Why are many atheists such hypocrites about the crusades? Just ignorant, or double standards?

Question

Does the NATO invasion of Afghanistan after 9-11 to attack El Qaeda and the Taliban prove somehow that Christianity is evil? Why or why not?

http://www.crisismagazine.com/april2002/cover.htm

Why was it bad that the Europeans united together and fought against foreign invaders on their own turf in order to preserve their freedom of religion?

Yes, obviously atrocities and war crimes were committed by the Europeans (and the Arabs) during hundreds of years of warfare, but why do atheists say that the fact that the Europeans fought back against foreign invaders is somehow proof that Christianity is evil?

Does the fact that it was NATO that united the West against the Taliban, instead of another international organization (like the Catholic Church – which was the only international organization in Medieval times), make our invasion of another country OK?

And how many people will actually READ this question before they attempt an answer?

Answer 1

NATO's position has nothing to do with the crusades.

The crusades consisted of recruitment, funding, internment, torture, and warfare justified by religion. They were sanctioned as holy wars by the pope.

Atheists are not saying the wars (there were 4 Crusades) were inherently evil. They are saying that evil during these wars were justified with Chrisianity, encouraged by church leaders, and justified with quotes from the bible.

What anyone else did in history, similar or not, has nothing to do with the fact that the crusades justified their cruelty and martial actions in the name of Christianity.

Answer 2

it would be blasphemy in the event that they have experimented the Holy Spirit and then deny it. You cant experience such exhilaration, vigour and the coolest purchase else that comes alongside with it and then say that it somewhat is fake or unreal. as quickly as this is completed that's blasphemy. An atheist does no longer word of of such concerns. somewhat countless persons who are not atheist have an excellent time x-mas and easter. the area i stay many Hindus and Buddhists do it as a sort of having their infants participate interior the exciting. The pagans have taken Jesus out of the Jesus located holiday trips and supplemented them with santa claus and the easter bunny. despite to take credit removed from the genuine which ability. now no longer protecting them, yet basically going by ability of what i've got been stated and word of a sprint of. desire this helps.

Answer 3

I'm against the crusades because it was a RELIGIOUS campaign sanctioned by the pope. Which means that people died in the name of religion. The term is also used to describe contemporaneous and subsequent campaigns conducted through to the 16th century in territories outside the Levant, usually against pagans, those considered by the Catholic Church to be heretics, and peoples under the ban of excommunication for a mixture of religious, economic, and political reasons.

I hate all religious conflicts and wars. I don't care if it's Christian, Muslim, Jewish or Wiccan. Why would you assume that I'm in favor of this war? Just because NATO was involved, doesn't change the fact that Taliban terrorists are religious extremist fundamentalists.

I say all religions are evil. I'm not just picking one.

atheist

Answer 4

huh, I did read it, and I also think you need to read a history book. The crusades were STARTED by Christians who wanted to take back that bloody stain on mankind called the 'holy land' from the Arabs who were inhabiting it and had been inhabiting it for hundreds of years.
And um, no, invading a country without military provocation is never OK. Whoever does it.
And what does any of this have to do with NATO!?!? Do you even know what NATO is?

Answer 5

Yes, there seems to be this ridiculous idea that the crusades were about repelling Muslim invasions. In fact, there were some crusades raged in Spain -- specifically, it was a rooting out of heresy. No one was invading Europe, other than ideologically.

The Western History class I took ~10 years ago in my freshman year of college was taught by a Roman Catholic and our textbook was the same one used at Notre Dame.

The reading of history is exceptionally clear: the Crusades were exclusively made up of European aggression against Muslim countries. The Pope went so far as to excommunicate European leaders who did not kill enough Muslims.

Answer 6

What do the crusades have to do with the Taliban and NATO? If I am not crazy, the Crusaders moved into the Arabs' land, not native turf, and attacked. On the way, they burned and killed Jews. The foreign invaders in that case were the Crusaders. I simply can't follow your logic in this.

Answer 7

Europe did not unite during the crusades to fight an invasion they united to invade.

The Byzantine christians lost control of Jerusalem in 614 when it was conquered by Khosrau II of the Persian Empire. The first crusade to recover Jerusalem didn't start until 1095, almost 500 years later.

Answer 8

im not atheist but agnostic. doing anything in the name of a higher being, especially killing people or imperializing, is wrong. for obvious reasons such as the fact that there is no proof that one group's higher being is better than that of another group; it is basically like a worldwide pokemon game for adults.
In terms of the crusades...tons of Christians marched town in a series of crusades killing many non-christians, trying to force people to convert, ... they fought to claim Jerusalem from the Muslims.
Christians haven't exactly acted in a laudible way according to the history textbooks; the spanish inquisition (convert or die), manifest destiny (kill the natives, god gave us the right to expand), storming into Israel (crusades), always sending missionaries that converted people across the globe to an imperialistic religion. And now in the U.S. there isn't really much in the way of separation of church and state. Christianity is so imperialistic that the saying is church and state rather than religion and state.
Those are the reasons that Christianity has often a bad connotation.
I wouldn't say that Christianity or other religions are, in and of themselves evil, though there are a few passages that instruct evil behaviour.
I do believe what Blaise Pascal once said:

Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction

Answer 9

your not supposed to use religion as an excuse to invade, unless your hunting orphan killers, the bible allows that it seems.

and how did RAMBO 3 go from supplying Afgan's with missles to firing missles on them?

also i beleive the Roman Legions were a separate international organization in Medieval times as well.

why not make english the only real language because it's mathematics are undisputable!

Ie
God=h
loser=f
don=f
false god=f
God named within WAR=h

does any other language say the same think?

Answer 10

That's not the hypocrisy. The hypocrisy is when Christians criticize Muslims for killing in what they view as a defense of their religion, the suggestion being that Christians would never do such a thing.