What is the difference of People Power 1 & 2 in the Phils.How did the conflict of Muslim & Christian start?
92569
People Power 1 happened during the Marcos regime when President Ferdinand Marcos declared Martial Law and established himself as dictator of the Philippines. The people rose up against him in a peaceful protest where nuns, priests, children, and basically ordinary people stood in front of and blocked the tanks and soldiers who were about to ambush Camp Crame, the headquarters of the rebellion against Marcos.\n\nPeople Power 2, however, was not as noble. Elected President Joseph Estrada was accused of graft and corruption and the people wanted him impeached. His trial, as well as the protest pushing for his impeachment in front of the Edsa Shrine, was televised for almost the whole day everyday. The trial itself seemed to be dubious and the people seemed to be using the effect and influence of the first People Power in the wrong way. But in any case Estrada was impeached, he fled the country, and Vice President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo became president.
1027861
I know for a while it was a close battle between mithraism and christianity..  Your facts are interesting but there's a lot of similarities between ALL religions when you look deep enough.
626688
Christianity began around the year 50 AD, Islam began around the year 600 AD.  Mohammad (peace be upon him) was born around 570 AD.
1064233
That's hard to answer, both Christian and Islamic denominations have been responsible for large wars that killed hundreds of thousands of people.  Let's just say the world would be a more peaceful place if people didn't start wars that are motivated by religious ideology.
674433
There was confusion over the difference in the naming of a cotton comforter and a down comforter.  In fact the debate got so heated that the muslims and jews started fighting over it.  In one form or another, people are still being killed today over religion.
897166
It has always been this contentious.  The reason it has become a political "football" is that the religious fringe has taken control of politics, making this the American Taliban.  Because it is an issue with no middle-ground and, therefore, no real possibility of compromise, it is likely to be a hot issue for a long time.
1009296
both, kind of. Religion and polictics feed off each other and when you mix them together..boom. Islam being one of the largest religions out there in conjunction with not many people liking america in general feeds the violence present today. While the warcry for islam increases, many muslims view the actions of the US and its presence in the Middle East as an intrusion of Christian oppressors in a Muslim land. Need I remind you of the Crusades?
48732
From the earliest history of humanity, war has always been about only two things - for power, and for resources, and many times it is for both - and many other times it is a war for power cloaked under a war for religion or resources. Hitler claimed he attacked poland for resources - he claimed he needed land for the German people, but that was really for his own power. Religious wars have been fought and are fought for power. For the power that those at the top of religion have over thier people. The best way to consolodate your power over your own people is to  unify them against an enemy. That goes for political power as well as religious. The religious leaders of Europe fought the holy wars for thier own gains, claiming it was religious duty, however those at the top weilded the power over thier people by sending them to war. The warriors fought for god and religion, but those in power facilitated this.  War will never go away because there will never be equity - someone will always have what someone else has. If by some miracle of technology, anyone can have anything, there will still be wars for power - power is the one thing that can't be fabricated. If you look at the current muslim extremists, they are not fighting for thier gods, they are fighting for power, and indirectly for resources. They want to create a muslim world, where they will have the power, and by having the power, they will get the resources. If you look at the heart of any conflict, you'll see it - resources and power. Those are the core reasons for ANY war.  However, since it takes two to make war.  The Allies couldn't stand aside while Hitler took over Europe and killed millions - wars are started by those who want resources and power, but are ended by people who fight for the defense of themselves and others. Wars are rarely started for honorable reasons, but they are often ended by honorable people, who sacrifice themselves to stop the greedy, the evil, and the powerhungry. However, sometimes, those who fight the evil and powerhungry have dishonorable motives of thier own, but they can claim the moral highground because they didn't start the war, and they will benefit from defeating the ones who started it, and maybe because they destroyed a greater evil, it is accepted. Sometimes you have to trade a great evil for a lesser evil.\n\nThis also goes for society on the small scale as well - Christians claim homosexuals are evil sinners in order to strengthen thier own group - any group gets stronger with a common enemy. There is no better way to facilitate group cohesion, and this group cohesion in this case leads to even more power for those at the top.  \n\nLife is a power struggle.
833183
The average Christian and the average Muslim would normally get along fine.  Unfortunately extremism begets extremism, and in today's climate we need all the communication we can possibly get between the various communities.\n\nI think it's ironic that in the twenty-first century, we should still be talking about religious wars.  That is something we should have put aside in our historical infancy.
857712
The real battles in America are between the faithful and those who want to make religious expression illegal.  \n\nChristians and Muslims respect the unborn child.  \nLiberals want to make abortion an internationally recognized human right, forcing all nations (including Muslim nations) to legalize abortion for any reason at any time throughout a pregnancy.\n\nChristians and Muslims fight pornography.\nLiberals want "freedom" to indulge in all the pornography they want, even when our children end up seeing it all around them.\n\nLiberals want to outlaw crosses, yarmulkes and the hijab in schools, the workplace, and eventually in public (case in point: Holland).\n\nLiberals want schools to teach that two men can get married, or two women, and that no one should have the right to say there is anything wrong with that.  Christians and Muslims believe marriage is something holy, not homosexual.\n\nIf you are fighting against the Christians, I think you should look again at which side you're on.
270676
Religion and politics have had a spill over effect with regards to each other, to a large extent in Pakistan. Religious 'Islamic' parties have furthered their political agenda on the basis of religion as a unifying and vote-gaining factor. This is where in my opinion most of the problems have erupted. Religion, be it any, does not advocate unwarranted violence. \nWhile in the case of Pakistan, political protest has more than often taken a violent turn, and since the religiohs parties are inviolved at times, it has been associated with the religion being violent. \nReligious ppl here in pakistan, the educated kind, are not at all violent. They are regular ppl that you would encounter on the street. They might have a beard, but that does not mean that they are trigger happy ,or weild a sword at every non-muslim. \nThe violence emerges out of political unrest, and soem reliogious political leaders, who claim themsevles to be the vanguards of the faith, utilise it to garner votes. So its important to seperate any understanding of religious people and those who use religion to further political gains.
341296
well i am a Christian, and i first and foremost try to take in consideration that everyone i know or that may be in the conversation isn't a Christian.  I know from experience that many Muslims, Atheists, Catholics, etc...can hold a very educated conversation about religion, without ever believing in God, or the Christian God.  As long as the Christians involved can respect that the "non-Christian" people are not interested in converting, now nor ever, and do not try to force their faith or beliefs on them, then there should not be any problems.  but i can somewhat relate to what you are talking about, thats why religion, politics and money are 3 things i try to avoid talking about in abundancy.
1006806
They have different beliefs.  You cannot unite them, no way.  If Christians stop making fun of Muslims, it might happen, till then.....let's keep hoping.  By the way, do they make fun of others? or is it just the Muslims the easy target?
1024539
Differences between the two religions began the day Abraham separated Ishmael and Hagar his mother from Isaac and Sarah, the progenitors of these faiths.  Both religions believe in the same monotheistic God, but views on how to relate and otherwise commune with Him differ drastically.  Christianity teaches that Jesus is the only way to God, Islam teaches that Jesus was not God Incarnate, but rather a prophet of Allah, who at the end of time will come back to proclaim Islam the true religion.
322769
Our founding forefathers were Christians. This great country was built on Christian beliefs.  We will always be one nation under God and those whom that offends should GTFO & find another place to live.  I hear Bin Laden has room.\n\n"Funny how those who cry tolerance, refuse to tolerate and those who cry to be heard, refuse to listen."
534357
It is rather involved.  They deal with different schools of thought on Islamic law and are related to different geographic areas.  The article below offers a good explanantion.
200249
I don't know, but the former Attorney General of the United States, John Ashcroft, said something like "Islam is a religion in which God requires you to send your son to die for him.  Christianity is a faith in which God sends his son to die for you."  Personally I think that was an insulting and offensive to the Muslim world.  Unfortunately I have yet to hear a better distinction drawn.