So Rhythm, you basically want to ban certain aspects of existing religions (the bits which should probably be illegal anyway). That's not the same as saying we should outright ban religion. A religion could exist in theory that didn't trespass on the liberties of others. You can't point at the bad bits of say, Islam, and use that as a reason to ban all religion. You could apply this logic elsewhere and end up banning all sorts of shit.
I agree with all the negative points you raise about religion (obviously, and believe me I don't intend to spend much time fighting their corner), but that doesn't mean you have, or should have, the right to remove it. People are free to do and say whatever they like. The only thing we should be combating is actions that infringe on the freedoms of others, which religion doesn't NECESSARILY do.
I agree with all the negative points you raise about religion (obviously, and believe me I don't intend to spend much time fighting their corner), but that doesn't mean you have, or should have, the right to remove it. People are free to do and say whatever they like. The only thing we should be combating is actions that infringe on the freedoms of others, which religion doesn't NECESSARILY do.
