In the reading of “Special Issues in the Study of Religion Today” and the article from “Religion Dispatches”, I found they both state that religious violence is a complex issue and should be investigated further in finding the motives and reasoning. In the “Special Issues in the Study of Religion Today”, violence “can be inflicted on a public target in order to induce terror in a populace” (Van Vorst 24). An instance of where violence happened on a “public target” would be the terrorist attacks of the World Trade Centers and the bombing in Paris, France. Both attacks were carried out by a religious group of the Islamic people: the al-Qaeda terrorist organization and ISIS. Because of this, “Religious violence committed by groups must be understood in its central context--not to excuse it, but to understand it” (Van Vorst 24). I strongly agree with this statement in which in order to comprehend the motives and causes of the violence, we need to be …show more content…
However, Schulson then questions, “what’s really to blame for the violence?” (Schulson). His response is we do not know. Schulson explains that even if we catch the terrorists and ask for their reasoning, there is no way of knowing the truth from lies. Another argument he states is that “Two people can share identical beliefs, social conditions, or backgrounds, while only one of them turns to violence” (Schulson). I believe this is a valid point in saying that just because people may have the same beliefs and upbringings, that does not mean everyone will have the same violent actions. This is an important concept to comprehend in today’s society when considering if the US should allow Muslim refugees into our