War and violence have been the one of the main cause of the downfall of many nations, states, empires, communities and other social institutions. There are numerous diversities in the way various groups of people look at certain situations and how their opponents look at the same issues. Several questions will be tackled such as how opposing interests lures to violence. Do individual perception and say the expectations of individuals lead to violence and war whenever they are misconceived? When does cognitive imbalance lure to war and how does it limit the growth of an economy as well as a people? These are but a few of the questions that will be addressed in this essay. We will also look into the limitations that are presented by war and violence in its existence. Such limitations include issues such as death and injuries of innocent citizens, deteriorating number of economic resources, destruction of the natural environment, and deterioration in the rate of productivity due to the damage lands as well as labor personnel (Hammond 7). Thus, war has a damaging effect on the society from the young beings to the old from all dimensions. This paper shall discuss the moral merits of the religious basis presented by the act of war and violence,
What is a Just War?
According to Hammond, conditions must be fulfilled for a war to be viewed as just. These conditions incorporate the following; the war must be an admirable motivation, a legitimate power must legally announce the war, and the goal of the war must be great. All different methods for determining the issue ought to have been attempted to start with. There must be a sensible possibility of progress, and the methods utilized must be a part of the extent to the end that the war looks to accomplish. While considering the conditions one has a tendency to ask him/herself how ought to a Just War is fought. A war that begins as a Just War may quit being a Just War if the methods used to wage it are improper (Hammond 10). Honest individuals and non-soldiers ought not to be hurt; only suitable power ought to be utilized. These apply to both the kind of power, and the amount of power is utilized. Globally concurred traditions controlling war must have complied.
Does trusting that "God is on our side" make it simpler for us to dispense torment and enduring on those apparent to be our foes? (Kafala par 2). If we think God sanctions brutality, would we say we would probably participate in rough acts? The response to both those inquiries, as per new research, is a reverberating "yes," even among the individuals who do not view themselves as devotees. Social therapist Brad Bushman of the College of Michigan drove a universal examination push to discover answers to these inquiries and asserted that is exceptionally "exasperates" by the outcomes. However, Bushman found what he had anticipated. Bushman has put in 20 years contemplating animosity and brutality, particularly the effect on the human conduct of savagery in the media, yet most past exploration has concentrated on TV and film viciousness, not such things as sacred texts and writings held consecrated by numerous (Kafala par 3). Bushman needed to make it a stride further and check whether essentially presenting somebody to content that infers God sanctions brutality would expand his or her level of aggression. According to Bushman, numerous individuals use God as concealing stone for their forceful activities or at whatever point they need to legitimize their savagery (Hammond 13). Bushman then takes the present clash in Iraq as a sample where Shrub asserts that God is on his side. Osama canister Loaded cases that God, or Allah, is on his side. History is packed with different cases of wars battled for the sake of God, including almost every religion on the planet. To discover his answers, Bushman amassed groups of analysts at two altogether different colleges, Vrije College in Amsterdam, Holland, where he additionally holds a residency, and Brigham Youthful College in Utah. Only 50% of the understudies who took part in the learn at Vrije reported that they have confidence in God, and just 27 percent have confidence in the Book of Scriptures (Walter par 2). At Brigham Youthful, 99 percent said they trust in God and the Book of Scriptures. Whenever there is a conflict among the justifications of violence, the religion in many cases emerges as the priority in many situations. Taking an example of the ISIS society, there are staunch believers of their connection with religion and any act that happens is more or less instructed by a supernatural being (Kafala par 1).
Closely analyzing how religion paints the act of war and violence, we find out that the sum of all these notions reveals the paradoxical representation of war by religion (Walter 288). The consequences presented by the resulting outcomes revolve around a huge destruction of property as well as big cost in the re-installment of the situation back to the norm. Since religion in itself is supposed to protect its followers from war and violence as well as preach gospel of peace to the followers of the religion, it turns out that religion is the biggest perpetrator of violence in many parts of the globe (Miller, 288). For instance, the discussed situation where in the Iraq war both the hero and the villain, from any person's perspective, between George Bush and Osama bin Laden, both perpetrators insisted that they had received a call from their gods. These shows how paradoxical the religion justifies the act of war as for this case the resulting war between the two parties claimed hundreds of thousands of lives globally (Hammond 14). Thus, war is a product resulting from normal human interactions; it contains numerous definable qualities, which depend on the scope and the diversity of the war (Walter 260). The preaching of different religions globally realizes the presence of a supernatural being that controls what happens in the mortality world. They all preach that the supernatural being deserves respect and honor and in return, they get peace and blessings. Considering such teachings, it is so unethical to look into a religions perpetrated wars in the name of the so-called supernatural being, yet the being exists to their interest and well-being (Hammond 15)
In conclusion, there are numerous questions on the justification of wars by the religion. Religion presents moral merits to the society by calming down acts of violence as discussed and putting perpetrators into prayers. Due to this, religion is viewed as both an advantageous situation as well as a cause of many acts of war in the society. The moral advantages of religions, however; present a firm basis of the importance of religion in solving emerging issues in our societies. The assumptions and results that come into existence in war according to religion as discussed cannot be controlled but are only prone to be shaped to certain selected divergent measures until a solution is acquired.
Works Cited
Hammond, Grant T. "Paradoxes of War." WAR AND VIOLENCE (2004): 7-16.
Kafala, Tarik. "What is a war crime? ." BBC News (2009): 2.
Paul Hill. "Why Shoot An Abortionist?" Why Shoot An Abortionist? Web. 13 Apr. 2016.
Walter, Benjamin. "Critique of violence." REFLECTIONS: Apborims, Autobiographical, Writings (2012): 277-299.
