Religion Is Not A Problem With Religion

Culture is a great influence among human life. It is who we are and what we are, in a sense. Based on culture, people commit deeds that they believe is approved by their kind. “Certain cultures may simply place little value on human life and in fact believe that life should be sacrificed to their sacred or secular Gods. Such cultures may thus provide the conditions in which Power can operate or diversity have its bloody effect.” (Rummel, 1994). “Strategies of action pertinent to defensive or honor-based violence emerge where the law is unavailable and may be amplified by moderate or high levels of poverty. However, when socioeconomic disadvantage is so severe that there is widespread institutional breakdown, strategies of action promoting more predatory and instrumental forms of violence may also evolve.” (Lee, 2011) Basically, culture is one of the most important influences in a persons decision making and therefore can increase the possibility of homicide and/or another form of violence. Because homicides are such drastic acts, the cross-cultural and historical information on homicide are numerous and basically uncontaminated by reporting biases as compared to data on almost every other human act.

Religious terrorism is regularly portrayed as demonstrations of unreasonable, silly and indiscriminate violence, along these lines offering few, if any what really spur religious terrorism measures. This presumption about religious terrorism comes from different nations, groups and individual’s. Unbalanced regard for prophetically catastrophic terrorism, and an absence of qualification between religious terrorism and its mainstream partner. This article, in this manner, expects to do four things: characterize and separate religiously inspired terrorism, confidence, and activism along the lines of faith and violence. Furthermore, prescribe a scope of religion, confidence, and terrorism systems in view of these perceptions.

This paper will discuss religious terrorism in particular. Religious terrorism can be defined as “the terrorism [is] carried out based on motivations and goals that have a predominantly religious character or influences.” (“Religious Terrorism”) An example of this will be the 9/11 attacks. It was “a series of four coordinated terrorist attack launched by the Islamic terrorist group al-Qaeda upon the United States in New York City and the Washington, D.C. metropolitan area.”(“September 11 attacks”) This attack had led to a serious causality, “almost 3000 people dies in the attacks.” (“September 11 attacks”) Osama Bin Laden, the leader of al-Qaeda, declared a “holy war against the United States” (“September 11 attacks”) In his “letter to America”, he stated the motives as follows: In opposition to western support for attacking Muslims in Somalia; supporting the Indian oppression against Muslims in Kashmir; the Jewish aggression against Muslims in Lebanon; the presence of U.S. troops in Saudi Arabia; U.S support of Israel and the sanction against Iraq. (“September 11 attacks”) The disastrous attack leads to a serious attention of re-constructing the old version of counter terrorism strategy, which had failed to protect the citizens against terrorism. However, ‘terrorism is far to complex for one solution to be effective in dealing with all the possible threats.” (Lygutas 146) Therefore, some of the measures have difficulties in balancing the rights of

In many cases it is natural to interpret the events of September 11th as purely evil, however, Lincoln argues that the terrorist attacks were profoundly and intensely religious. For this reason, Lincoln attempts to clarify what religion does and how it can be used to legitimate violent acts such as the terrorist attacks of September 11th. To support his argument, Lincoln offers a definition of religion that is more precise than the definition previously discussed in this essay. Lincoln argues that within religion there is a religious maximalist approach and a religious minimalist approach. The maximalist approach is the,“conviction that religion ought to permeate all aspects of social, indeed of human existence”(Lincoln 5). Essentially maximalists believe that religion should be considered the most important thing above all else. In contrast, minimalists believe that religion should be "restricted to an important set of (chiefly metaphysical) terms, protects its privileges against state intrusion but restricts its activity and influence to its specialized sphere”(Lincoln 5). Lincoln then goes on to define religion as having four parts. The four parts being; discourse, which contains speech acts that create a social reality in which people live, as well as, textual examples of “transcendence.” Secondly, there is practice which consists of the rituals and ceremonies of religion. Thirdly there is, community which refers to the people practicing the religion and constructing a religious world around it. Lastly there is, institution which is the recognized regulation and representation of the religion, its practices and community. All of these factors make up Lincoln’s more specific definition of

Religious extremism may be the kind of terror threat most familiar to contemporary Americans, considering the religious extremism that fuels groups like al-Qaeda and its affiliates. However, while these groups are based outside of the United States and often coordinate across borders, there are domestic religious groups that have developed within the United States. In addition to any "homegrown" terrorists who may identify

For most of the 20th Century, America’s Faith Community enjoyed the luxury of reposeful sanctuary within their Houses of Worship. Such places were considered “off limits” for acts of crime and mayhem by most Americans. Reality often mirrored this anticipation. Even the criminal element looked with great disdain upon those victimizing churches and synagogues. However, immunity to the problems slowly began to deteriorate. The lawless began to view holy and sacred locations as merely wealthy soft targets overseen by the forgiving and the naive. The general respect that was once accustomed from American culture started to erode as well; only exasperating the situation. By 2001, the reality that world level terrorism could also

With unique assessments and the continued citations to contemporary academics and experts in the social sciences, the author provides some validation to even after sixty years. In fact, the author cited relevant works in a post 9/11 environment that searches for answers regarding terrorist movements like Arquilla, Psychology, Sowell and Madigan (Hoffer, 1951, p. ). His book ?touches? on many aspects of political, social, academy and psychology, these scientists should read the book because it sheds light on good and bad, begin, gain momentum and move towards a state of activity.

The purpose of this paper is to annotate four sources that I will analyze for my final research paper. These sources focus on the following items: (a) Comparing Muslim converts and non-converts in the United States, (b) the psychology of radicalization, (c) the risk of radicalization and terrorism, and (d) how we can combat homegrown radicalization and terrorism. By analyzing these sources, I will be able to develop in-depth reasoning on this topic and complete the research paper.

Terror related attacks in the United States is a vastly growing situation. From non-government organizations, to individual lone wolf attacks. Numerous attacks and circumstances can be related to the American way of life, as well as the foreign policies and procedures the U.S follows. There are various aspects in which are the “why” of the attacks, relating to government and religion are two dominant reasons for attacks.

In the recent past terrorism has been the greatest challenge to many countries in the world. To be precise religious terrorism has taken its route. Such heinous acts are spearheaded through violent motives. This motive renders the whole nation into a somber mood. It is as a result of tragedies caused by heinous acts of terror. For instance, the USA was subjected to such a mourning scenario. It was that moment when the shooting in Unitarian Universalists Church was under way. It was flabbergasting because American citizens least expected it at that time. Such heinous acts experienced by the United States left families deprived and children orphaned. It was a big blow to the nation’s security.

The most prominent part of this problem is how often a person relates Muslims to terrorism. An assumption is made after every attack that the ones involved in it were committing this violence in the name of Islam. In reality, this statement is very incorrect and research has been made to come to the conclusion that actually “94% of Terrorist attacks in the US since 1980 are by non-Muslims”

According to Hunsberger and Jackson after the terrorist attack on the World Trade Center in New York City and the Pentagon and Washington DC on September 11, 2001, the role of religion-based prejudice in context is exemplified in the claim involvement of extremist

Societies will always have problems that cause some sort of reaction from individuals who believe that their social stability is being endangered. There have been a number of moral panics which have captivated society in terror and more often than not, owing to unfamiliarity. This essay will discuss the perception of a moral panic and will look at the case of the September 11th Terrorist attack against the United States of America, which triggered a colossal conflict of morality within modern day society. This essay will also analyse terrorism as a perceived deviance, the role of the moral entrepreneur and folk devil, in order to develop a level of understanding to the causes of this particular moral panic and its effects on society.

One can scarcely turn on the television, or the radio, or open up a web browser without the mention of Islamic terrorism or unrest around the world. Though the United States and the rest of the world may not be engaged in a protracted religious war, for radical Muslim fundamentalist they are. Bernard Lewis brings to light possible reasons for the issues facing the world dealing with Islamic terrorism. The Crisis of Islam: Holy War and Unholy Terror explains these issues in historical context as well as how some of the actions professed in the name of Islam and claim to

Religion teaches goodness and violence is rarely found, if ever, within the teachings (Winchester, 1). Terrorists, though, need a justification for their actions and so they must dig through scriptures to find a reason (Gibson, 2). Religion and terrorism is a major controversy because of all the different opinions and facts.