Ban Religion - are you for or against it and why?

[Cinjin]

Don't get me wrong - I would totally trample all over someone's religious freedom if it meant that I could save the world from the violence of Islam and the soft tyranny of Christianity. (hell, it's not like they haven't trampled all over mine at times.)

But banning anything (absolutely anything) doesn't work. Humans by nature want what they are not allowed to have. Plus Rome already tried banning Christianity and look how well THAT worked out. It left us with the scourge of Europe - the Roman Catholic Church.

Nope. As stupid and horrible as religion is, it must be allowed to die off on it's own. At most we can try to speed up the process with educating young minds, but other than that - we're stuck until humanity as a whole figures it out. Imagine being there when the last steeple is torn down - not out of anger, but because people just don't give a shit about myths and fairy tales anymore. Awesome.

[twocompulsive]

Banning religion is attacking the symptom, not the cause. What you need to go after is human nature and for that you would have to overthrow 200, 000 years of Evolution so on a practical level it really isn't feasible. Also the figures themselves just belie it too. There are 2. 2 billion Christians, 1. 3 billion Muslims, 900 million Hindus and 800 million Buddhists. These four belief systems alone account for a whopping 80 % of the total global population. The fact of the matter is that as long as there are humans, there will be religion. Us atheists have to tolerate it whether we like it or not.

[5thHorseman]

I'm against it. But I'd like a ban on people who preach in the street, wear burqas, hijabs, crosses and all religious paraphernalia. And a deep hole to drop scientologists in.

[frankiej]

The past has shown that religion can't really be used responsibly and until it is I don't think it should remain very private to a person. Even when someone says the good that people have done in the name of religion, I wonder if they didn't have their faith would they kill and rape everything in sight?
Praise should not be given to those who claim to have done good out of something else other than their own good will.

Unfortunetly, I respect people's rights too much to take away their freedom to believe what they want.

[5thHorseman]

Religion is a good way to keep score of how many gullible people populate the planet.

[BethK]

I also think banning religion would be grossly unfair to stupid people who need fables to get them through their day.

However, their church property and income should be taxed and they should be told to STFU about political issues.

Yeah. In fact, how DO we objectively tell the difference between a fiction story with fictional non-human characters (perhaps superior to humans) and someone writing a "scripture"? We don't want to ban "Star Wars" and _Lord of the Rings_ along with the Bible, Koran, and Book of Ubizmo. (Google it)

[Violet]

Banning religion is attacking the symptom, not the cause. What you need to go after is human nature and for that you would have to overthrow 200, 000 years of Evolution so on a practical level it really isn't feasible.

So what is the cause?

And if it was 'human nature', then I (being human), would also be subject to it. Yet I'm not. I don't wonder why, but maybe you do

---

I also think banning religion would be grossly unfair to stupid people who need fables to get them through their day.

However, their church property and income should be taxed and they should be told to STFU about political issues.

Yeah. In fact, how DO we objectively ______________________?


tell the difference between a fiction story with fictional non-human characters (perhaps superior to humans) and someone writing a "scripture"? We don't want to ban "Star Wars" and _Lord of the Rings_ along with the Bible, Koran, and Book of Ubizmo. (Google it)

The better question is bold. How do we objectively _______________________?

There is no difference between 'scripture' and 'fiction'. Doesn't mean we can't lean from either of course (subjectively, as always)

[Epimethean]

Against banning it- but totally for banning proselytizing. I fucking hate that shit.

[Darinda]

Oppose it.

[The Grand Nudger]

Support it. Religion is a failed hypothesis regarding our origins at the very least. I assume most here support the ban on the institution of slavery on the basis that the hypothesis that some human beings aren't as human as other human beings is a false premise. There is a ban on public displays of nudity, but public displays of torture (IE crucifixion) are okay? Grow some spine folks..lol.

did I say "With all due respect"?