I don't like the question posed in the title of the thread. Context matters so it depends upon what situation we are "opposing" .
I cannot oppose human nature, and our evolution will always produce irrational thoughts and claims, because evolution's goal is only getting to the point of reproduction, it will still produce people with delusions.
And since I myself value my own rights in the freedom to say what I want, in that context it would be unwise for me to oppose the rights of others, including religion. Strictly from a human rights context, it would not be pragmatic to oppress others and not allow them to make claims I find absurd, because I myself want the right to challenge those claims, which many theists would not want me to do.
BUT, as far as the intrusion religion can have on things like education and science and politics, I appose it when those who advocate it want taboo status where others are expected to sit at the back of the bus and never challenge them. I appose special favoritism by government that puts one group above or more special than another.
AND then there is the context of credibility of ANY religious claim. I do oppose deity claims from a logical and scientific standpoint because there is simply no evidence for such claims.
So it depends what we are "opposing".
I cannot oppose human nature, and our evolution will always produce irrational thoughts and claims, because evolution's goal is only getting to the point of reproduction, it will still produce people with delusions.
And since I myself value my own rights in the freedom to say what I want, in that context it would be unwise for me to oppose the rights of others, including religion. Strictly from a human rights context, it would not be pragmatic to oppress others and not allow them to make claims I find absurd, because I myself want the right to challenge those claims, which many theists would not want me to do.
BUT, as far as the intrusion religion can have on things like education and science and politics, I appose it when those who advocate it want taboo status where others are expected to sit at the back of the bus and never challenge them. I appose special favoritism by government that puts one group above or more special than another.
AND then there is the context of credibility of ANY religious claim. I do oppose deity claims from a logical and scientific standpoint because there is simply no evidence for such claims.
So it depends what we are "opposing".
