There are no "Religions of peace".....

[Brian37]

So if the problem is systemic in the species, why rail against one group (religious)? If some people feel being religious helps them be better people or some people see religion as a more objective moral authority than society, doesn't that mean it makes a positive difference (whether entirely peaceful or not)?

Feeling that something does you good, is not the same as saying it has any real divine power to make you only do good. It only means the person holding that label as the source of good means they believe it does.

The reality worldwide in our entire species history, is that we have always displayed both acts of cruelty and compassion. Claiming that one is good because of a label only means they believe the label is the source. It does not mean the label has any real power. 

I believe someone when they say they believe it is the source.. Not the point. I simply doubt that is where our behaviors as a species are coming from.

[tackattack]

Some things act as force multipliers for our worst impulses.  Just as before, while there's a wide range of nasty things that both the religious and non religious share, there are nasty things unique to the religious just as there are nasty things unique to specific religions and specific forms of religion.

Note, though, that you went ahead and said "but mom, timmy hit him too!"

Some people feel many things, that doesn;t mean that their feels are an accurate representation of reality, so..no...feeling like something helps doesn't actually make a thing a force for good.

I'm told that heroin feels great. The objective moral authority of religion tends to be something decidedly non-objective. I don't actually concern myself much with violence in some non-specified form, so I'd be the wrong guy to ask. I think that a measured application of violence can be a force for good. I don't long for a world where everyone sings kumbayah so much as a world where shitty people are more terrified of the good ones than the good ones are of them. My only comments on thus notion of "religions of peace" is that there just isn't any such thing. There has never been a religion that can't be leveraged in equal measure to justify violence. That's more a feature than a bug...the violent ones aren't getting it wrong, we're engaging in escapism by imagining such a thing in the first place.

I will agree that it is a force of escapism, and the fact that it's a feature is exactly my point. It involves people. It's systemic across infrastructures (whether religious, government, SJW cause, etc.). What you and Brian are implying is that Religion is bad because it's not peaceful, but nothing is. What it amounts to you both saying, when you agree that it's systemic and a feature, is that people are violent, organizations are violent, let's just not have any organizations, let's start with dismantling religion because I don't like it. Let's just be a little more honest here and call a spade a spade. The problem, and solution will be in the individual.

What I disagree with is "feeling like something helps doesn't actually make a thing a force for good. ". Believing that something is the reason for your good informs you that what you're doing is good. Feeling and belief (as well as hope, fear, justice, etc.) are because of, and the cause of, action. I'm aware this isn't always a societal agreed good, but individually, those things we perceive as being a positive sounding board, inform us that we are right (even when we aren't).

So if the problem is systemic in the species, why rail against one group (religious)? If some people feel being religious helps them be better people or some people see religion as a more objective moral authority than society, doesn't that mean it makes a positive difference (whether entirely peaceful or not)?

Feeling that something does you good, is not the same as saying it has any real divine power to make you only do good. It only means the person holding that label as the source of good means they believe it does.

The reality worldwide in our entire species history, is that we have always displayed both acts of cruelty and compassion. Claiming that one is good because of a label only means they believe the label is the source. It does not mean the label has any real power. 

I believe someone when they say they believe it is the source.. Not the point. I simply doubt that is where our behaviors as a species are coming from.

To address your point and continue with what I was saying to Gae, It's not the label that holds the power, it's the Belief backed by how we label ourselves and how others label us that does have power. One is subjectively good if their personal subjective morality defines them as a good doer. One is considered socially good when they're morality is followed and aligns with the societal definitions of morality. Example: You could find executions as murder personally but your society accepts that the moral impetus for justice requires it and labels it moral. That person could either believe they're doing good by society or doing good by themselves, and it will inform a belief followed by an action.

Their behaviors come from far more things than we could map, and I'm not aware of it being done successfully yet. The myriad of beliefs and feelings that inform and spur us to action is not just one thing, as your argument implies. Who are you to say that the fact I believe alien's will abduct me if I go to Nevada is keeping me out of Nevada? Can you say it's not the cause? It may not be a reliable belief, or even the most important one, but it still would inform if I held it true.
Bringing it back to religion, such an emotive force (a type of force multiplier as Gae said) as powerful as religion, does have more power than say, a belief that Popsicle are tasty. A powerful force that can make things spiral quickly either god or bad, based on the direction of the organization and the individual.

[Brian37]

Some things act as force multipliers for our worst impulses.  Just as before, while there's a wide range of nasty things that both the religious and non religious share, there are nasty things unique to the religious just as there are nasty things unique to specific religions and specific forms of religion.

Note, though, that you went ahead and said "but mom, timmy hit him too!"

Some people feel many things, that doesn;t mean that their feels are an accurate representation of reality, so..no...feeling like something helps doesn't actually make a thing a force for good.  

I'm told that heroin feels great.  The objective moral authority of religion tends to be something decidedly non-objective.  I don't actually concern myself much with violence in some non-specified form, so I'd be the wrong guy to ask.  I think that a measured application of violence can be a force for good.  I don't long for a world where everyone sings kumbayah so much as a world where shitty people are more terrified of the good ones than the good ones are of them.  My only comments on thus notion of "religions of peace" is that there just isn't any such thing.  There has never been a religion that can't be leveraged in equal measure to justify violence.  That's more a feature than a bug...the violent ones aren't getting it wrong, we're engaging in escapism by imagining such a thing in the first place.

I will agree that it is a force of escapism, and the fact that it's a feature is exactly my point. It involves people. It's systemic across infrastructures (whether religious, government, SJW cause, etc.). What you and Brian are implying is that Religion is bad because it's not peaceful, but nothing is. What it amounts to you both saying, when you agree that it's systemic and a feature, is that people are violent, organizations are violent, let's just not have any organizations, let's start with dismantling religion because I don't like it. Let's just be a little more honest here and call a spade a spade. The problem, and solution will be in the individual.

What I disagree with is "feeling like something helps doesn't actually make a thing a force for good. ". Believing that something is the reason for your good informs you that what you're doing is good. Feeling and belief (as well as hope, fear, justice, etc.) are because of, and the cause of, action. I'm aware this isn't always a societal agreed good, but individually, those things we perceive as being a positive sounding board, inform us that we are right (even when we aren't).

Feeling that something does you good, is not the same as saying it has any real divine power to make you only do good. It only means the person holding that label as the source of good means they believe it does.

The reality worldwide in our entire species history, is that we have always displayed both acts of cruelty and compassion. Claiming that one is good because of a label only means they believe the label is the source. It does not mean the label has any real power. 

I believe someone when they say they believe it is the source.. Not the point. I simply doubt that is where our behaviors as a species are coming from.

To address your point and continue with what I was saying to Gae, It's not the label that holds the power, it's the Belief backed by how we label ourselves and how others label us that does have power. One is subjectively good if their personal subjective morality defines them as a good doer. One is considered socially good when they're morality is followed and aligns with the societal definitions of morality. Example: You could find executions as murder personally but your society accepts that the moral impetus for justice requires it and labels it moral. That person could either believe they're doing good by society or doing good by themselves, and it will inform a belief followed by an action.

Their behaviors come from far more things than we could map, and I'm not aware of it being done successfully yet. The myriad of beliefs and feelings that inform and spur us to action is not just one thing, as your argument implies. Who are you to say that the fact I believe alien's will abduct me if I go to Nevada is keeping me out of Nevada? Can you say it's not the cause? It may not be a reliable belief, or even the most important one, but it still would inform if I held it true.
Bringing it back to religion, such an emotive force (a type of force multiplier as Gae said) as powerful as religion, does have more power than say, a belief that Popsicle are tasty. A powerful force that can make things spiral quickly either god or bad, based on the direction of the organization and the individual.

"It is not the label that holds the power"

I AGREE, stop right there.

If we both agree on that, then the only logical conclusion to be made is that the belief is a mere belief, not a requirement.

If one can be good and do good being a Muslim, or not being a Muslim, and one can do good being a Christian, or not being a Christian, and one can be good being a Jew or not being a Jew, and one can be good being a Buddhist or not being a Buddhist, and one can be good being a Hindu, and not being a Hindu, and one can be good being an atheist, and not being an atheist, that says to me our behaviors are in our genes, not in the labels we assign ourselves,

"Power" so what? Again, the ancient Egyptians truly believed in their gods as much as any current believer does today. But that "power" isn't a real power, it is a false perception that can have the real effect of social grouping. 

If religion and god belief were a requirement for all life to evolve, one would expect to see other life create religions and gods too. If any one religion or god claim were true, one could expect also, to be able to universally demonstrate it as true beyond personal bias,

The only reason religions exist and god claims exist, is because they are nothing more than our species comic book projection of our own qualities in comic book form. They are nothing more than  superstitious politics as a false justification to create excuses to have power over resources,

[tackattack]

---

I will agree that it is a force of escapism, and the fact that it's a feature is exactly my point. It involves people. It's systemic across infrastructures (whether religious, government, SJW cause, etc.). What you and Brian are implying is that Religion is bad because it's not peaceful, but nothing is. What it amounts to you both saying, when you agree that it's systemic and a feature, is that people are violent, organizations are violent, let's just not have any organizations, let's start with dismantling religion because I don't like it. Let's just be a little more honest here and call a spade a spade. The problem, and solution will be in the individual.

What I disagree with is "feeling like something helps doesn't actually make a thing a force for good. ". Believing that something is the reason for your good informs you that what you're doing is good. Feeling and belief (as well as hope, fear, justice, etc.) are because of, and the cause of, action. I'm aware this isn't always a societal agreed good, but individually, those things we perceive as being a positive sounding board, inform us that we are right (even when we aren't).


To address your point and continue with what I was saying to Gae, It's not the label that holds the power, it's the Belief backed by how we label ourselves and how others label us that does have power. One is subjectively good if their personal subjective morality defines them as a good doer. One is considered socially good when they're morality is followed and aligns with the societal definitions of morality. Example: You could find executions as murder personally but your society accepts that the moral impetus for justice requires it and labels it moral. That person could either believe they're doing good by society or doing good by themselves, and it will inform a belief followed by an action.

Their behaviors come from far more things than we could map, and I'm not aware of it being done successfully yet. The myriad of beliefs and feelings that inform and spur us to action is not just one thing, as your argument implies. Who are you to say that the fact I believe alien's will abduct me if I go to Nevada is keeping me out of Nevada? Can you say it's not the cause? It may not be a reliable belief, or even the most important one, but it still would inform if I held it true.
Bringing it back to religion, such an emotive force (a type of force multiplier as Gae said) as powerful as religion, does have more power than say, a belief that Popsicle are tasty. A powerful force that can make things spiral quickly either god or bad, based on the direction of the organization and the individual.

"It is not the label that holds the power"

I AGREE, stop right there.

If we both agree on that, then the only logical conclusion to be made is that the belief is a mere belief, not a requirement.

If one can be good and do good being a Muslim, or not being a Muslim, and one can do good being a Christian, or not being a Christian, and one can be good being a Jew or not being a Jew, and one can be good being a Buddhist or not being a Buddhist, and one can be good being a Hindu, and not being a Hindu, and one can be good being an atheist, and not being an atheist, that says to me our behaviors are in our genes, not in the labels we assign ourselves,

"Power" so what? Again, the ancient Egyptians truly believed in their gods as much as any current believer does today. But that "power" isn't a real power, it is a false perception that can have the real effect of social grouping. 

If religion and god belief were a requirement for all life to evolve, one would expect to see other life create religions and gods too. If any one religion or god claim were true, one could expect also, to be able to universally demonstrate it as true beyond personal bias,

The only reason religions exist and god claims exist, is because they are nothing more than our species comic book projection of our own qualities in comic book form. They are nothing more than  superstitious politics as a false justification to create excuses to have power over resources,

---

OK I'm content that we found the first part of common ground. If you don't want to discuss the beliefs formed from labels, and their affect to the good of a society, then that's fine. We can also agree, I believe, that me labeling myself as Christian, has no "God give" or otherworldly power to magically make me good. Since you called an all stop, we can rest it there. Happy Friday!

[The Grand Nudger]

I will agree that it is a force of escapism, and the fact that it's a feature is exactly my point. It involves people. It's systemic across infrastructures (whether religious, government, SJW cause, etc.). What you and Brian are implying is that Religion is bad because it's not peaceful, but nothing is. What it amounts to you both saying, when you agree that it's systemic and a feature, is that people are violent, organizations are violent, let's just not have any organizations, let's start with dismantling religion because I don't like it. Let's just be a little more honest here and call a spade a spade. The problem, and solution will be in the individual.

What I disagree with is "feeling like something helps doesn't actually make a thing a force for good. ". Believing that something is the reason for your good informs you that what you're doing is good. Feeling and belief (as well as hope, fear, justice, etc.) are because of, and the cause of, action. I'm aware this isn't always a societal agreed good, but individually, those things we perceive as being a positive sounding board, inform us that we are right (even when we aren't).

Meh, I'll let Brian handle whatever it is Brian thinks.  I only put on my Brian decoder ring when shits falling apart.

I'm not even sure what to add here, ofc there are things common across this or that two things, but if there are no things unique to a specific representative than there is no differentiating one thing from another.  
Your religion...for example..is fucking terrible.  Historically terrible and ideologically terrible...in ways unique to itself..or, you know, not..in which case, it;s no different than any other thing and why is there even a name for it?

"Moooom! Timmy hit him toooooo!"

Yeah, maybe, but timmy had his own reasons, which were different than your reasons, or, I guess, they weren't and there's no difference between you and timmy, no difference between christianity and germanic paganism.

You tell me, lol.

On the other count, I'll just repeat that folks tell me that heroin feels great. If feelin great makes something a force for good..then heroin must be wonderful.

[Brian37]

---

"It is not the label that holds the power"

I AGREE, stop right there.

If we both agree on that, then the only logical conclusion to be made is that the belief is a mere belief, not a requirement.

If one can be good and do good being a Muslim, or not being a Muslim, and one can do good being a Christian, or not being a Christian, and one can be good being a Jew or not being a Jew, and one can be good being a Buddhist or not being a Buddhist, and one can be good being a Hindu, and not being a Hindu, and one can be good being an atheist, and not being an atheist, that says to me our behaviors are in our genes, not in the labels we assign ourselves,

"Power" so what? Again, the ancient Egyptians truly believed in their gods as much as any current believer does today. But that "power" isn't a real power, it is a false perception that can have the real effect of social grouping. 

If religion and god belief were a requirement for all life to evolve, one would expect to see other life create religions and gods too. If any one religion or god claim were true, one could expect also, to be able to universally demonstrate it as true beyond personal bias,

The only reason religions exist and god claims exist, is because they are nothing more than our species comic book projection of our own qualities in comic book form. They are nothing more than  superstitious politics as a false justification to create excuses to have power over resources,

---

OK I'm content that we found the first part of common ground. If you don't want to discuss the beliefs formed from labels, and their affect to the good of a society, then that's fine. We can also agree, I believe, that me labeling myself as Christian, has no "God give" or otherworldly power to magically make me good. Since you called an all stop, we can rest it there. Happy Friday!

There is nothing to discuss once you agree we are the same species. The rest is our personal bias.

I'd hope you agree we are the same species. And if you do agree we are, then the more rational conclusion is that humans make up religions as an excuse to ignore that we all want the same things. The only difference between a follower of any religion, and an atheist, is that the atheist does not assign our behaviors to old mythology, super cognitions or superstition. But, like the religious, most humans, including most atheists, love their families, love their friends and co workers, and seek like minded others.

[tackattack]

---

I will agree that it is a force of escapism, and the fact that it's a feature is exactly my point. It involves people. It's systemic across infrastructures (whether religious, government, SJW cause, etc.). What you and Brian are implying is that Religion is bad because it's not peaceful, but nothing is. What it amounts to you both saying, when you agree that it's systemic and a feature, is that people are violent, organizations are violent, let's just not have any organizations, let's start with dismantling religion because I don't like it. Let's just be a little more honest here and call a spade a spade. The problem, and solution will be in the individual.

What I disagree with is "feeling like something helps doesn't actually make a thing a force for good. ". Believing that something is the reason for your good informs you that what you're doing is good. Feeling and belief (as well as hope, fear, justice, etc.) are because of, and the cause of, action. I'm aware this isn't always a societal agreed good, but individually, those things we perceive as being a positive sounding board, inform us that we are right (even when we aren't).

Meh, I'll let Brian handle whatever it is Brian thinks.  I only put on my Brian decoder ring when shits falling apart.

I'm not even sure what to add here, ofc there are things common across this or that two things, but if there are no things unique to a specific representative than there is no differentiating one thing from another.  
Your religion...for example..is fucking terrible.  Historically terrible and ideologically terrible...in ways unique to itself..or, you know, not..in which case, it;s no different than any other thing and why is there even a name for it?

"Moooom! Timmy hit him toooooo!"

Yeah, maybe, but timmy had his own reasons, which were different than your reasons, or, I guess, they weren't and there's no difference between you and timmy, no difference between christianity and germanic paganism.

You tell me, lol.

On the other count, I'll just repeat that folks tell me that heroin feels great. If feelin great makes something a force for good..then heroin must be wonderful.

---

There are unique attributes. Should we list them all and rate them? It’s not about personally feeling good. It’s about having an objective moral authority and explination of the supernatural. If there are specific reasons modern Christianity is uniquely atrocious to society, feel free to trot them out

Btw, doing this on my phone sucks donkey balls.
@“Brian37” yes I agree we are both human, I just disagree that atheism is more rational solution.

[The Grand Nudger]

There are unique attributes. Should we list them all and rate them?

You can if you like, : shrugs :

It’s not about personally feeling good.

Then your earlier comment to that effect crumbles in on itself.

It’s about having an objective moral authority and explination of the supernatural.

There either is or there isn;t such a thing as an objective moral authority.  The existence of the supernatural is wholly irrelevant to that, and, as usual, the supernatural explains nothing in this or any other regard.

If there are specific reasons modern Christianity is uniquely atrocious to society, feel free to trot them out

You onboard with killing some random asshole to pay for your parking tickets? You onboard with a tax exempt institution sucking up state and federal funds to indoctrinate children into the usual christian ignorance and bigotries..when they aren't shaking down grannies to fund the same? You reckon the current potus was sent by god to save isreal by pushing the middle east further towards thermonuclear war? You all about the separation of families and alienation of affection due to doctrinal differences between the various christian cults or flat non-belief? The elevation of cultural and individual bigotries to the proper function of the cosmos? Bombing abortion clinics, or hey..trying to pull some handmaid shit with the power of state and federal governments?

Let's just start there, lol, or not. You don't actually have to answer any of those but I would've appreciated it had you not feigned knowledge here. I'm sure you can come up with your own list of gripes about contemporary jesusism, every jesusist can. That's been an intra-party pastime ever since the birth of the movement...the effects of which could also be added to the list above. Do me a favor, though, save the timmy hit him too response, this time, if you feel the need to respond.

Appeals to hypocrisy, such as the one you're trying to launch...again... can only establish that both parties are in the wrong in some particular, which is unlikely to be a point of disagreement between us, and this will be the third time I've had occasion to mention that in three responses. I guess we can add that to the list, jesusism has apparently made it impossible for you to carry this conversation with me or comprehend what I'm saying.

[tackattack]

---

It’s not about personally feeling good.

Then your earlier comment to that effect crumbles in on itself.

It’s about having an objective moral authority and explination of the supernatural.

There either is or there isn;t such a thing as an objective moral authority.  The existence of the supernatural is wholly irrelevant to that, and, as usual, the supernatural explains nothing in this or any other regard.

If there are specific reasons modern Christianity is uniquely atrocious to society, feel free to trot them out

You onboard with killing some random asshole to pay for your parking tickets?  You onboard with a tax exempt institution sucking up state and federal funds to indoctrinate children into the usual christian ignorance and bigotries..when they aren't shaking down grannies to fund the same?  You reckon the current potus was sent by god to save isreal by pushing the middle east further towards thermonuclear war?  You all about the separation of families and alienation of affection due to doctrinal differences between the various christian cults or flat non-belief?  The elevation of cultural and individual bigotries to the proper function of the cosmos?  Bombing abortion clinics, or hey..trying to pull some handmaid shit with the power of state and federal governments?

Let's just start there, lol, or not.  You don't actually have to answer any of those but I would've appreciated it had you not feigned knowledge here.  I'm sure you can come up with your own list of gripes about contemporary jesusism, every jesusist can.  That's been an intra-party pastime ever since the birth of the movement...the effects of which could also be added to the list above.  Do me a favor, though, save the timmy hit him too response, this time, if you feel the need to respond.

Appeals to hypocrisy, such as the one you're trying to launch...again... can only establish that both parties are in the wrong in some particular, which is unlikely to be a point of disagreement between us, and this will be the third time I've had occasion to mention that in three responses.  I guess we can add that to the list, jesusism has apparently made it impossible for you to carry this conversation with me or comprehend what I'm saying.

---

You said "Some people feel many things, that doesn;t mean that their feels are an accurate representation of reality, so..no...feeling like something helps doesn't actually make a thing a force for good. " I didn't claim it was a truth of reality but an influencer of reality. Just because something feels right, doesn't mean it is right. That's the main reason for searches for objective truth, which I thought you were a proponent of. It's a fairly simple and common concept called positive reinforcement. The crux of the issue though isn't about the feel goods, but that feeling good about something can lead to good actions which causes good systemically.

The OP was attempting to frame the thread as a universal claim (that all religions are not peaceful) while at the same time acknowledging that people as a whole aren't peaceful and the problem exists in many facets of civilization. I was simply pointing that out as preposterous.

I wasn't feigning knowledge. We both know the church as a whole has and does some atrocious claims, but since you seemed to want to get specific, I was allowing you to elaborate. You can't fault me for the Timmy hit me too perspective when one person is trying to make a generalization and another is getting specific. No, I am not down with a tax exempt institution sucking up public tax funds. Does that even happen? The rest of your list isn't dogmatic, organizational or doctrinal and smacks of typical HUMAN behavior on every facet.

Do you believe people are responsible for the evil they commit or that God is? I feel they are personally accountable.
Do you believe that "bad religion" negates personal accountability? I don't, but you have yet to prove that "bad religion" exists, much less the responsibility on God or an organization. As an example, I know that the Catholic Church has been doing horrible shit to kids for a long time and then covering it up. I hold the individuals responsible for their actions. I don't (nor do I think they do) blame religious doctrine or God for that. If the people in the food lines feel it's their calling to take care of the homeless, widows and orphans cite their beliefs, doctrine and God as the reason why the do it then that reason (at least partially) informs their beliefs and spur their action improving society doesn't it? Being religious doesn't prevent you or excuse you from doing bad things. I will admit that it does really speak towards human drive to commit evil that, despite indoctrination into "loving religion" and societal pressures, people still do atrocious things. I just don't see how you're arguing that simply having a particular moral framework is by definition automatically detrimental as a whole.

[The Grand Nudger]

You said "Some people feel many things, that doesn;t mean that their feels are an accurate representation of reality, so..no...feeling like something helps doesn't actually make a thing a force for good. " I didn't claim it was a truth of reality but an influencer of reality. Just because something feels right, doesn't mean it is right. That's the main reason for searches for objective truth, which I thought you were a proponent of. It's a fairly simple and common concept called positive reinforcement. The crux of the issue though isn't about the feel goods, but that feeling good about something can lead to good actions which causes good systemically.

Feeling good about that something doesn;t actually mean that it will lead to good actions.  I don't know how many times or how many ways I'll have to restate this?

The OP was attempting to frame the thread as a universal claim (that all religions are not peaceful) while at the same time acknowledging that people as a whole aren't peaceful and the problem exists in many facets of civilization. I was simply pointing that out as preposterous.  

What's preposterous about it?  Do you think that your religion, of killing the better man, is "peaceful", somehow?  It's fundamental article of faith and long history to the contrary would have to be entirely ignored.  You may feel comfortable discarding the one..but you can't discard the other and remain christian.  

I wasn't feigning knowledge. We both know the church as a whole has and does some atrocious claims, but since you seemed to want to get specific, I was allowing you to elaborate.  You can't fault me for the Timmy hit me too perspective when one person is trying to make a generalization and another is getting specific. No, I am not down with a tax exempt institution sucking up public tax funds. Does that even happen? The rest of your list isn't dogmatic, organizational or doctrinal and smacks of typical HUMAN behavior on every facet.

I can actually fault you for it, because it's an atrocious argument -on it's own grounds-..excusing nothing.

Do you believe people are responsible for the evil they commit or that God is? I feel they are personally accountable.
Do you believe that "bad religion" negates personal accountability? I don't, but you have yet to prove that "bad religion" exists, much less the responsibility on God or an organization. As an example, I know that the Catholic Church has been doing horrible shit to kids for a long time and then covering it up. I hold the individuals responsible for their actions. I don't (nor do I think they do) blame religious doctrine or God for that. If the people in the food lines feel it's their calling to take care of the homeless, widows and orphans cite their beliefs, doctrine and God as the reason why the do it then that reason (at least partially) informs their beliefs and spur their action improving society doesn't it?  Being religious doesn't prevent you or excuse you from doing bad things. I will admit that it does really speak towards human drive to commit evil that, despite indoctrination into "loving religion" and societal pressures, people still do atrocious things. I just don't see how you're arguing that simply having a particular moral framework is by definition automatically detrimental as a whole.

If a person can be convinced that evil is righteous than it's very difficult to pin the pious and holy atrocity that they've committed fully on themselves.  

You don't have a "particular moral framework" - your religion is not a moral system...lol, it's a transactionary scheme meant to escape accountability for your own actions by killing the better man.  That you then go on to blather about morality (and objective morality, as well) is a wonderful example of the ability of indoctrination to subvert the better angels of our nature.

If you want to tally up souplines against the bullshit that we both know religions have gotten themselves into (and the bullshit tha you would never accept -as- bullshit, see above) then I;ll just remind you that people manage to form souplines without all that shit - whereas no one can justify atrocity by reference to divine fiat of their "moral system" without an explicit belief in and invocation of their god. Then, ofc, theres the nagging fact that those souplines were very often used explicitly as propaganda and recruitment tools.

That's something that timmy the non believer can't actually do, even if he can throw 99 blows to your hundred on the other poor fucker..you've got that one extra knife to the gut. If religion is as profound and unique a motivator as we both are likely to agree that it is...then to any extent that it provides the faithful with some tacit or explicit justification for shittiness..that's it's unique and profound possession.

You know what I've always found amusing? How often the faithful don't realize how much anti-theists like myself broadly agree with them about their religions, and the articles of their faith. How much of it isn't based on rejection or doubt, but acceptance. If your god exists, and it is as your religion claims it to be...then it's no religion of peace. If you espouse the beliefs it's alleged to have certified then you will only manage to be cruel and petty yourself..and if you choose to discard those things you know to be cruel and petty then you will only be following your own conscience, not the will of any lord or strictures of any religion.

Your's is a religion of fear, and predation, and terror, and ghoulish lies - and it's only through the common human decency of it;s followers winning out that anyone has ever managed to convince themselves otherwise, imo, ofc.