Have come to the conclusion that religion - especially the monotheisms of Christianity and Islam (to a lesser degree Judaism) are a menace and a threat to society, and dangerous to an individual.
Religions are a form of discrimination. It's "us" and "them". It puts up an artificial difference where there is no basic difference, such is the case with religious discrimination, or age discrimination, or sexual discrimination. These prejudices are used, misused, and abused to support war, fighting, terrorism, and all of that. Of course, religion is not the real reason - economics almost always is, and that is financial gain for the ruling class. It's easier to say, "Kill the infidels!" or "Kill those Godless (whoever)!" than to say, "I, as ruler, would like to expand my influence to the neighboring country. I would like to take over their money and resources, and bring it to this country. I will share it with my own ruling class, but you will get nothing for your efforts." The former gets patriots. The second gets nothing except the ruler thrown out of office.
Religions can mask insanity. Simple: What is the difference between "God is talking to me" and "My dog is talking to me"? Either is hearing voices which others cannot hear. One is considered pious and a candidate for sainthood when they die, and the other is the babbling of a psychotic killer. One is left alone or even esteemed, the other put into a mental hospital and given potent drugs for the rest of their life. The former can say, "God is talking to me and He tells me to (kill the infidels)." See previous paragraph. What's the difference? The existence of, or tolerance for, religion can allow some ludicrous concepts to be tolerated, unquestioned, for a long long time. By the time mental illness is recognized, the situation may be too far gone to remedy. Wouldn't it be better if the first time the person believes that a supernatural being is speaking to him/her, they could just put it out of their mind, view it as a thought from their own mind, and effectively "nip it in the bud"? Or, if that doesn't work, see it as a disturbance and seek help with the matter, when that help can be talking to re-formulate thoughts?
Religion can be used to excuse crime. If someone murders another, it's a homicide. If someone murders another, and they say that they "had to" because God didn't like (something about them - they're gay, they're committing adultery, they were performing abortions (killing baybeez), etc), it's viewed as having an excuse, and they may actually be acquitted.
Religion requires some people make careers out of it. They are paid for doing a non-function. Unless, you consider providing religion to be entertainment, which it can be but is a lot more insidious, pervasive, and life-altering than that. Essentially, it is a tax.
Same with property used by religion, including churches, cloth, books, artwork, finely-crafted items, gold, silver. musical instruments, and so forth. These buildings and personal property are taken out of common usage by the church, take someone's time to make them, and are unused for anything used by the religion. It is horrific for there to be a finely built church, richly decorated with finely-carved hardwood fixtures, handcrafted stone decorations, beautiful stained glass, fine woolen robes, gold and silver, when the area surrounding it is filled with hungry, desperately-poor, unclothed, cold, starving people. Why not sell off the gold, and instead of building a beautiful marble church, build a community well, aqueduct, or grain elevator? Why not have the priest working in a trade or as a merchant to improve the lot of the community, instead of telling them that they are poor, and GREAT rewards are in store for them in Heaven?
Religion can be used by nations and societies to commit atrocities - stoning of adulteresses (like in the middle east), killing unruly children, burning witches, genocides of Jews. and so forth. The cruel treatment/abuse of children by their religious parents or religious schools. No one in their right mind would approve of these things if it weren't for someone saying "Gawd wants it", and somehow convincing others of it. In other regards, it can be used to create laws mandating adherence to the religion for nonbelievers - laws against homosexuality, laws against poly-marriages (why is marriage limited to 1-man 1-woman other than religion?), laws against selling alcohol or gambling on Sunday, laws against (some) businesses being open on Sunday, and on and on. If I don't believe in your religion, why pass laws forcing me to follow its rules?
Religion can be, and often has been, used to stifle the progression of society. Religion gets into science, and refutes it. It might even kill the scientist if the scientist has evidence that differs from their bronze-age mythical book. Religion digs in its heels and insists that the world operates according to this book, and wastes time and resources implementing any of those discoveries. Religion gets in the way of medical research and refuses to even look at using certain things in science (e.g., stem cell research which is promising as a treatment for many conditions) because they believe their religion says something about it is wrong. You can get stem cells from foetuses, but you can also get them out of living adult or child bodies without significantly harming the person.
Religion makes its rules about the teaching of the young - and insist that everyone be taught those things - even nonbelievers in that religion. They insist that creationism be taught as science, they insist that biology be taught in a ridiculous mythical way, they insist that geology or astronomy be taught according to those rules.
This effects any society that lets religion make the rules of all of its members because there are other societies that make no such rules. They can progress. They will progress farther and faster. Eventually, these technologically-superior societies will take over the land and resources of the mythologically-impaired one, possibly kill, possibly enslave, possibly re-educate its people. Nonetheless, it's their rulers who have it. Their atheistic rulers will use words like "backwards" and "helping those poor superstitious (people) improve their lives."
Then, to add insult to injury, they insist upon being tax exempt in all of their riches, all of their holdings, all that is given to the church or spent on its behalf. Doesn't a church get the same police and fire protection as any other building in the community? That is paid for by all the people in the community, including the ones who do not support that religion. In some areas, their church (or megachurch), being exempt from zoning laws, is built and attracts such a crowd that it creates a traffic problem, for which everyone has to put in wider roads, traffic lights, and so forth.
Then, to top it off, they publish "voter guides", and preach on political topics. This is against the law for a tax exempt organization to do, but they do it anyway. And, it's mostly ignored when reported - unless there are a lot of witnesses and a great deal of physical evidence. Then they get a warning.... just don't get caught doing it....
Religions are a form of discrimination. It's "us" and "them". It puts up an artificial difference where there is no basic difference, such is the case with religious discrimination, or age discrimination, or sexual discrimination. These prejudices are used, misused, and abused to support war, fighting, terrorism, and all of that. Of course, religion is not the real reason - economics almost always is, and that is financial gain for the ruling class. It's easier to say, "Kill the infidels!" or "Kill those Godless (whoever)!" than to say, "I, as ruler, would like to expand my influence to the neighboring country. I would like to take over their money and resources, and bring it to this country. I will share it with my own ruling class, but you will get nothing for your efforts." The former gets patriots. The second gets nothing except the ruler thrown out of office.
Religions can mask insanity. Simple: What is the difference between "God is talking to me" and "My dog is talking to me"? Either is hearing voices which others cannot hear. One is considered pious and a candidate for sainthood when they die, and the other is the babbling of a psychotic killer. One is left alone or even esteemed, the other put into a mental hospital and given potent drugs for the rest of their life. The former can say, "God is talking to me and He tells me to (kill the infidels)." See previous paragraph. What's the difference? The existence of, or tolerance for, religion can allow some ludicrous concepts to be tolerated, unquestioned, for a long long time. By the time mental illness is recognized, the situation may be too far gone to remedy. Wouldn't it be better if the first time the person believes that a supernatural being is speaking to him/her, they could just put it out of their mind, view it as a thought from their own mind, and effectively "nip it in the bud"? Or, if that doesn't work, see it as a disturbance and seek help with the matter, when that help can be talking to re-formulate thoughts?
Religion can be used to excuse crime. If someone murders another, it's a homicide. If someone murders another, and they say that they "had to" because God didn't like (something about them - they're gay, they're committing adultery, they were performing abortions (killing baybeez), etc), it's viewed as having an excuse, and they may actually be acquitted.
Religion requires some people make careers out of it. They are paid for doing a non-function. Unless, you consider providing religion to be entertainment, which it can be but is a lot more insidious, pervasive, and life-altering than that. Essentially, it is a tax.
Same with property used by religion, including churches, cloth, books, artwork, finely-crafted items, gold, silver. musical instruments, and so forth. These buildings and personal property are taken out of common usage by the church, take someone's time to make them, and are unused for anything used by the religion. It is horrific for there to be a finely built church, richly decorated with finely-carved hardwood fixtures, handcrafted stone decorations, beautiful stained glass, fine woolen robes, gold and silver, when the area surrounding it is filled with hungry, desperately-poor, unclothed, cold, starving people. Why not sell off the gold, and instead of building a beautiful marble church, build a community well, aqueduct, or grain elevator? Why not have the priest working in a trade or as a merchant to improve the lot of the community, instead of telling them that they are poor, and GREAT rewards are in store for them in Heaven?
Religion can be used by nations and societies to commit atrocities - stoning of adulteresses (like in the middle east), killing unruly children, burning witches, genocides of Jews. and so forth. The cruel treatment/abuse of children by their religious parents or religious schools. No one in their right mind would approve of these things if it weren't for someone saying "Gawd wants it", and somehow convincing others of it. In other regards, it can be used to create laws mandating adherence to the religion for nonbelievers - laws against homosexuality, laws against poly-marriages (why is marriage limited to 1-man 1-woman other than religion?), laws against selling alcohol or gambling on Sunday, laws against (some) businesses being open on Sunday, and on and on. If I don't believe in your religion, why pass laws forcing me to follow its rules?
Religion can be, and often has been, used to stifle the progression of society. Religion gets into science, and refutes it. It might even kill the scientist if the scientist has evidence that differs from their bronze-age mythical book. Religion digs in its heels and insists that the world operates according to this book, and wastes time and resources implementing any of those discoveries. Religion gets in the way of medical research and refuses to even look at using certain things in science (e.g., stem cell research which is promising as a treatment for many conditions) because they believe their religion says something about it is wrong. You can get stem cells from foetuses, but you can also get them out of living adult or child bodies without significantly harming the person.
Religion makes its rules about the teaching of the young - and insist that everyone be taught those things - even nonbelievers in that religion. They insist that creationism be taught as science, they insist that biology be taught in a ridiculous mythical way, they insist that geology or astronomy be taught according to those rules.
This effects any society that lets religion make the rules of all of its members because there are other societies that make no such rules. They can progress. They will progress farther and faster. Eventually, these technologically-superior societies will take over the land and resources of the mythologically-impaired one, possibly kill, possibly enslave, possibly re-educate its people. Nonetheless, it's their rulers who have it. Their atheistic rulers will use words like "backwards" and "helping those poor superstitious (people) improve their lives."
Then, to add insult to injury, they insist upon being tax exempt in all of their riches, all of their holdings, all that is given to the church or spent on its behalf. Doesn't a church get the same police and fire protection as any other building in the community? That is paid for by all the people in the community, including the ones who do not support that religion. In some areas, their church (or megachurch), being exempt from zoning laws, is built and attracts such a crowd that it creates a traffic problem, for which everyone has to put in wider roads, traffic lights, and so forth.
Then, to top it off, they publish "voter guides", and preach on political topics. This is against the law for a tax exempt organization to do, but they do it anyway. And, it's mostly ignored when reported - unless there are a lot of witnesses and a great deal of physical evidence. Then they get a warning.... just don't get caught doing it....
