Busy week for me outside of work I guess. In addition to the 3rd party debate last night, this evening I went to a seminar on how political leaders use religion in times of war.

It was a very cynical seminar. According to the professor who gave the lecture, all religions can be used to advance war efforts. In additon to the suicide bombers of modern day, he discussed Bibicial directives to enslave, rape, and kill enemies in Exodus and Deuteronomy. He talked about the Crusades, and the exploitation of religion by Hitler in WWII. He also pointed out how religion was used by the U.S. to justify and sanctify wholesale slaughter in the Phillipinos, where Generals wrote proudly of killing every last woman and all children older than ten in resistant villages.

The professor was also very cold blooded in acknowledging the effectiveness of religion as a tool in war. Essentially, in wartime religion is a powerful incentive for soldiers, who are more willing to sacrifice themselves when they have religious as well as political motives. Politicians use it because it works.

None of this means that religion is bad, because war is sometimes necessary. Like any tool, religious motivation can have positive and negative impacts. Both U.S. and German troops felt that they had God on their side during World War II. Russia, on the other hand, was primarily atheistic and look at how badly they got slaughtered. (Although someone did point out that Stalin started letting his troops practice religion when he saw how it could help the fighting.)

"Religion is the opiate of the people," wrote Karl Marx. However, from the lecture given this evening, it is clear that religion's effect on a people can be used to stimulate as well as pacify. I think I got more from the religion seminar than from the 3rd party debate the night before.