Ban Religion - are you for or against it and why?

[Epimethean]

It's not about spine. It's about realizing that evolution in this regard is a process that, while it can be hastened along, would likely cause more trouble were it just flat out done all in a sitting. If 80% of people are religious, what do you suppose banning it would do? Let's lay out a hypothetical scenario. It won't just "go away." A bit like a vaccine-resistant bug, it would morph.

[The Grand Nudger]

Every time I hear religion proposed as a genetic imperative I begin to feel disappointed that I may have received defective code (obviously I apologize if you meant evolution in a different context). So lets say 80% of people are religious, and apply my analogy of the ban on slavery. South Carolina, 1720...roughly 65% of the population were slaves. That we cannot do something about an issue because to many people are for it (or part of it) is no argument at all. There's even a name for this argument.

Now perhaps when we attempt to legislate something out of existence it doesn't just disappear. I would freely offer that the distance in time between 1720 and 1960 is huge, and that we are most likely not done repairing the damage that the institution of slavery has caused. If those opposed to that institution employed the logic you've employed here and decided to let it run it's own course, perhaps we would have ended up where we are, but I wouldn't agree with the position that was taken even if we did. Taking that further, if we banned the expression or continuation of religion today, it's likely that come the year 2251 there would still be a discussion about the lasting effect of religious thought on the human landscape, but at least we'd be that much further along.

I'm simply stating that in my opinion, the institution of religion is a relic that belongs in the same dustbin that the institution of slavery now rots away in. I find it difficult to understand why we would wish to reserve a special status for this particular delusion. The work has already begun with regards to making religion something one reads about in a history class. Religion, in my opinion, not only has nothing to offer us, it is a barrier to human progress. At it's best it is benign, and at its worst genocidal and apocalyptic.

How someone could come to the conclusion that religion has no basis in reality, look at its track record of oppression and tyranny (obviously atrocities perpetrated by human beings for human reasons- but again I'd love to strip this scapegoat from those who would use it to justify abuse), and conclude that we should probably just let it take care of itself, is strange to me. On most issues I'm an optimist with regards to our future, not so much when it comes to religion. It has been refined over thousands of years to be subversive and convincing, appealing to the worst parts of the human psyche, surviving not because of the nature of human beings but in spite of it. No explanation of the world is sufficient once the mind has decided that godidit. This sort of magical thinking has absolutely limitless potential for destruction and suffering.

That people willingly subject themselves to absolute intellectual ignorance, and that others allow them to do this on the grounds that they have a right to delude themselves in such a manner is not a position that I am comfortable with, even though I understand that it borders on the classic definition of facism. Sometimes the opinions we form are uncomfortable, even to ourselves.

The spineless comment was not in any way meant to be taken personally, you know I love you baby. I'm just abrasive at times.

[Napoléon]

I'd love to see religion wiped from the face of this planet, but it's not something which should be forced. So banning religion is a no no for me

[Epimethean]

I see the attempt to ban it creating a hydra effect. It's like telling a kid he can't drink until he's 21. First think he wants to do is break the law-because it's there. The drinking becomes secondary to the breaking.

How in the hell would you ban what might easily go underground? Thought police? How would such a ban affect the Bill of Rights, and what would take a tumble with religion? The arts? Sketchy thinking at best-a nice dream, but not a reality.

[WiffGiff]

I am against banning religion. As someone said earlier you can't forbid someone for believing or thinking something. As long as it doesn't become dangerous in any way or try to limit human rights and such, then I don't see why you should ban it. Nothing good would come out of it.

[The Grand Nudger]

As long as it doesn't become dangerous in any way, or try to limit human rights? My friend, the religious crossed that line long, long ago. I mean, these are the people who brought us the concept of "thought crime".

"but I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart." : Matthew 5:28 NAS

[Godscreated]

---

Every time I hear religion proposed as a genetic imperative I begin to feel disappointed that I may have received defective code (obviously I apologize if you meant evolution in a different context). So lets say 80% of people are religious, and apply my analogy of the ban on slavery. South Carolina, 1720...roughly 65% of the population were slaves. That we cannot do something about an issue because to many people are for it (or part of it) is no argument at all. There's even a name for this argument.

Now perhaps when we attempt to legislate something out of existence it doesn't just disappear. I would freely offer that the distance in time between 1720 and 1960 is huge, and that we are most likely not done repairing the damage that the institution of slavery has caused. If those opposed to that institution employed the logic you've employed here and decided to let it run it's own course, perhaps we would have ended up where we are, but I wouldn't agree with the position that was taken even if we did. Taking that further, if we banned the expression or continuation of religion today, it's likely that come the year 2251 there would still be a discussion about the lasting effect of religious thought on the human landscape, but at least we'd be that much further along.

---

I'm simply stating that in my opinion, the institution of religion is a relic that belongs in the same dustbin that the institution of slavery now rots away in. I find it difficult to understand why we would wish to reserve a special status for this particular delusion. The work has already begun with regards to making religion something one reads about in a history class. Religion, in my opinion, not only has nothing to offer us, it is a barrier to human progress. At it's best it is benign, and at its worst genocidal and apocalyptic.

---

How someone could come to the conclusion that religion has no basis in reality, look at its track record of oppression and tyranny (obviously atrocities perpetrated by human beings for human reasons- but again I'd love to strip this scapegoat from those who would use it to justify abuse), and conclude that we should probably just let it take care of itself, is strange to me. On most issues I'm an optimist with regards to our future, not so much when it comes to religion. It has been refined over thousands of years to be subversive and convincing, appealing to the worst parts of the human psyche, surviving not because of the nature of human beings but in spite of it. No explanation of the world is sufficient once the mind has decided that godidit. This sort of magical thinking has absolutely limitless potential for destruction and suffering.

That people willingly subject themselves to absolute intellectual ignorance, and that others allow them to do this on the grounds that they have a right to delude themselves in such a manner is not a position that I am comfortable with, even though I understand that it borders on the classic definition of facism. Sometimes the opinions we form are uncomfortable, even to ourselves.

The spineless comment was not in any way meant to be taken personally, you know I love you baby. I'm just abrasive at times.

---

Surely you do not think slavery is dead. Slavery is alive in many countries around the world and the U.S. is no exception my friend, ban religion and it goes underground and gives the extremist the freedom to grow a militant attitude without being noticed until it's to late.

[The Grand Nudger]

I can think of one place where slavery is absolutely alive and well

::peers deeply into GC's eyes::

[HeyItsZeus]

If it wasn't for religious freedom we would probably be killed right now.
I didn't read any of the posts... I only read the title so sorry if someone said this already.

---

I'd love to see religion wiped from the face of this planet, but it's not something which should be forced. So banning religion is a no no for me

You're french.

[Epimethean]

Nah, he's Italian. It was decided.