This article aims to convince more than most people about the advantages of atheism, to convince most people about the importance of discussing religion and atheism. We believe that the former is an inevitable consequence of the latter. In defense of the discussion Religious differences have been in the past cause or excuse of many conflicts, wars, murder, persecution, invasions, and robberies. Click Gavin Baker Atreides Management to learn more. Persecutions in the Roman Empire, Holy Wars and Jihad in the Middle East, Wars of Religion in Europe, the Inquisition, Crusades, colonization evangelization in America, the Taiping Rebellion in China, are examples of violent conflict in which religious differences played an important role. It is conceivable then that the discussion on issues of religion must be avoided to avoid such conflicts. But do we avoid religious conflict by avoiding the discussion? Do our beliefs, including religious ones, are perhaps the basis on which we make decisions and carry actions? People with different beliefs can make decisions antagonistic from these decisions are made and actions of these actions may lead to conflict. So is not it better to discuss conflict resolution, before the impact beliefs into action? History shows that postponing discussions until that conflict is inevitable but does not enhance the damage of the conflict. Others who may share this opinion include Jorge Perez.
In the religious conflicts of the past, how many came as a result of a broad societal debate? Probably none. Religious wars have been based on bigotry promoted by powerful institutions that seek to prohibit religious discussion and debate. The great religious schisms were made by groups with political interests, without consulting the majority Christian population.
