[ Show ]
Support VoyForums
[ Shrink ]
VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 123[4]56789 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 07:13
Author: Eponymous4Jun02
Subject: Re: India/Pakistan
In reply to: ketch-4Jun02 's message, "Re: India/Pakistan" on 07:12

Well, wait a minute - let's have a whack at these critieria.

As to the first: Why would a "religious" conflict need to be confined or even based upon religious matters? If two parties A and B have a dispute about a parcel of land that otherwise would be trivial, and their religious differences eventually drive them to lob grenades at each other, the dispute is effectively religious, even though the dispute has its origins in a trivial piece of real estate. Thus, e.g., the dispute between Israel and Palestine is over small areas of land, but religous ideology invests that land with a meaning both parties find worth killing and dying for. By my lights, it is therefore a religious dispute.

As to the second: For the same reason, the fact that there might be a residue of nonreligious dispute after abstracting out the religious elements does not alter the fact that it is the religious elements that have exacerbated the controversy to a degree that entirely changes its basic character.

As to the third: Religious leaders encouraging conflict would certainly be sufficient to characterize the dispute as religious, but it's not necessary, for the reasons I've stated above.

But then of course, if the third criterion is sufficient, then the India-Pakistan conflict is easily shown to be religious: Both Pakistan and India have extremist religious leaders (Muslim and Hindu, respectively) who foment conflict.
(Note that whether these groups have an official institutional character would be beside the point.)

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]


Post a message:
This forum requires an account to post.
[ Create Account ]
[ Login ]
[ Contact Forum Admin ]

Forum timezone: GMT+0
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.