Christian Persecution. Is it ok?

[Puff-Puff-Pass Land]

awesome!

Anything else I might be missing?

[Treznor]

awesome!

Anything else I might be missing?

"Thank you O Lord and Master. I humbly present my body and soul for your service as you see fit."

I may be paraphrasing slightly.

[Puff-Puff-Pass Land]

awesome!

Anything else I might be missing?

"Thank you O Lord and Master. I humbly present my body and soul for your service as you see fit."

I may be paraphrasing slightly.

Smile, Treznor! You're in my sig!

[Treznor]

awesome!

Anything else I might be missing?

"Thank you O Lord and Master. I humbly present my body and soul for your service as you see fit."

I may be paraphrasing slightly.

Smile, Treznor! You're in my sig!

An achievement that will live on past my mortal demise.

[Nulono]

Persecution of anybody is not okay.

But if you think that a few isolated murders constitute "the systematic mistreatment of an individual or group by another group" (to quote wiki) then I have a hard time taking you seriously.

It's fucking ridiculous how, in a society where Christianity is so dominant that you are essentially required to be a Christian to hold elected office, they still so often think that they're the ones being oppressed.

This.

Really. I want a link that says you have to be Christian to hold office. Do you realise that politicians say they're Christian just to get our(Christian) votes?

It's de facto, not de jure.

Really. I want a link that says you have to be Christian to hold office. Do you realise that politicians say they're Christian just to get our(Christian) votes?

You don't understand the difference between de facto and de jure, do you?

You don't understand the difference between "essentially" and "legally", do you?

[Treznor]

Persecution of anybody is not okay.

But if you think that a few isolated murders constitute "the systematic mistreatment of an individual or group by another group" (to quote wiki) then I have a hard time taking you seriously.

It's fucking ridiculous how, in a society where Christianity is so dominant that you are essentially required to be a Christian to hold elected office, they still so often think that they're the ones being oppressed.

This.

Really. I want a link that says you have to be Christian to hold office. Do you realise that politicians say they're Christian just to get our(Christian) votes?

It's de facto, not de jure.

Really. I want a link that says you have to be Christian to hold office. Do you realise that politicians say they're Christian just to get our(Christian) votes?

You don't understand the difference between de facto and de jure, do you?

You don't understand the difference between "essentially" and "legally", do you?

So, you're making the claim that a non-Christian will find it just as easy to get elected to office as a Christian in the US?

[Farnhamia]

Persecution of anybody is not okay.

But if you think that a few isolated murders constitute "the systematic mistreatment of an individual or group by another group" (to quote wiki) then I have a hard time taking you seriously.

It's fucking ridiculous how, in a society where Christianity is so dominant that you are essentially required to be a Christian to hold elected office, they still so often think that they're the ones being oppressed.

This.

Really. I want a link that says you have to be Christian to hold office. Do you realise that politicians say they're Christian just to get our(Christian) votes?

It's de facto, not de jure.

Really. I want a link that says you have to be Christian to hold office. Do you realise that politicians say they're Christian just to get our(Christian) votes?

You don't understand the difference between de facto and de jure, do you?

You don't understand the difference between "essentially" and "legally", do you?

So, you're making the claim that a non-Christian will find it just as easy to get elected to office as a Christian in the US?

Sure they can, Trez. They just have to take the oath of office using the Christian Bible, is all.

[HayBal]

Persecution is wrong regardless of religion, ethnicity, race, etc. Unless the individual murdered somebody, there is no justification for it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crusades
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inquisition
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conquista
A- HEM

These things were wrong but that doesn't mean the entire religion should be punished for them. I'm an atheist, I'll get that out of the way so nobody accuses me of bias. Christianity is just a religion, and even though it's brought about some horrible things, I would not persecute the followers. Plus, it brings about a question of where we stop. What about Universalist Unitarians, who identify with Biblical scripture, along with other religious scripture. Technically that's a form of Christianity. What about Mormons? Mormons have never had much power, but they're still Christians. The logic used to justify this is that because religious officials did something modern followers in the religion should be punished. But the modern Christians had nothing to do with it, and thus, shouldn't be punished.

[Treznor]

Persecution is wrong regardless of religion, ethnicity, race, etc. Unless the individual murdered somebody, there is no justification for it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crusades
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inquisition
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conquista
A- HEM

These things were wrong but that doesn't mean the entire religion should be punished for them. I'm an atheist, I'll get that out of the way so nobody accuses me of bias. Christianity is just a religion, and even though it's brought about some horrible things, I would not persecute the followers. Plus, it brings about a question of where we stop. What about Universalist Unitarians, who identify with Biblical scripture, along with other religious scripture. Technically that's a form of Christianity. What about Mormons? Mormons have never had much power, but they're still Christians. The logic used to justify this is that because religious officials did something modern followers in the religion should be punished. But the modern Christians had nothing to do with it, and thus, shouldn't be punished.

What about Mormons? This.

[HayBal]

Persecution is wrong regardless of religion, ethnicity, race, etc. Unless the individual murdered somebody, there is no justification for it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crusades
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inquisition
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conquista
A- HEM

These things were wrong but that doesn't mean the entire religion should be punished for them. I'm an atheist, I'll get that out of the way so nobody accuses me of bias. Christianity is just a religion, and even though it's brought about some horrible things, I would not persecute the followers. Plus, it brings about a question of where we stop. What about Universalist Unitarians, who identify with Biblical scripture, along with other religious scripture. Technically that's a form of Christianity. What about Mormons? Mormons have never had much power, but they're still Christians. The logic used to justify this is that because religious officials did something modern followers in the religion should be punished. But the modern Christians had nothing to do with it, and thus, shouldn't be punished.

What about Mormons? This.

You still fail to respond to the logic about blaming Christians with nothing to do with Christian violence, most of whom don't even support it.

[Treznor]

Persecution is wrong regardless of religion, ethnicity, race, etc. Unless the individual murdered somebody, there is no justification for it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crusades
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inquisition
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conquista
A- HEM

These things were wrong but that doesn't mean the entire religion should be punished for them. I'm an atheist, I'll get that out of the way so nobody accuses me of bias. Christianity is just a religion, and even though it's brought about some horrible things, I would not persecute the followers. Plus, it brings about a question of where we stop. What about Universalist Unitarians, who identify with Biblical scripture, along with other religious scripture. Technically that's a form of Christianity. What about Mormons? Mormons have never had much power, but they're still Christians. The logic used to justify this is that because religious officials did something modern followers in the religion should be punished. But the modern Christians had nothing to do with it, and thus, shouldn't be punished.

What about Mormons? This.

You still fail to respond to the logic about blaming Christians with nothing to do with Christian violence, most of whom don't even support it.

I was nitpicking, yes.

Do I blame the average Christian on the street for the Crusades? No. Do I blame them for supporting a religion that condones discrimination against homosexuals and anyone else they decide they don't like? Yes. Do I blame them for not setting their own houses straight when abortion doctors are killed? Yes. Do I blame them when they allow people to speak for them claiming religious persecution against Christians. Yes.

They're not responsible for what their forefathers did. They are responsible for what's being done in their name today, because they're not speaking up in protest of persecution against non-Christians and they're not disavowing themselves from the institutionally protected pedophilia of the Catholic Church or the rampant homophobia of the rest. The Unitarians are the closest I would come to a relatively benign branch of Christianity, and they're still not speaking up in protest of the crimes their fellows are committing.

[HayBal]

Persecution is wrong regardless of religion, ethnicity, race, etc. Unless the individual murdered somebody, there is no justification for it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crusades
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inquisition
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conquista
A- HEM

These things were wrong but that doesn't mean the entire religion should be punished for them. I'm an atheist, I'll get that out of the way so nobody accuses me of bias. Christianity is just a religion, and even though it's brought about some horrible things, I would not persecute the followers. Plus, it brings about a question of where we stop. What about Universalist Unitarians, who identify with Biblical scripture, along with other religious scripture. Technically that's a form of Christianity. What about Mormons? Mormons have never had much power, but they're still Christians. The logic used to justify this is that because religious officials did something modern followers in the religion should be punished. But the modern Christians had nothing to do with it, and thus, shouldn't be punished.

What about Mormons? This.

You still fail to respond to the logic about blaming Christians with nothing to do with Christian violence, most of whom don't even support it.

I was nitpicking, yes.

Do I blame the average Christian on the street for the Crusades? No. Do I blame them for supporting a religion that condones discrimination against homosexuals and anyone else they decide they don't like? Yes. Do I blame them for not setting their own houses straight when abortion doctors are killed? Yes. Do I blame them when they allow people to speak for them claiming religious persecution against Christians. Yes.

They're not responsible for what their forefathers did. They are responsible for what's being done in their name today, because they're not speaking up in protest of persecution against non-Christians and they're not disavowing themselves from the institutionally protected pedophilia of the Catholic Church or the rampant homophobia of the rest. The Unitarians are the closest I would come to a relatively benign branch of Christianity, and they're still not speaking up in protest of the crimes their fellows are committing.

There's a difference between not supporting the action and not leaving the religion. Most Christians do speak against the abortion doctor murders, they do speak against the Catholic Pedophilia, and even if they don't, they aren't doing it.

[Treznor]

I was nitpicking, yes.

Do I blame the average Christian on the street for the Crusades? No. Do I blame them for supporting a religion that condones discrimination against homosexuals and anyone else they decide they don't like? Yes. Do I blame them for not setting their own houses straight when abortion doctors are killed? Yes. Do I blame them when they allow people to speak for them claiming religious persecution against Christians. Yes.

They're not responsible for what their forefathers did. They are responsible for what's being done in their name today, because they're not speaking up in protest of persecution against non-Christians and they're not disavowing themselves from the institutionally protected pedophilia of the Catholic Church or the rampant homophobia of the rest. The Unitarians are the closest I would come to a relatively benign branch of Christianity, and they're still not speaking up in protest of the crimes their fellows are committing.

There's a difference between not supporting the action and not leaving the religion. Most Christians do speak against the abortion doctor murders, they do speak against the Catholic Pedophilia, and even if they don't, they aren't doing it.

They enable it with their silence and their continued membership. They support it with their money and attendance. They vote to support laws that prevent homosexuals from sharing basic civil rights, repeat dogma about how homosexuality is abomination, then express "horror" when violence is committed against homosexuals. They vote to abolish abortion and talk about how it's murder, then again express "horror" when doctor performing medically necessary abortions are killed.

Yes, they're doing it. They're passive about it, but they are part of the problem.

[Caninope]

Persecution is wrong regardless of religion, ethnicity, race, etc. Unless the individual murdered somebody, there is no justification for it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crusades
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inquisition
A- HEM

add: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conquista to that list

The Spanish hid behind conversion for colonization, but that wasn't their primary motive.

[HayBal]

I was nitpicking, yes.

Do I blame the average Christian on the street for the Crusades? No. Do I blame them for supporting a religion that condones discrimination against homosexuals and anyone else they decide they don't like? Yes. Do I blame them for not setting their own houses straight when abortion doctors are killed? Yes. Do I blame them when they allow people to speak for them claiming religious persecution against Christians. Yes.

They're not responsible for what their forefathers did. They are responsible for what's being done in their name today, because they're not speaking up in protest of persecution against non-Christians and they're not disavowing themselves from the institutionally protected pedophilia of the Catholic Church or the rampant homophobia of the rest. The Unitarians are the closest I would come to a relatively benign branch of Christianity, and they're still not speaking up in protest of the crimes their fellows are committing.

There's a difference between not supporting the action and not leaving the religion. Most Christians do speak against the abortion doctor murders, they do speak against the Catholic Pedophilia, and even if they don't, they aren't doing it.

They enable it with their silence and their continued membership. They support it with their money and attendance. They vote to support laws that prevent homosexuals from sharing basic civil rights, repeat dogma about how homosexuality is abomination, then express "horror" when violence is committed against homosexuals. They vote to abolish abortion and talk about how it's murder, then again express "horror" when doctor performing medically necessary abortions are killed.

Yes, they're doing it. They're passive about it, but they are part of the problem.

I know MODERATE Christians who are pro-gay and pro-abortion. You're using logic that lumps all Christians in one group. I know Christians who have protested FOR gay marriage and have spoken FOR abortion. Or do you know how every Christian in America votes?

[Treznor]

I was nitpicking, yes.

Do I blame the average Christian on the street for the Crusades? No. Do I blame them for supporting a religion that condones discrimination against homosexuals and anyone else they decide they don't like? Yes. Do I blame them for not setting their own houses straight when abortion doctors are killed? Yes. Do I blame them when they allow people to speak for them claiming religious persecution against Christians. Yes.

They're not responsible for what their forefathers did. They are responsible for what's being done in their name today, because they're not speaking up in protest of persecution against non-Christians and they're not disavowing themselves from the institutionally protected pedophilia of the Catholic Church or the rampant homophobia of the rest. The Unitarians are the closest I would come to a relatively benign branch of Christianity, and they're still not speaking up in protest of the crimes their fellows are committing.

There's a difference between not supporting the action and not leaving the religion. Most Christians do speak against the abortion doctor murders, they do speak against the Catholic Pedophilia, and even if they don't, they aren't doing it.

They enable it with their silence and their continued membership. They support it with their money and attendance. They vote to support laws that prevent homosexuals from sharing basic civil rights, repeat dogma about how homosexuality is abomination, then express "horror" when violence is committed against homosexuals. They vote to abolish abortion and talk about how it's murder, then again express "horror" when doctor performing medically necessary abortions are killed.

Yes, they're doing it. They're passive about it, but they are part of the problem.

I know MODERATE Christians who are pro-gay and pro-abortion. You're using logic that lumps all Christians in one group. I know Christians who have protested FOR gay marriage and have spoken FOR abortion. Or do you know how every Christian in America votes?

And yet, somehow this "majority" is somehow less influential, not as loud and not seen nearly as much as their dogmatic brethren. I believe that there are Christians who are FOR gay marriage and spoken in DEFENSE of abortion, but I don't buy that they're more common.

[HayBal]

I was nitpicking, yes.

Do I blame the average Christian on the street for the Crusades? No. Do I blame them for supporting a religion that condones discrimination against homosexuals and anyone else they decide they don't like? Yes. Do I blame them for not setting their own houses straight when abortion doctors are killed? Yes. Do I blame them when they allow people to speak for them claiming religious persecution against Christians. Yes.

They're not responsible for what their forefathers did. They are responsible for what's being done in their name today, because they're not speaking up in protest of persecution against non-Christians and they're not disavowing themselves from the institutionally protected pedophilia of the Catholic Church or the rampant homophobia of the rest. The Unitarians are the closest I would come to a relatively benign branch of Christianity, and they're still not speaking up in protest of the crimes their fellows are committing.

There's a difference between not supporting the action and not leaving the religion. Most Christians do speak against the abortion doctor murders, they do speak against the Catholic Pedophilia, and even if they don't, they aren't doing it.

They enable it with their silence and their continued membership. They support it with their money and attendance. They vote to support laws that prevent homosexuals from sharing basic civil rights, repeat dogma about how homosexuality is abomination, then express "horror" when violence is committed against homosexuals. They vote to abolish abortion and talk about how it's murder, then again express "horror" when doctor performing medically necessary abortions are killed.

Yes, they're doing it. They're passive about it, but they are part of the problem.

I know MODERATE Christians who are pro-gay and pro-abortion. You're using logic that lumps all Christians in one group. I know Christians who have protested FOR gay marriage and have spoken FOR abortion. Or do you know how every Christian in America votes?

And yet, somehow this "majority" is somehow less influential, not as loud and not seen nearly as much as their dogmatic brethren. I believe that there are Christians who are FOR gay marriage and spoken in DEFENSE of abortion, but I don't buy that they're more common.

But you do think, in defending Christian Persecution, that this minority should be persecuted?

[Kayliea]

Persecution is wrong regardless of religion, ethnicity, race, etc. Unless the individual murdered somebody, there is no justification for it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crusades
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inquisition
A- HEM

add: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conquista to that list

The Spanish hid behind conversion for colonization, but that wasn't their primary motive.

oh ok, that's alright then.

[Treznor]

I was nitpicking, yes.

Do I blame the average Christian on the street for the Crusades? No. Do I blame them for supporting a religion that condones discrimination against homosexuals and anyone else they decide they don't like? Yes. Do I blame them for not setting their own houses straight when abortion doctors are killed? Yes. Do I blame them when they allow people to speak for them claiming religious persecution against Christians. Yes.

They're not responsible for what their forefathers did. They are responsible for what's being done in their name today, because they're not speaking up in protest of persecution against non-Christians and they're not disavowing themselves from the institutionally protected pedophilia of the Catholic Church or the rampant homophobia of the rest. The Unitarians are the closest I would come to a relatively benign branch of Christianity, and they're still not speaking up in protest of the crimes their fellows are committing.

There's a difference between not supporting the action and not leaving the religion. Most Christians do speak against the abortion doctor murders, they do speak against the Catholic Pedophilia, and even if they don't, they aren't doing it.

They enable it with their silence and their continued membership. They support it with their money and attendance. They vote to support laws that prevent homosexuals from sharing basic civil rights, repeat dogma about how homosexuality is abomination, then express "horror" when violence is committed against homosexuals. They vote to abolish abortion and talk about how it's murder, then again express "horror" when doctor performing medically necessary abortions are killed.

Yes, they're doing it. They're passive about it, but they are part of the problem.

I know MODERATE Christians who are pro-gay and pro-abortion. You're using logic that lumps all Christians in one group. I know Christians who have protested FOR gay marriage and have spoken FOR abortion. Or do you know how every Christian in America votes?

And yet, somehow this "majority" is somehow less influential, not as loud and not seen nearly as much as their dogmatic brethren. I believe that there are Christians who are FOR gay marriage and spoken in DEFENSE of abortion, but I don't buy that they're more common.

But you do think, in defending Christian Persecution, that this minority should be persecuted?

I said from the first, and have repeatedly said, that I don't believe anyone should be persecuted. What I have said is that Christians who claim to be persecuted are whining little bitches without a leg to stand on. Nothing here has invalidated that.

[Illithar]

I was nitpicking, yes.

Do I blame the average Christian on the street for the Crusades? No. Do I blame them for supporting a religion that condones discrimination against homosexuals and anyone else they decide they don't like? Yes. Do I blame them for not setting their own houses straight when abortion doctors are killed? Yes. Do I blame them when they allow people to speak for them claiming religious persecution against Christians. Yes.

They're not responsible for what their forefathers did. They are responsible for what's being done in their name today, because they're not speaking up in protest of persecution against non-Christians and they're not disavowing themselves from the institutionally protected pedophilia of the Catholic Church or the rampant homophobia of the rest. The Unitarians are the closest I would come to a relatively benign branch of Christianity, and they're still not speaking up in protest of the crimes their fellows are committing.

There's a difference between not supporting the action and not leaving the religion. Most Christians do speak against the abortion doctor murders, they do speak against the Catholic Pedophilia, and even if they don't, they aren't doing it.

They enable it with their silence and their continued membership. They support it with their money and attendance. They vote to support laws that prevent homosexuals from sharing basic civil rights, repeat dogma about how homosexuality is abomination, then express "horror" when violence is committed against homosexuals. They vote to abolish abortion and talk about how it's murder, then again express "horror" when doctor performing medically necessary abortions are killed.

Yes, they're doing it. They're passive about it, but they are part of the problem.

I know MODERATE Christians who are pro-gay and pro-abortion. You're using logic that lumps all Christians in one group. I know Christians who have protested FOR gay marriage and have spoken FOR abortion. Or do you know how every Christian in America votes?

And yet, somehow this "majority" is somehow less influential, not as loud and not seen nearly as much as their dogmatic brethren. I believe that there are Christians who are FOR gay marriage and spoken in DEFENSE of abortion, but I don't buy that they're more common.

Its the same thing with Islam. The majority opposes terrorism, but mostly doesn't speak out against it. The majority of Christians oppose violence against homosexuals and abortionists and oppose the child molestation done by priests, but don't really speak out against it.

[Illithar]

I don't think that people here grasp that people lie about their motivations for doing things. In a world where religion is of central importance, it is very easy to hide greed behind religion without giving an actual shit about the religion one claims to be spreading.

[Treznor]

I was nitpicking, yes.

Do I blame the average Christian on the street for the Crusades? No. Do I blame them for supporting a religion that condones discrimination against homosexuals and anyone else they decide they don't like? Yes. Do I blame them for not setting their own houses straight when abortion doctors are killed? Yes. Do I blame them when they allow people to speak for them claiming religious persecution against Christians. Yes.

They're not responsible for what their forefathers did. They are responsible for what's being done in their name today, because they're not speaking up in protest of persecution against non-Christians and they're not disavowing themselves from the institutionally protected pedophilia of the Catholic Church or the rampant homophobia of the rest. The Unitarians are the closest I would come to a relatively benign branch of Christianity, and they're still not speaking up in protest of the crimes their fellows are committing.

There's a difference between not supporting the action and not leaving the religion. Most Christians do speak against the abortion doctor murders, they do speak against the Catholic Pedophilia, and even if they don't, they aren't doing it.

They enable it with their silence and their continued membership. They support it with their money and attendance. They vote to support laws that prevent homosexuals from sharing basic civil rights, repeat dogma about how homosexuality is abomination, then express "horror" when violence is committed against homosexuals. They vote to abolish abortion and talk about how it's murder, then again express "horror" when doctor performing medically necessary abortions are killed.

Yes, they're doing it. They're passive about it, but they are part of the problem.

I know MODERATE Christians who are pro-gay and pro-abortion. You're using logic that lumps all Christians in one group. I know Christians who have protested FOR gay marriage and have spoken FOR abortion. Or do you know how every Christian in America votes?

And yet, somehow this "majority" is somehow less influential, not as loud and not seen nearly as much as their dogmatic brethren. I believe that there are Christians who are FOR gay marriage and spoken in DEFENSE of abortion, but I don't buy that they're more common.

Its the same thing with Islam. The majority opposes terrorism, but mostly doesn't speak out against it. The majority of Christians oppose violence against homosexuals and abortionists and oppose the child molestation done by priests, but don't really speak out against it.

Excellent point. The problem is not restricted to Christianity by any means: Muslims are equally guilty of enabling the problems in their religion. They are all responsible, if only for their silence.

[Treznor]

I don't think that people here grasp that people lie about their motivations for doing things. In a world where religion is of central importance, it is very easy to hide greed behind religion without giving an actual shit about the religion one claims to be spreading.

That doesn't let religion off the hook, though.

[Iron Chariots]

I don't think that people here grasp that people lie about their motivations for doing things. In a world where religion is of central importance, it is very easy to hide greed behind religion without giving an actual shit about the religion one claims to be spreading.

That doesn't let religion off the hook, though.

And besides, as much as people don't like to face this fact, yes, sometimes people really do horrible things out of genuine religious belief. I know people like to say "nobody commits atrocities for religion; religion is just an excuse," but that's bullshit.
The same people, strangely, will often credit religion with inspiring people to charity or whatnot.

Well, yeah, sometimes religion inspires people to do good. Sometimes, however, it has the opposite effect-- there's no magical barrier that prevents genuine religious belief from motivating somebody to do ill.

[Illithar]

I don't think that people here grasp that people lie about their motivations for doing things. In a world where religion is of central importance, it is very easy to hide greed behind religion without giving an actual shit about the religion one claims to be spreading.

That doesn't let religion off the hook, though.

And besides, as much as people don't like to face this fact, yes, sometimes people really do horrible things out of genuine religious belief. I know people like to say "nobody commits atrocities for religion; religion is just an excuse," but that's bullshit.
The same people, strangely, will often credit religion with inspiring people to charity or whatnot.

Well, yeah, sometimes religion inspires people to do good. Sometimes, however, it has the opposite effect-- there's no magical barrier that prevents genuine religious belief from motivating somebody to do ill.

Well, obviously not. I would like to point out that the most common examples of "evil commited in the name of religion" are really just using religion as an excuse, it was not the main cause.

For example:
Colonization-Wealth, Power, Land and National Prestige all ranked before spreading the faith
The Holocaust-Not commited in the name of religion at all, no matter what some people say.
The Crusades- For the Europeans, as equally commited out of religous fervor as a desire for wealth and opportunities for the younger sons of nobility. For the Byzantines, not out of religious fervor at all (other than 'they're muslims, we're christians so them=bad). For the muslims, its the same thing as the Byzantines.
Spanish and Holy Inqusitions: Absolutley inspired by religious fervor. Remember, Christianity was undergoing massive changes to doctrine and dogma, causing doubt and confusion amongst the faithful. Inqusitions reflect that.
Building of the Islamic Empire- As much for land and power as for spreading the faith.
Spanish Reconquista-primarily out of nationalism. Spain had been occupied by the Moors for hundreds of years. Religion was really only an aside.
Conquista of Aztecs/Mayans/Incas/etc- not out of religious fervor at all, that was just a lie to get funding. Primarily wealth and glory.
Atrocities commited by Columbus- same thing ^