In Defense of God.

[Astonished]

I certainly agree that we need to move away from those  portions and types of religion which have repeatedly shown themselves to lead to misery.  Most religious people agree, even the ones who believe in what we would call silly shit or in the tradition that -caused- the misery.

(in the book, the author tries to convey that the things some other traditional religious beliefs provide do not require gods, or those traditional religious strictures, in order to be achieved.  A religion without superstition, a religion without  a spirit telling you to kill the gays or what have you.  A religious system that provides the bennies...without the nasty side effects or unsupported assertions.  A religion of curiosity, a religion of natural investigation.)

Here's my problem: The intrinsic irrationality of it is unavoidable, and when you open that door, you're inviting any number of the negative consequences we see in it. You don't need to believe in nonsense, or even be open to fanciful notions, to have a sense of wonder and mystery. Why can't people be content with that? It's like saying people are desperate to be insane and...that's insane.