Human sacrifice is part of their religion. Do you think it is right? Or Hernan Cortes had the right to interfere?
Just want to hear your opinions. NO FIGHTING.
2006-10-31 19:03:30 · 11 answers · asked by BMW M5 3 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
I don't believe cortez had any right to interfere--nobody has the right to wipe out an entire race, and motecuzoma greeted him in peace and welcomed him--they were very friendly and hospitable towoards him, and the only reason he conquered them was that he had been thrown out of spain and wanted to go back in good standing
2006-10-31 19:07:51 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
AH...the Aztecs. Well first of all...human sacrifice was a small part of the belief and was used only when there was a desperate need for the gods to have extra power, like times of famine, drought or war. Normally, they only used small anmounts of blood drawn from the tongue or genitals of the priests and royalty. Occasionally a human sacrifice was used as a messenger and they were volunteers.
The bulk of human sacrifice was of criminals or prisoners of war, people that would have to be gotten rid of anyway, no real difference form the human sacrifice used in the modern world by the legal system (capitol punishment).
The Aztecs were a warrior people and conquered many of their neighbors, much as ALL civilizations have in their hsitory.
As for Cortez...he had NO right to interfere. NO ONE has the right to interfere with the internal working of ANY government without the permission of that government. Cortez took advantage of the Aztec religion and used it for his own ends. The Aztecs were not Christians, he was and so he felt, as MOST Christians did at the time, that he could interefere simply because of that fact.
Even the modren practitioneres of the ancient Aztec religion in Mexico don't do human sacrifice. NOT because of the legal or moral implications, but because it is not necessary. The small amounts of blood given by volunteers is sufficient to feed the Gods, although if more is needed there are plenty of followers willing to be sacrifices.
2006-10-31 19:17:06 · answer #2 · answered by kveldulfgondlir 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Why do you not know what an atheist is‽ ATHEIST - someone who does not believe in a God – any God – not just the Christian one. But that does not mean they do not hold strong moral or religious beliefs! They can follow any religion that does not have a god and there are a lot of those! Like BUDDHISM – Religious teaching from Buddha and his followers that by destroying greed, hatred and delusion (the cause of all suffering) man can attain perfect enlightenment! Where do you think Christianity got it's ideas of a soul and afterlife from for goodness sake? They stole it from the pagan tribes and peoples which existed hundreds and thousands of years before Christianity! From the stone age through Vikings, Egyptians, Maoris, Aborigines, American Indians and especially the Chinese, they all had elaborate funerals and grave goods to speed the soul into the next life with comfort!
2016-05-23 00:59:55 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
They were Cannibals, they fought wars to capture enemies and take them home for lunch. Peaceful? No not a bit, They were extremely warlike. Cortes did not interfere out of moral or religious concern, he was just trying to steal the treasury, and if it was not for smallpox he never would have made it home.
Extra: Smallpox and related diseases like measles wiped out up to 90% of the native populations of North and South America.
2006-10-31 19:08:50 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I would not say it was peaceful as it did require human sacrifice. Are we any different today with abortion? I am not saying that to be mean just to point out it is a form of sacrifice, if you consider the times we live in.
2006-10-31 19:10:11 · answer #5 · answered by Godb4me 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Peaceful? No. Right? Not by our standards, but in their culture it was pefectly acceptable. The right to interfere? Perhaps, but not to the extent that he did.
2006-10-31 19:08:25 · answer #6 · answered by angk 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I think placing judgement on something none of us understands is ignorance. Yes, at first glance, it does seem a little barbaric, but so do many other religious teachings.
2006-10-31 19:09:07 · answer #7 · answered by nunya 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Tying someone down and stabbing them through the heart as "sacrifice" to a primitive false god? Hmm, what's "peaceful" about murder?
2006-10-31 19:06:04 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
No, it is typical nonsense and superstition. like christianity is too.
2006-10-31 19:07:32 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
25,000 People killed THATS NOT PEACFULL!
2006-10-31 19:07:16 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋