One of my problems

[Mr Camel]

If enough people want something, they will work hard to make sure they get it.

Yep. Just look at the Intelligent Design movement in America.

[Tiberius]

You speak about protecting individual freedoms; well what about the freedom of your neighbour to spend their money in whatever way they want? Why should you (or anyone else) have a say in what your neighbour does with *his* money?

umm, because it can pay for evil deeds. Its the same a the government arresting someone who wires money to terrorist organizations. You make it sound like anyone anywhere can buy anything they want....

Yet the obvious difference here is that the vast majority of people who donate to churches do so for good reasons; because they want to be charitable, and they think they are helping. Granted, some money might find its way to fund some "evil" actions, but this is irrelevant to the point for two reasons:

1) The majority of the donations do not go towards things like this. They go towards charitable causes.
2) The people donating don't know their money will be used to fund evil (if it even is), and to compare them to the government stopping the wiring of money to terrorists is completely absurd.

As for making it sound like anyone anywhere can buy anything they want; it was you who brought up protecting individual freedoms. Well guess what, that's an individual freedom. It might not be implemented very well under most governments, but that doesn't make it any less of a freedom. If there is a demand for it, there should be a market for it (and there invariably will be, whether it is black or otherwise).

[Mr Camel]

I think churches should be banned as they exist today.

Furiidomu While you have touched on one or two good points, from what I've skimmed in this thread, you've still got a lot to learn about religion and human rights.

Adrian touched on the inevitability of new founded church ideals and buildings.. where if you eradicate the existing churches, you'll only find brand new ones elsewhere. Specifically in America, religion is probably the most powerful influence of our time and this makes them very adaptive. And who's to say they wont be even more of a threat to us. I can see that possibility as they would have significant incentive to hate the government and people who don't believe as they do. Or at least, more than they already do.

The problem with your idea of banning Church altogether is in order to do such a thing, you have to ignore some very important humanitarian rights. You need to understand this...
Taking away their freedom to attend church goes against the constitution that America was founded on. But regardless of the American constitution - if we, Atheists and Humanists etc, took away their freedoms to attend church and to give money to whom or what they wish, we would be no better than them. And we would stain the very core of what we believe.


Please understand, I am not attacking you personally and neither of us are here to do so. I write this solely to aid your growth as an Atheist.

[Minimalist]

Actually, Furii, you'd be playing right into their hands.

The fuckers love to pretend that they are martyrs being persecuted for their silly beliefs.

[Oldandeasilyconfused]

Furiidomu Wrote: History has shown that if we give religion the freedom to exist in any from, it ultimately entails them commiting 'acts that harm other people'.

Another view:

Sorry,that's an assertion of an opinion,not a fact based on evidence. Wars are never begun over matters of principle or for the sake of religion,although religion and/or claims of moral superiority are invariably used to justify wars. By that I mean those things are used by cynical old men to gull our stupid young men into going to another country to kill their stupid young men.


Religions reflect the societies which invent them. Religions exist because they meet a range of human needs. As those needs are met in other ways,religion declines. This can be seen by looking at the more affluent societies. There seems to be a correlation between education , affluence and lack of belief,and conversely,wth poverty,ignorance and superstition.

I heve seen no evidnece that abolishing churches /religion would make any noticeable difference to the long term behaviour of humans individually or as a species. If just a matter of law being passed,believers would ignore the laws,and religion could become even stronger.(look at Poland and Russia once Communism collapsed)

IF everyone simply stopped believing overnight, humans would remain the same greedy,stupid animals we have always been,motivated by self interest above all. We would immediately invent or modify something else to justify our every behaviour.

"Should be abolished" Morally? The basis of morality is pragmatism.I can see no pragmatic justification for the abolition of churches or of religion.

The question seems more matter of adolescent self absorption and limited knowledeg of history than any practical reasons based on evidence.

[Rev. Rye]

While I would like to see Islam and Christianity go the way of the ancient Greco-Roman cults, I would prefer to not outlaw them, although I admit that a lot of this opinion is for practical reasons; making it illegal will lead to persecutions, and then Fundies will actually be right to claim that they are persecuted, and giving fundamentalists a legitimate grievance is not something we should see happening.

[Godscreated]

Thanks to all who have responded to Furiidomu, I also believe that each person has a right to live as they see fit as long as it is within the laws of the land. Furiidomu I believe that you have the right to believe as you do even though that belief is directed at me personally. I have faith in the laws of our country to protect people from radical ideas like yours and as for the radical religious nuts out there that break the laws I say punish them with equal justice. Furiidomu reasonable people see the importance of the freedom to practice their beliefs whether they are atheist, christian, muslim and ect. and this has been shown to you by the replies you've received to your post.

Welcome to the forum.

[Caecilian]

3 things about banning religion:

1. It could only be done in the context of a totalitarian state. The USSR, Maoist China, The Khmer Rouge all did their best to eradicate religion. Do you really want to live in a society like that?

2. It doesn't work- persecution can even make religion prosper. After 70-odd years of official atheism, enforced with brutal rigour, Russia emerged with roughly 2/3 of the population being orthodox christian.

3. Even if it did work, the outcome would imo be undesirable. I'd like to live in a world where people are atheists because they've looked at the options, thought stuff through, and made up their own minds. I don't want to live in a world in which state propaganda has brainwashed people into being atheists.

[Furiidomu]

if we, Atheists and Humanists etc, took away their freedoms to attend church and to give money to whom or what they wish, we would be no better than them. And we would stain the very core of what we believe.

Please understand, I am not attacking you personally and neither of us are here to do so. I write this solely to aid your growth as an Atheist.

Thank you. I think I am beginning to understand what you and the others are saying. I still have reservations about giving freedom to those whom may not deserve it, but I see your point.

[Mr Camel]

Well it's a good start