I think you are missing the point, Saltpetre.

>>I still think the Loyalist vs Republican divide (and the associated age-old history involved) has had more than a little to do with the Belfast/Eire situation.<<

That "age-old history" has its roots in the religious differences too. It goes back to the Battle of the Boyne in which William III whacked James II, on the sole basis that the latter was Catholic. Thereafter, northern Ireland was colonized by predominantly Scottish (Protestant) landowners, making the Catholics into second-class citizens in the process. Eventually, this caused the creation of Northern Ireland, separate from Eire, because the Protestant North feared oppression by the Catholic majority in a united Ireland.

What comes around, goes around, eh.

And it isn't necessarily about what is "foremost".

>>As in Rwanda for example, or Bosnia (Czechoslovakia), how is one to know what is/was foremost in people's minds?<<

It is all about a particular religious affiliation being a differentiation in itself. There would be no point, for example, in Paddy the Proddy, when cornered by Mick the Mick and his IRA mates, explaining that he was, as an individual, sympathetic to the Republican cause.

His kneecaps would be gone, whatever he said.

Pericles, WmTrevor, George,

All good ideas, but how? Such is the human condition, it appears, to grasp to any 'tribe' holding similar views/affiliations. Bullies or victims retaliating, all. We have not come far in 2 million years, hunters and gatherers still (albeit with abattoirs and broad-acre cropping), still fearful of 'outsiders'.

It is no wonder some turn to Buddhism - they who burn themselves to make a point, rather than turning the gun on their perceived 'enemy'. Radical, and completely dedicated to non-violence.

We take a narrow view when focusing primarily on Christianity, and its deficiencies. In the wider view, 'religion', of myriad persuasion, has the capacity to 'move' millions - and the question, in my (perhaps blinkered) view, is whether that power can be harnessed for the common good, and how?

The new 'golden calf' of Capitalism is providing an irresistible drive and motivation to succeed at all costs for millions. As 'religious strictures' take an increasingly declining role in moderating human behaviour I can only see this fight for survival escalating - perhaps to totally intolerable levels.

Religious and cultural reform, focusing on the ethical and philosophical objectives embraced and espoused, and explaining mysticism and parables as essentially 'vehicles' (mostly relevant to former times) for reinforcing the underlying 'message' and ethic, could provide a 'bridge' to human 'reform'. (And possibly pave the way for philosophy/ethics as the new world 'religion'.) But, shelving of all religion does not appear a viable or constructive option.

salty/quote..""still fearful..of 'outsiders'.""

no i feel the issue..is a elite minority
oppressing a down trodden minority

basic colonialism[like the 100's..of indonesia islanders
being dominated by the three from java[who took over from the yanks
who took over from the japs..who took over..from..[YOU GET THE IDEA?]

its the same middle east
here sunies oppresing arabs,,[like south arabia,..king minority oppressing an other mob..ditto all ther outcast tribes..oppressed by british awarded statehood..

its time these were ALL dismantled...and all borders dropped
that people chose which governance system [party]gets their tax..to spend[leverage into representation

not united nations
but united nation
sovereign united nations [sun]

""In the wider view,..'religion',of myriad persuasion, has the capacity to 'move' millions""

so lets declare
sans creed..that we disavow oppression of any[for all is our brother]
we unite as one tribe..to serve alltribes..to pay them to preserve their uniqness..as being a glory of god

god is in our difference
not our sameness

do we not all bleed
do we not all claim the messengers 'one god'
lets get it together for god[thus get it together for all nations

but how to pay for that[read my wikiseed/wikigeld
sun declarations...moneybased on a seed[the seed of revelations 22[for the healing of nations

"" - and the question,
in my (perhaps blinkered) view,..is whether that power can be harnessed for the common good,..and how?""

the seed of the tree of life is our god given legal inheritance
but its controled by mens and womans birth rights[as enjoined mortal heirs of the immoertal good[god]

our inheritance
claim it

johannine
of the horn of plenty:
god made it..now we make it shine
pay to restore every bit of gods material glory

Saltpetre,

“But, shelving of all religion does not appear a viable or constructive option.”

No one is trying to do this. Giving all people proper choice without indoctrination of any ideology by repetition, threats and promises is how humanity should proceed to be fair to everyone. It is unethical to do this where it leads to narrow and divisive opinion controlling politics and it is elitist to not do anything about it where this is seen to be happening.

There will always be religion and other views not backed by evidence that do harm and have the potential to do harm to individuals and society. If these notions are chosen without coercion they should be supported by humanity as long as they are not imposed upon others.

“Shelving” religion is not even the point. If people do away with religion as many have, I fail to see how that is not “viable” or a “constructive option”. The polity changes continually over time and humans cause and adapt to these variations with Western democratic systems benefiting by them.

David

Peter Singer has just been uploaded to Youtube number 10 here.

http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL7C0CA45F60FD44C7&feature=plcp

Incidentally he is the focus of an article in The Punch here.

http://www.thepunch.com.au/articles/peter-singer-doesnt-deserve-an-order-of-australia/

David

singing from the same ol song sheet

religions..formed arround 'a' message
nuthing they present refutes or concerns the reality..of god..[its all about religion..getting a free lunch..].,.or piests doing ungodly things

or about how if you believe ...in THE THEOry..of evolution
your basing it on science..even if you got no idea of how 'science'..or 'evolution'..dun it..

i extensivly studied science..by the book
searched out the text it was bassed on..[from the actual science text punlications...read darwins revealations extensivly[asdore his science mind]..but watch as fools..never read any text..say god didnt do it[evolution did]

if you recall the feeling[when others grab the credit]
how that feels..knowing the actual person what CLAIMS they KNOW how it was dun BUT CANT REPEAT IT..they got a theory[a faith/hope fear]..but not a proof

if you cant do it
dont claim others did it
unless you can prove EGSACTLY HOW THEY DID IT[ie if you can sing sing]
if you think \singing did it..sing and make it happen

or like that king that orded the tide to stop
yua [they got a faith belief or fear
but no god replacement

till a man does what he says is how it really happend
his proof of how its done..is not proof..thus its theorry[wind]

david realises ..science cant prove evolution[out of genus]
as do the other prophets of evolution..spies level evolution cannot leave its genus[and if you dont grasp that statement..PRESENT PROOF ITS FAULSE

its not
science proves genus cant be evolved out of
proves living genus bbreds other living genus
of the same genus as its parents..

there is NOT ONE PROOF
OF A NEW GENUS..[lol..evolving..
exta;..out of..an old genus]...*ever*

life from same life
this is what science CAN prove
the rest is theory[unable to be proven]..thus taken on hope fear or faith..by thgose who dont dare learn limits of science facts..

science[evolution etc]..isnt that scientific
it has the same high priest authority..peers re-vieuw..[own singers]

just like the high priests of athiestic sic belief..
re-vieuw tha athiest[sic*]vidio..[they got their christ on tape]