My opinion is that it is not. People aren't forced into war, you choose to put yourself into that situation where you can choose to kill or be killed. The second you enlist you are making a promise to kill. Even if there is a draft you can still be a conscientious objector. Killing is killing.
"He who, seeking his own happiness, punishes or kills beings who also long for happiness, will not find happiness thereafter"
- Buddha -
What do you think?
2006-09-20 06:59:02 · 15 answers · asked by Shinkirou Hasukage 6 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Sela: Our soldiers are not fighting for our freedom, they stopped looking for Osama a long time ago and invaded another country for no reason.
2006-09-20 07:06:58 · update #1
Preacher: With such disdain for other humans and their beliefs, how can you say such things in the name of Jesus; I understood him to be a kind and compassionate man. Buddha is dead, and he can do nothing for the world, but his teachings live on, and I believe by following them I can make myself a better person.
2006-09-20 07:15:32 · update #2
Niza: that is good, read into not only Buddhism but every other religion as well. No religion holds the absolute truth, each one has its own message. I choose Buddhism only because it was the religion that I understood and connected with the most.
2006-09-20 07:24:15 · update #3
Jeremey: You my friend have captured the essence of the message of Christ. Namaste.
2006-09-20 07:31:01 · update #4
In ancient Israel, the decision to make war rested with God. (Deuteronomy 32:35, 43.) He had his people fight for specific purposes. However, these purposes were long ago accomplished. Furthermore, Jehovah foretold that those who serve him “in the final part of the days” would “beat their swords into plowshares” and not “learn war anymore.” (Isaiah 2:2-4) Clearly, Biblical wars do not justify modern-day conflicts, none of which are fought under God’s direction or at his command.
While on earth, Jesus demonstrated how to replace hatred with unselfish love, commanding: “Love one another, just as I have loved you.” (John 15:12) He also said: “Happy are the peaceable.” (Matthew 5:9) Here the Greek word for “peaceable” means more than enjoying a state of tranquillity. It really entails cultivating peace, actively working to promote goodwill.
When Jesus was being arrested, the apostle Peter tried to defend him with a lethal weapon. But the Son of God reprimanded him, saying: “Return your sword to its place, for all those who take the sword will perish by the sword.” (Matthew 26:52) How did first-century Christians apply those words? Note the following quotations.
“A careful review of all the information available [shows] that, until the time of Marcus Aurelius [121-180 C.E.], no Christian became a soldier; and no soldier, after becoming a Christian, remained in military service.”—The Rise of Christianity.
“The behavior of the [early] Christians was very different from that of the Romans. . . . Since Christ had preached peace, they refused to become soldiers.”—Our World Through the Ages.
Because Christ’s disciples refused to serve in the emperor’s legions, the Romans put many of them to death. Why did Christians maintain such an unpopular stand? Because Jesus taught them to be peacemakers.
In modern Warfare: Imagine the dreadful situation if Christ’s followers were to fight in opposing armies, trying to kill one another. Such a scenario would be contrary to Christian principles. Really, those who obey the God of the Bible would not harm anyone—not even their enemies.—Matthew 5:43-45.
Clearly, God does not put his blessing on modern carnal warfare between humans. Being peaceable, true Christians advocate the peace that will be established worldwide under God’s Kingdom.
If you would like further information regarding how God's Kingdom will bring an end to war, please contact Jehovah's Witnesses at the local Kingdom Hall. Or visit http://www.watchtower.org
2006-09-20 07:26:41 · answer #1 · answered by Jeremy Callahan 4 · 1⤊ 2⤋
When a mad man like Hitler announced over and over that he is going to be the first person to own the whole world. Then you see from the countries he already occupied, just how he controls the defeated, you have to choose either to fight for your freedom, or to give in like sheep going to slaughter.
I am not a sheep. I fought in the front line infantry all the way across Europe. I had my choice many times to kill or be killed. I'm still here, so I don't have to tell you what that means.
Your quote from Buddha makes sense only if the one killed also longed for happiness, not domination.
I will say that not all Germans thought they were fighting for Hitler. Instead they were fighting for their country. I left the infantry and was put in Military Service when the war ended. Most of my friends were hard fighting German soldiers. A good fighter respects a good fighter, even from opposite sides.
2006-09-20 14:21:23 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
You obviously understand nothing about the military. It is generally considered justify to kill in war, for after all that is the way that wars are won. there is no such thing as a war in which human life is not lost due to intentional killing, else what would be the deterrent to it? People protest war not because of the politics, but because of the killing. Killing in combat has never been considered murder, unless a soldier intentionally kills one of his own. I do not personally promote war, even though I am a US Army Veteran. I think that there are better ways to solve conflicts than wholesale slaughter of human beings and the complete destruction of the infrastructure of a society. The war in Iraq is an example of a totally unnecessary police action, and Saddam Hussen may get off and be out on the streets again----so what will have accomplished? Democracy? Iraqis have about as much use for democracy as we do of a monarchy. And forget Buddha---he is just another dead prophet that can do no one any good. Wars are begun and fought because the love of Christ is absent. If Christ was universal throughout this world, war would become obsolete.
2006-09-20 14:09:18 · answer #3 · answered by Preacher 6 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Killing is never "okay".Due to circumstances, the right to kill is only in self defense, and then i would hope to find a much better solution.In war, you will have to kill to survive, its not that anyone wants to destroy another person,unless they are already blood thirsty.Survival and other instincts kick in when you are threatened, but killing is always a last resort to any problem.
2006-09-20 14:06:48 · answer #4 · answered by deedeeco1738 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I think if we can land on the moon we could have done something different. This is just terrible what we are doing. We reacted without thought. For those people who say that would be stupid it was certainly the case here on our home land in the storms!
2006-09-20 14:02:36 · answer #5 · answered by Karrien Sim Peters 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Defending your country and its interests is a noble cause. People in the world wars enlisted/fought in order to protect their countries and the freedom of their country, their country's men, women and it's children, how can that be wrong? I don't think it's wrong because in my opinion it's for a justifiable reason. Of course killing isn't good, but there are situations when it definitely isn't wrong.
2006-09-20 14:08:56 · answer #6 · answered by AndyB 5 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Completely agree, Buddha was a very wise man.
you have sparked my interest in Buddha, perhaps i should look more into his teachings.....
2006-09-20 14:00:49 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I have to agree. I really don't understand how people who believe murder is morally abhorent can volunteer for the military. It's clearly an institution founded for the sole purpose of inflicting murder and fear on others.
2006-09-20 14:02:22 · answer #8 · answered by lenny 7 · 4⤊ 1⤋
I think I agree with Buddha.
2006-09-20 14:00:42 · answer #9 · answered by a_delphic_oracle 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
In the 10 commandments the word that is translated 'kill' is in the Hebrew Ratsach should have been translated 'murder, or manslaughter'.
It should read 'Thou shalt not do murder.'
2006-09-20 14:10:30 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋