How would you respond to these common theist statements?

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

1.  Religion is the foundation of society.

Let's assume for the mo' that this is true (it's debatable, but let's play along).  History has produced one helluva lot of societies, some intensely religious (the states governed by god-kings, some of the early American colonies) and some significantly less so (modern France, some of the Greek city-states (exempting Athens, natch).  The degree to which a society is religious seems to have precious little effect on how successful it is, but it DOES seem to have a deleterious effect on the well-being of it citizens.  In other words, the less bound-up with Godism a society is, the happier its people seem to be (check of claim:  not a lot of non-religious Swedes are opting for a move to Uganda).

As far as atheists being against churches being a 'productive community', I'm unaware of a single atheist who objects to a church that feeds the hungry or houses the homeless.  But since there are secular organisations that do the same thing, it seems pretty clear that being religious isn't a requirement to being 'productive'.  In fact, I'd be willing to wager that church members who go out of their way to do these 'good works' would continue to do them, even if they lost their faith.


2.  Religion is the foundation of morality.

Ok, but morality seems a pretty fluid concept.  Other than the basics (don't kill people, don't steal things, etc), religious has produced some pretty horrific moral precepts - burning witches, not taking your kids to the doctor, and so forth.  The fact that some non-human animals (crows, bonobos) exhibit moral behaviour seems to indicate that religious belief is not necessary to behave morally.

3.  Science (or atheists) cannot tell us right from wrong.

If true (and it isn't), so what?  Religion doesn't exactly have a stellar record on telling right from wrong, either.  Slavery is 'right'.  Killing disobedient children is 'right'.  Enslaving virgins captured in war is 'right'.  Puh-lease.

What enables us to tell right from wrong is the human experience.  Religion, it is true, has often codified these things, but writing down something that everyone already knows doesn't really give you the right to claim a monopoly on virtue.

4.  Religion made history.

Partly true, and a cruel and bloody history it has been.  But this is hardly a plus for religion.  And the notion that atheists are unaware of religion's impact on the history of our species is simply laughable.

Boru

[Regina]

1. Religion is the foundation of society.

I think this is just an idea we've got used to. As the post above said, there have been many societies, especially in modern times, that have prospered without religion. I don't really have much to add to what Brian already said because his answer is perfect.

2. Religion is the foundation of morality

I think anyone with a brain and some basic education, can work out that things that negatively impact other people are wrong and things that positively impact other people (as well as yourself) should be encouraged. Religion doesn't have a monopoly on morals, and if you think you can't be moral without an ancient book that just means you're incapable of thinking for yourself.

3. (Continuation of 2) Science (or atheists) cannot tell us right from wrong.

Neither can religious people. Again as Brian said, a history of slavery, dehumanisation and suppression of the female and killing in the name of religion doesn't set a good track record for religion's ability to tell right from wrong.


4. Religion made history.

Quite. Such a history we can't quite imagine where we might be today, were it not for the thousand year period between 500-1500AD, where the absolutism of religion almost completely stagnated human development.