Effects of War on Morality and Religion of a Person

War leads to oppression and leaves negative implications on all people and societies by impacting the poor, women, children, and nations as a whole. "War is a state of violent conflict between one or more groups" (Rasenberger 3). Rasenberger defines war as a state of conflict between one group within itself or several groups in combat with each other, what is not mentioned are the after-effects of war. War itself leads to many civilian and military deaths, an estimated 1.5-3.8 million people died during the Vietnam War and an approximate 500,000 people died in the Iraq war. The biggest tragedy of War is that it always results in fatality, but another key, negative, factor to understand is that after the War many adverse implications arise. Post-war ramifications in the nation fall upon the poor, women, and children, making them weaker and less motivated leading to the downfall of a society. Regardless if a nation wins or is defeated in war they have to deal with consequences of war and find solutions to the impacted people and society. It is essential to understand that there is never a true victor in war because regardless of the outcome, fatality and a fall of morale within society on both sides are inevitable. War has often been the solution to situations that required force or violence, but in recent times this has

Pacifism covers an array of views and there are many subcategories of pacifism, some of which I will cover, but the main definition of the word pacifism is the opposition to war and/or violence. Perhaps the most famous use of the word pacifism is found in the “Sermon on the Mount”, where Jesus claims the “peacemakers” are blessed. In this passage, the Greek word eirenopoios is translated into Latin as pacifici, which means those who work for peace. One common and simple argument for pacifism among religious groups or god fearing people is the argument that god’s revealed words says, through the bible, “Thou shalt not kill.”

Just War Theory is a theory that is designed to explain how to morally start a war and moral ways of acting during a war. The different sections in the just war theory are Jus Ad Bellum, “right to war” and Jus In Bello “laws of war.” Within the just war theory there has been some speculation from pacifists, people who believe in resolving issues in a non-violent way. Brian Orend critiques a type of pacifism, deontological pacifism, the pacifism that discusses not having a war since it involves killing and killing involves violating a human being’s right to life. He argues that even though humans have a right to life there are certain things that can take that right way.

Pacifists believe that war is always an unnecessary evil for two reasons: First, is that they are immoral and don’t achieve the goals of the country, even if the goals are legitimate. Second, is that wars are ultimately ineffective and they don’t solve any disagreements. Sometimes they can make them worse ( Barcalow 303-304).

Since the dawn of humanity the practice of war has been with us every step of the way. Going as far back as the roots of civilization in Mesopotamia 4712 years ago and today the fight in the Middle East continues. In a world constantly ravaged by the outbreaks of war, it is important to engage our Christian faith and determine whether any war is justifiable in lens of Christianity. Thus looking at looking at theologians such as Augustine, Aquinas, Niebuhr, and Yoder provide us with a condemned look on war.

The weakness of pacifism greatly outweighs the strengths of pacifism because pacifism in war does not solve any real problems. (Topic) People have to realize that no matter what, people are going to be in some way fighting one another. (Point) George Orwell in “Pacifism and the War” wrote about how pacifism is ignorance because “the idea that you can somehow remain aloof from and superior to the struggle, while living on food which British sailors have to risk their lives to bring you, is a bourgeois illusion bred of money and security” (Orwell 509). (Evidence) People have to be completely ignorant to be living off of what has been provided to them by fighting, because they don't realize that they wouldn't have all they do without the wars going on. (Explanation 1) People have to be fighting in some sort of way to obtain the freedom and utilities for all. The world does not have an unlimited amount of what is needed, and so we must fight for our resources. (Explanation 2) An educated person would be able to realize this and be able to pick a side that would benefit them, because war is unavoidable and therefore justified. George Orwell correctly describes how joining in on a war effort is better than disregarding the responsibility that people have to solve issues. (Explanation 3) Being a pacifist does not make the war any more justifiable, it just ignores it.

War, while being the vilest thing that humans can create, has been a part of our human heritage as much as religion. Scholars, historians, and philosophers have pondered upon why mankind is so prone to warfare. While not all humans choose to participate in war or in religion, both have affected each and every individual on this planet somehow. Religion has played a significant role in warfare by either being a motivating factor, moral builder, or even an arbitrator of peace. For as long as the human race exists, the practice of religion and proliferation of war will continue to remain.

It is wrong to lie, and wrong to steal, and wrong to kill, but in war men must lie and steal and kill. War must be wrong. Certainly, but it does not apply to everybody. War is wrong for the party that is in the wrong, and whose act involves both parties in all these wrong acts. War is an accursed thing, and it is hell. But all is fair in war and hell. War is wrong, for the party that is in the wrong. War is right, for the party that is in the right. The accursed, hellish thing is right, for those whose cause is right. Lying, stealing, killing are wrong. However, lying, stealing, killing are only right for those whose cause is right. For these, these detestable immoralities are sacred, heavenly things. Wrong is right, whenever it is used for right ends. The answer of war is a pitiable answer. It is useless to attempt to describe the shamefulness of such doctrine. It crushes to dust the last stone of the foundations of morals. War turns morality into a thing of mere temporary, shifting, baseless expediency. The most serious objection to war is the change in moral standards which it

The war has affected the humans perspective of killing greatly. Humans believe all killing is wrong and not justified unless they are defending themselves or protecting someone. Even though humans know all killing is wrong war has "taught" the world that killing is justifiable if you're protecting someone. Killing is not a justifiable act but nowadays people believe that if its in order to protect people it's justified.

Innocent victims in a war include both civilians and soldiers fighting for the just side. Pacifists believe that the innumerable deaths of innocent men, women, and children that take place during war far outweigh any benefit that war could bring. After all, most wars are fought for the sake of human lives. It is ironic that

Just-War theory is a very contentious subject. There are many different versions of what is a “Just” war. Can war really be justified? The concept of morality comes into play now. It definitely has an influential factor found in almost every war that has occurred. Morality or the lack there of, does influence the willing to rage war.It can be used as an excuse, or just be completely disregarded. “Realism” will be very applicable also later on. Frequently one party would say to the other that it has violated their moral codes and that is the reason why they have the right to go to war. Ancient philosophers such as Plato, Aristotle, St Augustine, etc. were brilliant of their analysis of rectifying just war. The bright minds of the time would agree that the only time that war is justified is for the pursuit of peace which is frequently obtained through self

War always has an effect on the culture of a population. With a whole world going to war every nation sees the effects of this man made pass time. Like a chain effect, technology shapes and changes the way war is made. Thus changing the way war affects people. New technologies will be discussed and the way it changed warfare. As well as the way it affects us as an intelligent species. War molds whole cultures and changes the way we go about our business.

War can be awfully violent, destructive, hostile, and problematical. War brings casualties, suffering, backlash, moral changes, unnecessary behavior, and so on. Pacifists believe that it is unjustifiable to go to war, that it is “only” unjust, there is no such thing as violence being righteous. Pacifists have argued about the issue, indicating the state or government is wrong for using war as a resort to resolve a problem. Even if there was a good intention of going into battle, it would still be wrong because there is an absence of peace when pointless violence is going to be or has been committed. It is thought with the aim to avoid confrontation, harmony and understanding of one another is a better way of elucidating conflicts.

In a world of love and peace, there is also war; to be specific, there are three types of wars, and I identify with realism. Realism is shown to be the view that suggests that war happens, and perhaps it needs no reason to be justified and violence will occur. Mentioning that, just war, another theory, is a three-part view that shows the reasoning prior to a war, the concerns during and after war, and essentially requires the person to see what difference the war could make. While, pacifism, another type, is the view that war is not needed; and is seen by pacifists who are against not only to killing but to violence. However, if anyone asked me, war can change your view of it; you may start off in pacifism, but end war thinking about realism; or starting off with a just war view of it, and finishing with pacifism; in hopes that the world would be like you imagined it before.

A frequently overlooked effect of war, the emotional effects, exist abundantly. It became a large military strategy to attack helpless people who were not involved in war and as a result, people are dying, and civilians are living in a constant fear of death; a serious emotional toll. The main goal of the attacks was to force fear into the citizens of the country, making them fall apart mentally, and