PDA

View Full Version : Study claims that video games associate religion with Violence..



Assassin_M
02-28-2012, 08:01 AM
http://aussie-gamer.com/news/study-claims-video-games-associate-religion-with-violence-disregards-the-crusades-etc/
Ok so Im a firm believer that Video games are forms of entertainment, and any action committed in the game cause this phrase to come to mind "Its just a video game"
I will not deny the presence of some extreme events of Video game violence, but I do not encourage deeming video games "completely violent and unsuitable" due to a deranged minority..
If a kid goes on a shooting spree because of GTA and another saves her family because of GTA, then there is certainly something a miss...
I truly do not understand this backlash on video games, I mean is there not violence in Movies ? was 9/11 inspired by a video game ? was the war on Iraq caused by Bush losing a Multiplayer match with Saddam Hussein ? are the attacks on the Aqsa Mosque inspired by Solomon`s Temple`s Piece of Eden ? Humans love to find reasons for their faults..
Opinions..

SlimeDynamiteD
02-28-2012, 08:18 AM
I think someone had too much time on his hands and decides to research religion views in games.
There's no real conclusion besides that 'Religion is associated with Violence in Games".

Big Deal?

I think not.

ace3001
02-28-2012, 08:19 AM
I really don't understand why people can't separate video games from reality. My opinion is that people just look for a scapegoat to blame, and video games seem to be nearby somewhere for them to pick.

SlimeDynamiteD
02-28-2012, 08:23 AM
I don't think they blame anyone in this article, not sure about the studies.
They just researched that Religion is associated with Violence in Games, there's no blaming anyone in there.

YuurHeen
02-28-2012, 08:31 AM
rofl. I already know how they believe this. Some religous man reads that more and more people admitting extreme religion causes lot of violence in the world. He asks himself how this is so. It cant be religion, that is pure good. So it must be that new evil: games.

LightRey
02-28-2012, 08:38 AM
Thing is that in the case of Assassin's Creed it's actually very accurate. Not to mention that the Knights Templar really were an order of zealous fighters. However, Assassin's Creed actually portrays them as being much more than that. In fact, in the world of Assassin's Creed (and most likely so too irl) all the mentioned wars are purely fought for political reasons and religion is just used as a tool to manipulate people. So if there is any (relatively realistic) game that tries to disassociate religion from war, it's Assassin's Creed.

Regardless, this is a very ambiguous topic and studies like these are often very unreliable (even if executed correctly). Recently there have been quite a few psychology professors that even went as far as making up experimental results in order to get their studies published. It's also noteworthy that this is a rather contraversial topic (it involves the psychological effects of video games and religion), which means that whoever did this study was likely under a lot of pressure, which is often the case with falsified or exaggerated studies. I'm sad to say that it really appears to be an upcoming trend in the world of science to falsify or "bend" test results, because of the immense pressure researchers these days are under to publish papers.

pirate1802
02-28-2012, 09:03 AM
"these games “problematize religion by closely tying it in with violence”.
That is how it is in real life. Religion has always been associated with violence whether they wanted it that way or not. No game I've played outright says religion is evil and should be banned.. stuff like that. Also most of the games are nonreligious. Of all the ACs, only the first one have remotely something to do with religion, there too, it merely made use of a historical period WHEN a religious war was going on. If depicting a religious war in the form it actually is is "problemitizing" it, then so be it. If some underage kid plays these games and get the wrong (?) idea about religion then his parents are to be blamed, not the game.Also, as others have said: the conclusion of the report is confused. I think the author has played AC (or maybe not) but he never really understood the meaning of the game.


rofl. I already know how they believe this. Some religous man reads that more and more people admitting extreme religion causes lot of violence in the world. He asks himself how this is so. It cant be religion, that is pure good. So it must be that new evil: games.

ROFL exactly my thoughts xD!

LightRey
02-28-2012, 09:22 AM
rofl. I already know how they believe this. Some religous man reads that more and more people admitting extreme religion causes lot of violence in the world. He asks himself how this is so. It cant be religion, that is pure good. So it must be that new evil: games.

It's a little more complicated than that. This is research (though i'm not sure if it's actually been published) from a doctoral student, not just some random religious guy.

The13Doctors
02-28-2012, 09:39 AM
nvm

De Filosoof
02-28-2012, 10:59 AM
You gotta love religious people...
They are always trying to blame other stuff. It's never the fault of the religious people or their religion itself.
I admit that there are some games around with just brainless killing in it, and even that isn't bad in most cases because games work as an outlet for frustrations and anger that this system produces, And by the way, games like assassins creed have some really accurate history in it (With nice and creative fiction ofcourse).
It's also an interesting way to learn some history for people who are not all that interested in history in their daily lives.
I think many religious people can't handle the fact that their religion has a very violent past and that it isn't a nice fairy tale like all the magic stuff they believe in.
I'm sorry, but it is often very hard to take religious people serious... I mean the fact that they believe in an all powerful, arrogant god who's incapable to manage the world is just weird to say the least.

http://a1.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/397021_275113719227664_100001871142892_648331_1208 069440_n.jpg

LightRey
02-28-2012, 11:04 AM
You gotta love religious people...
They are always trying to blame other stuff. It's never the fault of the religious people or their religion itself.
I admit that there are some games around with just brainless killing in it, and even that isn't bad in most cases because games work as an outlet for frustrations and anger that this system produces, And by the way, games like assassins creed have some really accurate history in it (With nice and creative fiction ofcourse).
It's also an interesting way to learn some history for people who are not all that interested in history in their daily lives.
I think many religious people can't handle the fact that their religion has a very violent past and that it isn't a nice fairy tale like all the magic stuff they believe in.
I'm sorry, but it is often very hard to take religious people serious... I mean the fact that they believe in an all powerful, arrogant god who's incapable to manage the world is just weird to say the least.

http://a1.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/397021_275113719227664_100001871142892_648331_1208 069440_n.jpg

Please don't turn this into a religion vs. science discussion. One does not exclude the other.

However, if anyone's interested I can use one of the basic principles of quantum mechanics to prove that god exists (assuming said principle is correct of course).

De Filosoof
02-28-2012, 11:08 AM
Alright, i'm interested.

YuurHeen
02-28-2012, 11:17 AM
Please don't turn this into a religion vs. science discussion. One does not exclude the other.

However, if anyone's interested I can use one of the basic principles of quantum mechanics to prove that god exists (assuming said principle is correct of course).

hmm you are the first who brings up science. I rather have you proove a conscious god if any since the most definiation of a god is a at least a conscious being and otherwise you can bring up Einsteins god which is just the laws of nature.

LightRey
02-28-2012, 11:39 AM
Alright, i'm interested.

Alright. I will be using the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics. This interpretation follows a certain principle which Erwin Schrödinger illustrated with the following example:

We have a (living) cat inside a box that when closed makes it impossible to determine anything of what's going on inside the box. Additionally, on the inside is a mechanism that is rigged to distribute a lethal poison at a random point in time, which will kill the cat instantly once distributed.

This interpretation (now the only scientifically accepted interpretation of quantum mechanics after the so-called realistic interpretation (ironic no?) was debunked) states that, if one were to close the box, the cat is to be considered both dead and alive. Basically, the cat exists in what is called a superposition of dead and alive. Once the box is opened, it becomes either one (or according to some theories the universe "splits up" into two separate ones, one with the cat being dead and one with the cat being alive).

Now consider the following:
suppose that our universe is actually some kind of computer program (i.e. a completely virtual world). Our universe would simply be the representation of a series of electronic mechanisms and the like, but because it's a representation of such things, it cannot "physically" interact with the computer and the world it is in, because our universe would be virtual and virtual particles aren't physical particles (for example, if you were to think of energy, you could not turn that into real, physically existent energy to, say, power your toaster). That means that any physical interaction between our universe and this other world is impossible. Basically, to us, that is a theoretically possible explanation for what is "outside" our universe and since it cannot be determined what (if anything) is outside the universe, that means that the "outside" of our universe is in its properties identical to the box mentioned above, with the exception that it cannot be opened. This means that the "outside" of our universe exists in a superposition of all theoretically possible explanations (which consists of basically anything you can think of, as the laws of nature need no longer apply there).

Now imagine that the guy behind the computer could influence or even have an avatar on the program that is represented by our universe. That guy could be considered god.

There are a number of different, more biblical "outsides" to imagine, but I found this example to be more useful, because of the analogy with computers.

Of course, this also means that god doesn't exist.

Useful information:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copenhagen_interpretation

itsamea-mario
02-28-2012, 11:49 AM
That's nice but it doesn't exactly prove gods existence, it just proves that we can't know if god exists or does not. like we can't prove that tiddles is alive or dead, or a lobster..

LightRey
02-28-2012, 11:53 AM
That's nice but it doesn't exactly prove gods existence, it just proves that we can't know if god exists or does not. like we can't prove that tiddles is alive or dead, or a lobster..

It proves it if we assume that this principle of quantum mechanics is correct, which is what I said I was doing.

YuurHeen
02-28-2012, 12:00 PM
It proves it if we assume that this principle of quantum mechanics is correct, which is what I said I was doing.


it proves you cant disprove a god as long as that god has any properties that we should have been able to detect. like you can disprove the biblical god because you can disprove the stories in the bible about god.

itsamea-mario
02-28-2012, 12:00 PM
Well it proves that everything exists outside the universe.
Such as an army of laser penguins, or a singing whale named Clyde who plays the ukelele, or some being who we'd know as god.
But unless we 'open the box' I may as well worship Clyde the musical whale.

LightRey
02-28-2012, 12:04 PM
it proves you cant disprove a god as long as that god has any properties that we should have been able to detect. like you can disprove the biblical god because you can disprove the stories in the bible about god.

No, it actually proves that there is a god (based on the given assumption of course). If you believe in the Copenhagen interpretation, you're going to have to believe in the existence of god.


Well it proves that everything exists outside the universe.
Such as an army of laser penguins, or a singing whale named Clyde who plays the ukelele, or some being who we'd know as god.
But unless we 'open the box' I may as well worship Clyde the musical whale.

You can do whatever you want. It all exists after all, but I see no reason to "blame" people for believing any of it, especially since it's as likely to be true as quantum mechanics itself.

Basically what I'm saying here is that god exists in a superposition of existence and nonexistence.

itsamea-mario
02-28-2012, 12:10 PM
Well I don't really believe in some separate conscious being influencing the world.
Prefer to believe in the universe itself, an impartial system that just exists.
And were I to be particularly zany i'd put forward that it could very well be conscious, but even if it was I doubt it'd give a **** what humans do.

Oh I don't blame people for believing in god, I blame people for being idiots who ignore reason.

LightRey
02-28-2012, 12:16 PM
Well I don't really believe in some separate conscious being influencing the world.
Prefer to believe in the universe itself, an impartial system that just exists.
And were I to be particularly zany i'd put forward that it could very well be conscious, but even if it was I doubt it'd give a **** what humans do.

Oh I don't blame people for believing in god, I blame people for being idiots who ignore reason.

But that's just the thing. That universe you believe in is the exact same universe, just with a different context. Its properties aren't any different. That's why the principle works to begin with. Schrödinger's cat is both dead and alive because both states are identical when the box is closed. God is both existent and nonexistent because his existence = his nonexistence.

YuurHeen
02-28-2012, 12:22 PM
No, it actually proves that there is a god (based on the given assumption of course). If you believe in the Copenhagen interpretation, you're going to have to believe in the existence of god.



You can do whatever you want. It all exists after all, but I see no reason to "blame" people for believing any of it, especially since it's as likely to be true as quantum mechanics itself.

Basically what I'm saying here is that god exists in a superposition of existence and nonexistence.

QM proves a lot of strange things. light being a particle and a wave, a electron can be at 2 places at the same time, if a particle is in a box it gets more momentum if the box gets smaller, there is a probability you can walk throught a wall, etc but it does not prove the cat is either alive or dead it proves you cant disprove it. thats what the example gives you.

now the example you give with the computer is wrong because you're adding someone who controls the computer. before that you already said that the two worlds can't interact.

AntiChrist7
02-28-2012, 12:34 PM
real life associates religion with violence. Palestina, Iraq (sunni and sjits or whatever you write it), nigeria, etc... the list goes on. Such a stereotype reaction. I bet some lame-*** hyper-conservative american cult was behind the study

De Filosoof
02-28-2012, 01:15 PM
real life associates religion with violence. Palestina, Iraq (sunni and sjits or whatever you write it), nigeria, etc... the list goes on. Such a stereotype reaction. I bet some lame-*** hyper-conservative american cult was behind the study
Most likely yes.
A rational scientist would know that Religion has a history of violence and you can't blame it on games instead of religion itself.

De Filosoof
02-28-2012, 01:22 PM
Oh and Lightrey, thanks for the information:). i am very interested in quantum mechanics myself but it's still a weak explanation for the existence of a God, and with god i mean something that made the universe/nature consciously. I mean someone could go as far to say that nature itself is "god", but for me nature is just nature. It already has a name.

Assassin_M
02-28-2012, 02:04 PM
God I knew this would happen -__-
You know what ? Im the one to blame, im an idiot for bringing such a sensitive topic here..
Mr_Shade please lock this as clearly some people here do not know the difference between a discussion about religions associated with game violence and the theory of God`s existence...
and Mario, Im a proud ignorant who doesnt listen to reason :)

pirate1802
02-28-2012, 02:22 PM
Most likely yes.
A rational scientist would know that Religion has a history of violence and you can't blame it on games instead of religion itself.

True. But his topic is deviating somewhere else >_<

Acrimonious_Nin
02-28-2012, 02:38 PM
I think the author lost countless online multiplayer matches and is now or a vendetta for revenge by trolling professionally in a research essay...

and isn't god just an ideological concept that only exists within the realm of perception?

LightRey
02-28-2012, 03:13 PM
QM proves a lot of strange things. light being a particle and a wave, a electron can be at 2 places at the same time, if a particle is in a box it gets more momentum if the box gets smaller, there is a probability you can walk throught a wall, etc but it does not prove the cat is either alive or dead it proves you cant disprove it. thats what the example gives you.

now the example you give with the computer is wrong because you're adding someone who controls the computer. before that you already said that the two worlds can't interact.

You are completely misinterpreting both QM and my statements. I'm not saying that QM proves that god exists, I'm saying that if we assume the basics behind the Copenhagen interpretationare are true, then god exists in a superposition of existence and nonexistence.

The worlds can interact, just not physically. The person ("god") is part of the outside world. The interaction just can't be traced back. It's like playing a video game. You can move around in a virtual world, but you can't actually prove to that world that you exist. You can influence it in such a way that people can see signs of your existence, you can show it even, but you cannot transfer physical evidence.

Acrimonious_Nin
02-28-2012, 03:17 PM
You are completely misinterpreting both QM and my statements. I'm not saying that QM proves that god exists, I'm saying that if we assume the basics behind the Copenhagen interpretationare are true, then god exists in a superposition of existence and nonexistence.

The worlds can interact, just not physically. The person ("god") is part of the outside world.

So god is intertwined with the universe and the 'outside' ? so the universe in the body and the 'outside' is the mind of this concept ? (I'm interested sorry :D)

LightRey
02-28-2012, 03:18 PM
So god is intertwined with the universe and the 'outside' ? so the universe in the body and the 'outside' is the mind of this concept ? (I'm interested sorry :D)

No, he's not. "God" can influence the computer which is what our world represents. Ergo, by changing what our world represents he can change our world.

Assassin_M
02-28-2012, 04:29 PM
I love how everyone seems to shrug my post away and carry on with this.. -__-
Where is Shade when you need him ?

YuurHeen
02-28-2012, 04:57 PM
You are completely misinterpreting both QM and my statements. I'm not saying that QM proves that god exists, I'm saying that if we assume the basics behind the Copenhagen interpretationare are true, then god exists in a superposition of existence and nonexistence.

The worlds can interact, just not physically. The person ("god") is part of the outside world. The interaction just can't be traced back. It's like playing a video game. You can move around in a virtual world, but you can't actually prove to that world that you exist. You can influence it in such a way that people can see signs of your existence, you can show it even, but you cannot transfer physical evidence.

You are using a interpretationare from a example from QM to make a example of a thought experiment with a false additation to explain something like a god. while admitting your god to be on the same plane as a pink fairy with wizard powers your adding extra powers to it. (to be able to influence the real world)
while your reason is false i do believe you are free to believe in any god or any supernatural thing and express that believe.I have no problem with that. just dont try to justifice it with science.

LightRey
02-28-2012, 05:07 PM
You are using a interpretationare from a example from QM to make a example of a thought experiment with a false additation to explain something like a god. while admitting your god to be on the same plane as a pink fairy with wizard powers your adding extra powers to it. (to be able to influence the real world)
while your reason is false i do believe you are free to believe in any god or any supernatural thing and express that believe.I have no problem with that. just dont try to justifice it with science.

You're really going to try to argue QM with me? This is the Copenhagen interpretation. It is the most accepted interpretation of QM and it is not QM itself, but the interpretation I am using as the basis of my statement. QM states that all systems can be described by a wave function. That includes the unobservable. Systems exist in a superposition of all their possible outcomes (and causes for that matter). What I did was state that what lies "outside" our universe can (and should) be interpreted as a system and it therefore exists in superposition of all possibilities (including nonexistence). Then I proceeded to give a relatable example in which a "god" existed. He doesn't live on the same plane as a pink fairy with wizard powers (though he could), but there are alternative "parts" of said superposition in which those exist. According to your logic, god would exist and not exist on the same plane.

Please do tell me how what is "outside" our universe is different from Schrödinger's theoretical box aside from the fact that the box can be opened, because if you can't my point stands, god exists in a superposition of existent and nonexistent and according to the copenhagen interpretation that would mean he exists (and not).

Please study the Copenhagen interpretation more closely. You seem to confuse basic aspects of the realistic interpretation with basic apsects of the Copenhagen intperpretation and I can inform you that the realistic interpretation has been determined to be false.

YuurHeen
02-28-2012, 05:30 PM
"According to your logic, god would exist and not exist on the same plane."

"god exists in a superposition of existent and nonexistent and according to the copenhagen interpretation that would mean he exists (and not)."


Whats the difference?

the outside of our universe is theoretical. ( in the non-science theory term). I know that would mean its non-existing and existing at the same time but as long as there is no evidence of it effecting the universe you can say that the properties are therefore that it does not interact with inside universe even if it exist and not exist at the same time.
and where the hell do you get the : alternative "parts" of said superposition.

and i studied QM long enough (the Copenhagen interprtation). otherwise i wouldnt have the bachelordegree in chemistry.

LightRey
02-28-2012, 05:56 PM
"According to your logic, god would exist and not exist on the same plane."

"god exists in a superposition of existent and nonexistent and according to the copenhagen interpretation that would mean he exists (and not)."


Whats the difference?

the outside of our universe is theoretical. ( in the non-science theory term). I know that would mean its non-existing and existing at the same time but as long as there is no evidence of it effecting the universe you can say that the properties are therefore that it does not interact with inside universe even if it exist and not exist at the same time.
and where the hell do you get the : alternative "parts" of said superposition.

and i studied QM long enough (the Copenhagen interprtation). otherwise i wouldnt have the bachelordegree in chemistry.

The difference is that to us he exists and doesn't exist at the same time. You are trying to describe a superposition from the perspective of the superposition itself, which destroys the principle of the superposition. Basically, what you're doing is like saying there is another cat in the box and you're asking whether the first cat is also dead and alive at the same time from the perspective of this second cat. The point is that as soon as you place an observer, the superposition disappears. The whole principle is based on the fact that you cannot observe the state at said time and there are no deterministic laws of nature to predict the state for you.

It doesn't matter if it's theoretical. It needs only be a possibility. The wave functions in quantum mechanics are of probability waves (i.e. waves that describe the possibility of all events in a system). Since what is "outside" our universe is by definition unobservable, all theoretical explanations are possibilities and are therefore part of its wave function.

The "parts" are the possibilities in the superposition. A superposition is really just a "set" of possible solutions.

Assassin_M
02-28-2012, 06:16 PM
I guess its pointless -__-

LightRey
02-28-2012, 06:17 PM
I guess its pointless -__-

Sorry M. It was never my intention to derail the thread like that.

We should stop here.

Assassin_M
02-28-2012, 06:25 PM
Sorry M. It was never my intention to derail the thread like that.

We should stop here.
It wasnt you who started this meaningless discussion in the first place, its not your place to apologize but I sincerely hope the others do the same.. so thanks man..

LightRey
02-28-2012, 06:36 PM
It wasnt you who started this meaningless discussion in the first place, its not your place to apologize but I sincerely hope the others do the same.. so thanks man..

No problem.

Now to get back on track. Studies like this one worry me. Parents will often look for any excuse to eliminate TV or video games from their kids' lives out of fear. It is sad because there are so many studies out there that clearly show the many (potential) positive effects of video games.

E-Zekiel
02-28-2012, 06:57 PM
That's kind of a stupid conclusion. Religion is associated with violence in games?

You can scratch out the "in games" part. Religion is associated with violence in general, and always has been, and probably always will be. There is no "in games" about it.

LightRey
02-28-2012, 07:00 PM
That's kind of a stupid conclusion. Religion is associated with violence in games?

You can scratch out the "in games" part. Religion is associated with violence in general, and always has been, and probably always will be. There is no "in games" about it.

Meh, who knows. Maybe one day people will stop trying to force their will upon others.

Assassin_M
02-28-2012, 07:03 PM
That's kind of a stupid conclusion. Religion is associated with violence in games?

You can scratch out the "in games" part. Religion is associated with violence in general, and always has been, and probably always will be. There is no "in games" about it.
It depends on how you look at it..
Its Humans that choose to associate religion with violence..
and again this is derailing the whole point of this thread, so I suggest we KEEP THIS ON TOPIC !!!!!

LightRey
02-28-2012, 07:07 PM
Thing is though, most video games are focused on violence of some sort. I think saying that AC associates religion with violence is like saying pokémon associates animals with violence.

pirate1802
02-28-2012, 07:56 PM
videogames associate religion with violence, because that is how it is in real life. Maybe it is us humans who are associating religion with violence and maybe in future there will be no more religious violence, but that is how things are in present.

Assassin_M
02-28-2012, 08:28 PM
videogames associate religion with violence, because that is how it is in real life. Maybe it is us humans who are associating religion with violence and maybe in future there will be no more religious violence, but that is how things are in present.
This is my point, Its not video games, its the reality of our lives, Religion and violence have always been the acts of MAN and their association is caused by MAN, not some video game..
as someone else said, People like a scapegoat, and video games are the modern scapegoat trend.. and it`ll only get worse as video games become more realistic..

Kit572
02-28-2012, 10:22 PM
Little trouble understanding here... are you saying people want to BAN gaming because of "Violence"??

Might as well ban chess too while we are at it! I mean, come on... The goal of chess is too "Eliminate" Your opponent's "Wooden men".

Oh, and we might as well ban toy guns/swords too, they encourage violence! And we should throw emos in prison too! They cut their wrists, ITS A FORM OF VIOLENCE!!

(Note: This entire post is sarcastic. Please don't take it seriously...)

Acrimonious_Nin
02-29-2012, 01:06 AM
Little trouble understanding here... are you saying people want to BAN gaming because of "Violence"??

Might as well ban chess too while we are at it! I mean, come on... The goal of chess is too "Eliminate" Your opponent's "Wooden men".

Oh, and we might as well ban toy guns/swords too, they encourage violence! And we should throw emos in prison too! They cut their wrists, ITS A FORM OF VIOLENCE!!

(Note: This entire post is sarcastic. Please don't take it seriously...)

I think your on to something... well if you are having trouble try reading it all over again(the article) :D...but to keep it in a nutshell that article is an example of people attacking anything that might promote violent behavior in children... in society

Kit572
02-29-2012, 03:25 AM
I think your on to something...

hehe.

i think i understand the article now. People are like that, getting too worked up about a game.

pirate1802
02-29-2012, 03:33 AM
This is my point, Its not video games, its the reality of our lives, Religion and violence have always been the acts of MAN and their association is caused by MAN, not some video game..
as someone else said, People like a scapegoat, and video games are the modern scapegoat trend.. and it`ll only get worse as video games become more realistic..

True.


I think your on to something... well if you are having trouble try reading it all over again(the article) :D...but to keep it in a nutshell that article is an example of people attacking anything that might promote violent behavior in children... in society

The article is about videogames portraying religion as something violent.

Kit572
02-29-2012, 05:58 AM
True.



The article is about videogames portraying religion as something violent.

How the hell do video games portray religion as violent? What if religion has nothing to do with the game?

pirate1802
02-29-2012, 11:47 AM
How the hell do video games portray religion as violent? What if religion has nothing to do with the game?

In the case of AC, by showing religious people doing violent acts (crusades). They might as well say the countless history textbooks and other media on crusades and the likes also portray religion as violent. BAN THEM!!

De Filosoof
02-29-2012, 12:05 PM
Read below... :p

It seems like people and politicians are always struggling with the symptoms of the real problem(s).
This kinda frustrates me.

LightRey
02-29-2012, 02:50 PM
Read below... :p

It seems like people and politicians are always struggling with the symptoms of the real problem(s).
This kinda frustrates me.

True dat.

Kit572
03-01-2012, 12:41 AM
In the case of AC, by showing religious people doing violent acts (crusades). They might as well say the countless history textbooks and other media on crusades and the likes also portray religion as violent. BAN THEM!!

But they did do violent acts. I mean, come on, the templars killed ANYONE who wasn't a christian in the name of "God".

GeneralTrumbo
03-01-2012, 01:48 AM
You gotta love religious people...
They are always trying to blame other stuff. It's never the fault of the religious people or their religion itself.
I admit that there are some games around with just brainless killing in it, and even that isn't bad in most cases because games work as an outlet for frustrations and anger that this system produces, And by the way, games like assassins creed have some really accurate history in it (With nice and creative fiction ofcourse).
It's also an interesting way to learn some history for people who are not all that interested in history in their daily lives.
I think many religious people can't handle the fact that their religion has a very violent past and that it isn't a nice fairy tale like all the magic stuff they believe in.
I'm sorry, but it is often very hard to take religious people serious... I mean the fact that they believe in an all powerful, arrogant god who's incapable to manage the world is just weird to say the least.

http://a1.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/397021_275113719227664_100001871142892_648331_1208 069440_n.jpg
I don't think you understand much at all. You are taking the easy way out and simply conclude that if there were a God, he would be arrogant. For you to be able to even understand the mind of God would make you all-powerful. In my religion, we believe God does everything for a certain reason, which will eventually lead to good things even if it takes bad things to traverse.

GeneralTrumbo
03-01-2012, 01:49 AM
But they did do violent acts. I mean, come on, the templars killed ANYONE who wasn't a christian in the name of "God".
True, but I wouldn't go associating one group of people for the countless other groups. We all have our own mind.

GeneralTrumbo
03-01-2012, 01:58 AM
Most likely yes.
A rational scientist would know that Religion has a history of violence and you can't blame it on games instead of religion itself.
You can't really blame religion itself either, though. Blame it on those who perform these acts.

LadyGahan2010
03-01-2012, 02:53 AM
. I mean the fact that they believe in an all powerful, arrogant god who's incapable to manage the world is just weird to say the least.



As a religious person I tell you God is NOT trying to rid the world of evil. I don't think you have ANY knowledge of any religion in depth and as such you should not voice opinions on it.

Anywho.
To answer OP, to discuss the topic at hand.... Religion is irrelevant, that's just extremist talk. If a kid goes on shooting rampage, then it's the parents' fault at not seeing the basic behavioral problems in their own child/children. As a parent I have to say watching a kid and raising him/her is TOUGH job, not easy and may take a lot of time which parents these days don't want to spare. That's where the problem lies, it's not violence in video games or associating video games with religion, etc etc.

Kit572
03-01-2012, 04:19 AM
True, but I wouldn't go associating one group of people for the countless other groups. We all have our own mind.

Maybe so, Maybe so...

D.I.D.
03-01-2012, 04:21 AM
I don't think you have ANY knowledge of any religion in depth and as such you should not voice opinions on it.

Of course he should voice opinions on it. Why not educate him rather than shut him down?

pirate1802
03-01-2012, 05:49 AM
But they did do violent acts. I mean, come on, the templars killed ANYONE who wasn't a christian in the name of "God".

That is exactly my (and others here) point. These games portrayed events that really happened. How can you blame them? Do people go against history textbooks for associating violence with religion? They contain a lot lot more violent examples than these games!

Kit572
03-01-2012, 10:02 AM
Of course he should voice opinions on it. Why not educate him rather than shut him down?

^this

I once asked questions about the bible, god, religion, etc. and i got put down by christians saying "How dare you question god?"

I mean... c'mon! All i wanted was to learn more about god and why christians hate some things...

YuurHeen
03-01-2012, 10:14 AM
I don't think you understand much at all. You are taking the easy way out and simply conclude that if there were a God, he would be arrogant. For you to be able to even understand the mind of God would make you all-powerful. In my religion, we believe God does everything for a certain reason, which will eventually lead to good things even if it takes bad things to traverse.

the funny thing is that if you cant understand god then why say a lot of people god hates ***s, god wants us to rest on sunday, god... etc.
you can know that if god is real he is a arrogant, sadistic, jealous, insecure, bloodthirsty, infanticidal, racist, genocidal, unforgiving, control-freakish, unjust dictator.

Kit572
03-01-2012, 10:17 AM
you can know that if god is real he is a arrogant, sadistic, jealous, insecure, bloodthirsty, infanticidal, racist, genocidal, unforgiving, control-freakish, unjust dictator.

I agree that christians make god sound racist. I mean, just look at how christians treat gays! I saw on the news once that an angry christian assaulted a homosexual...

that poor bastard... i don't think christians understand that people don't simply "Choose" to be gay right out of the blue one day.

GeneralTrumbo
03-01-2012, 10:30 AM
the funny thing is that if you cant understand god then why say a lot of people god hates ***s, god wants us to rest on sunday, god... etc.
you can know that if god is real he is a arrogant, sadistic, jealous, insecure, bloodthirsty, infanticidal, racist, genocidal, unforgiving, control-freakish, unjust dictator.
That is only some individuals who think that. There are others, like I, who say God is an example of love. He is not hateful towards gays and whatever. People like that are just brainwashed and only listen to the minister at church or whatever. I think God does NOT "hate" gays.

GeneralTrumbo
03-01-2012, 10:31 AM
I agree that christians make god sound racist. I mean, just look at how christians treat gays! I saw on the news once that an angry christian assaulted a homosexual...

that poor bastard... i don't think christians understand that people don't simply "Choose" to be gay right out of the blue one day.
I think the way SOME Christians treat gays is unjust and goes against God. They have no idea what they are talking about.

Assassin_M
03-01-2012, 10:49 AM
Every religion has its customs and teachings, but as every material given to man, its been corrupted to be used as a tool for control and excuses..
The crusades, the Jihad, The holocaust etc...
I dont remember any religion that says beat the crap out of gays, or go kill the americans and your god will be happy..
Religion is what man makes of it, do not go blaming religion for every act of MAN..

YuurHeen
03-01-2012, 10:53 AM
That is only some individuals who think that. There are others, like I, who say God is an example of love. He is not hateful towards gays and whatever. People like that are just brainwashed and only listen to the minister at church or whatever. I think God does NOT "hate" gays.


Then why did your god allow 3 different books with anti-gay lines in it to be written (old and new testament and Quran) that inspired a lot of people to hate women, keep slaves and kill gays.
again to me its a joke but i really dont think you can make any case that your god loves anything other then himself and people worshipping him.

Assassin_M
03-01-2012, 10:56 AM
Then why did your god allow 3 different books with anti-gay lines in it to be written (old and new testament and Quran) that inspired a lot of people to hate women, keep slaves and kill gays.
again to me its a joke but i really dont think you can make any case that your god loves anything other then himself and people worshipping him.
Excuse me but have you read the Quran ? No I suppose, It never preached slavery, but MAN did, it never preached the hatred of women, but MAN did, it never preached the prosecution of Gays but MAN did..
Do not go around saying things you know nothing about..

YuurHeen
03-01-2012, 11:06 AM
Excuse me but have you read the Quran ? No I suppose, It never preached slavery, but MAN did, it never preached the hatred of women, but MAN did, it never preached the prosecution of Gays but MAN did..
Do not go around saying things you know nothing about..

you know something else MAN did. wrote those books.

Assassin_M
03-01-2012, 11:07 AM
you know something else MAN did. wrote those books.
No..

GeneralTrumbo
03-01-2012, 11:09 AM
you know something else MAN did. wrote those books.
Faith can mean a lot when deciding what decisions you choose to make in life.

GeneralTrumbo
03-01-2012, 11:10 AM
Then why did your god allow 3 different books with anti-gay lines in it to be written (old and new testament and Quran) that inspired a lot of people to hate women, keep slaves and kill gays.
again to me its a joke but i really dont think you can make any case that your god loves anything other then himself and people worshipping him.
Simple, over time people manipulated certain parts of the bible to make it seem worse than what it really is.

YuurHeen
03-01-2012, 11:11 AM
Simple, over time people manipulated certain parts of the bible to make it seem worse than what it really is.

rofl

Assassin_M
03-01-2012, 11:15 AM
rofl
I expect nothing more from you after this..

GeneralTrumbo
03-01-2012, 11:16 AM
rofl
You are acting very ignorant. -.-

YuurHeen
03-01-2012, 11:17 AM
You are acting very ignorant. -.-


no really you really think religions are getting worse?

pirate1802
03-01-2012, 11:20 AM
http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=151290&d=1299658614

Assassin_M
03-01-2012, 11:23 AM
I`v tried my best for this not to happen, I swear..

LightRey
03-01-2012, 11:29 AM
Wow, great job. Y'know, for people that claim religion is the cause of conflict, you sure like causing conflicts over whether religion is the cause of conflict.

STOP DERAILING THE THREAD WITH YOUR HYPOCRITICAL OPINIONS.

pirate1802
03-01-2012, 11:45 AM
Wow, great job. Y'know, for people that claim religion is the cause of conflict, you sure like causing conflicts over whether religion is the cause of conflict.

STOP DERAILING THE THREAD WITH YOUR HYPOCRITICAL OPINIONS.

LOL! True
on topic (or rather offtopic): I don't believe in god, but I don't believe in ridiculing other's beliefs either. If they leave us alone, i leave them alone too. .Live and let live \m/

Assassin_M
03-01-2012, 11:50 AM
LOL! True
on topic (or rather offtopic): I don't believe in god, but I don't believe in ridiculing other's beliefs either. If they leave us alone, i leave them alone too. .Live and let live \m/
You just earned my respect..

Kit572
03-01-2012, 06:57 PM
I think the way SOME Christians treat gays is unjust and goes against God. They have no idea what they are talking about.

Exactly what i'm trying to say