But humanists differ with such suppositions, stating that it is our moral obligation to use our reasoning mental faculties and intelligence to deliberate on war and overpower such natural instincts. Thus in the event of emergence of war, we ought to explore non-violent interventions (Norman, 2007, pp.1-5).
Peaceful solutions are not often simple to arrive at or put into force, as the past record of the United Nations suggests. However, human beings should be committed in supporting the UN’s peaceful efforts towards resolving conflicts among states. A significant number of humanists, such as Betrand Russell, have come out to vehemently oppose the use and manufacture of weapons of mass destruction. Today’s religion is absurd since it is supportive of violent means of resolving differences and injustices (Norman, 2007, pp.1-5).
Religion should never be a justification for participating in war. Non-religious individuals are quick to highlight the many wars that have been waged for centuries owing to religious differences. These are ridiculous reasons for taking away other people’s lives. They also condemn the role that world’s major religions play regularly in promoting war. Liberal democracies have a good overall reputation when it comes to violence. In fact, most liberal democracies will be remembered in the annals of history as having an excellent record for not igniting or promoting wars (Norman, 2007, pp.1-5).
Today’s religions have deviated from seeking faith and purity, and instead become entangled in activities geared towards promoting war. In the past, Christians expressed reservations towards participating in military activities. Quite a negligible fraction of Christians today root for the commandment ‘Thou shalt not kill’. Equally, they cite Jesus’s advice to turn the other cheek and not and not resist evil, as a guideline for pacification. But when Christianity