Death and Religion and Society ... and War

[shireen]

I've been thinking a lot about death recently. Why is it so easy to kill another human being? The word "easy" is relative: it's easy to walk a mile. It's easy to bake a cake. I'm not talking about that kind of "easy." I mean "easy" as in shouldn't it be incredibly difficult and painful to take another human life?

Yet it seems so easy. Here in Baltimore, we're poised to beat our previous record for murders per year. We have gone past the 3,500 mark for US soldiers killed in Iraq, and who knows how many tens of thousands of Iraqis. We barely give the unfolding disaster known as Darfur the attention it deserves. At home, thousands die because they cannot afford medical care, or due to disease caused by industrial pollution. We execute people who have committed heinous crimes even though some may actually be innocent. On a planetary scale, we continue to exhale greenhouse gases knowing full well the deadly consequences for future generations.

Paradoxically, we also fight very hard to save lives. Medical advances have been extraordinary; cancer or being HIV-positive are not necessarily death sentences anymore. We rush to assist people in disaster areas; our first responders put their lives on the line every day, as we saw during 9/11. Some of us are registered as organ donors because, in death, we can save other lives. Many of our military men and women selflessly serve to protect our country -- our lives, our freedom -- even if it means the ultimate sacrifice, as we saw on the beaches of Normandy.

It's hard to reconcile these two views of life and death. Simply put, death is the end of life. Consciousness ceases to exist. Many world religions, however, believe that death is not the end, but that life continues in a different form like in reincarnation, going to heaven or hell, or becoming a spirit entity. For believers, death is not The End. It's a transition from human life to an everlasting life.

I don't hold these beliefs because they are just that, beliefs. I cannot blindly accept them. There is no scientific evidence for life after death. And in the absence of evidence, I've concluded that people stop existing when the brain stops working. But as an agnostic, I keep an open mind and I'm not afraid to say "I don't know for sure."

However, I envy the believers, the ones who have faith in God and believe in eternal life. It's a deep source of comfort and hope in times of pain and struggle, when grieving the deaths of loved ones, and in coming to terms with their own deaths. It makes life just a little less scary.

Sadly, there are people who use religious beliefs to justify horrible acts of violence. Like the ones who crashed fully-fueled jetliners into buildings partly because it would fast-track them to heaven where 70 virgins await. Like the ones who have blown themselves up in crowded venues to fulfill God's will. Or the ones who, to hasten the Second Coming, released deadly sarin gas in a Tokyo subway.

Then, there are the really insidious ones: they don't kill directly. They deceived and subtly terrorized millions to believe that it was necessary to protect us by waging a preemptive war against a country that never threatened us. They directed irresponsible incompetent ill-planned military actions in the name of national security. They used good innocent patriots to do their dirty work. And to this day, they don't care how many of these people die in the process because, after all, death is just a transition to another life. And while they're at it, they might as well hasten that twisted myth known as Armageddon or get really really rich, or both.

I wondered: if people believed they had only one shot at existing in this universe, would they lead richer, happier, more fulfilling lives? Would they treat others with more care and respect?

What if, when death comes, it turns out to, really really really, be the END? No peacefully floating up the tunnel to a bright light, no reincarnation into a tree frog, not even a ghost to haunt the crap out of the living. After death, NOTHING. Knowing that, would human beings have second thoughts about taking another person's life?

We all take death seriously. But, as a society, do we take it seriously enough? I don't think so. It's the only way I can make any sense of this surreally-insane world.

(edited for typo)

[bonito]

1. All I know is I'm life

And will support life because of that, to me the world begins with every life and ends with every death. taking one life is taking all life, spitting on one's own existence imo.
Life, it's all we have.

[NMMNG]

2. My take

Killing another person, except as a last resort in a self-defense/defense of other situation, is wrong. Not because "god", society, Mom/Dad, or anybody else says so, but because it's just wrong. I don't have the right to take the life of another human being any more than they have the right to take my life. No book, authority figure, religion, philosophy or whatever is going to tell me otherwise.

[RaleighNCDUer]

3. I am to take it then, that your handle speaks only figuratively...

ya gotta watch out - fundies are literalists.

:hi:

[NMMNG]

5. Of course

I slay the rhetoric and stupidity, not the actual people. :hi:

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

4. I think people live the lives they live

People who kill other people usually don't see the other person as a person, and are, to a great extent, interested only in their own needs. Whether or not they are believers has little to do with it.

The problem with religion comes when it is used as an excuse for wholesale slaughter--which we have seen happen again and again throughout history. The religious ideal was used as an excuse--sacrifices must be made for the ideal. (Interestingly enough, though the Native Americans did have wars between tribes, no one knows of any war that was started by religious differences.)

The old Soviet Union was an atheistic state which promoted atheism, and yet was known to have killed off thousands of people-the peasants who starved to death after collectivization, the dissodents who died in the Gulag. The excuse was the ideal of Communism--sacrifices must be made for the ideal.

Perhaps what is needed is a shattering of ideals-religious, political, whatever--leaving humankind with no excuse to be mean to one another.

Perhaps some introspection, to find out what it is that motivates humankind to acts of cruelty. Personally, I think this starts by finding peace within your own self. I am doing this through spiritual practices; secular humanists have said they use psychology. Fine, whatever works for you. But peace will only come when we can take the peace within ourselves and be with it in all situations in our lives--not only feel it while before the altar or on the psychiatrist's couch, but out in the street, and on message boards like this one.

I have found that with peace comes a growing compassion. May you find peace, and live each day of your life to the fullest, being totally aware of the wonder of each moment. That is the true treasure--what is happening right now. Matters not what comes after, if anything. Feel the moment, cherish it, be thankful you have it. If more people would do this, it would change the world.

[DemBones DemBones]

6. Your post brings to mind John Lennon's "Imagine," but it's only a song.

I love Lennon and it's a great song but it suggests "Imagine there's no Heaven. . . Nothing to kill or die for."

In fact, people kill for a lot of reasons that have nothing whatsoever to do with Heaven.

I think most believers are aware that there may be no afterlife. Assuming normal intelligence, I can't imagine not questioning religion. It's entirely possible to have doubts and still have faith. God's existence cannot be verified or disproved by scientific means.

Religious faith makes some, if not most, people more respectful of all life. That's the thing society needs badly: respect for all life. Certainly some people can develop that respect without religious faith. Its development should be encouraged in every way possible.


I think the ability to kill is rooted in personality, not faith. Sociopaths want to kill and they don't believe in anything outside themselves, though they may pretend to be religious to gain respect.

Other people have personalities that make it possible to lead them to kill. They feel comfortable following a leader. If they are religious, they have an added incentive to follow people they believe are also religious and trying to rid the world of evil.

The third group of people question authority and are not easily led to do others' bidding. They may be religious but are unlikely to kill even for a religious cause, because they don't follow leaders.

I doubt that sociopaths ever give their lives to protect someone else. People from the second two groups would be more likely to do that, to be heroes or martyrs, to die for something. They're normal people who would put their own life in danger to protect their children. They might also do so to protect a stranger or to protect their country.

Some people in the third group, who question authority and aren't followers, would even serve in the military if they felt the war was just, that it was necessary to protect their country. They'd be more likely to be medics and in other support positions than to be engaged in combat, though, if they had any choice. Some religious people would die before they would give up their religion or do something against their conscience. St. Thomas More is an example

Of course, this is a simplified view of personality differences, but I think personality explains why people kill more than religion does, since it's obvious that not all religious people are willing to kill.