s understandable why someone would hate Muslims because of how stuff they do is negatively publicized by the media, but that doesn’t mean all Muslims are “bad.” Not every Muslim wants to blow you up! And also, concerning the Israel-Palestine conflict, it’s easy to see why the Muslims are angry there as well. They’ve basically got the rest of the world going against them.

I strongly refute the statement that religion fosters hatred, and I think anyone who has looked at the facts should agree.


Religion in Schools as Discriminatory

I’ve heard people say over and over again that Religion has no place in School. While I don’t disagree with this, as I think that no particular religion should be endorsed over another in school, I think religion is a good topic for discussion and, also, by having 80% of the student population say that religion has no place in school, it is actually creating an environment discriminatory to those who are religious, no matter what their religion. In fact, this approach is endorsing atheism, which in itself is a religion, a set of beliefs.I’ll expand on this point at a later time, but I’m interested in hearing what people have to say to what I’ve written.