Religion: The Drug They Aren't Warning You About

[AtheistBuddah]

That's right folks, I said it. Religion is a drug just as addictive and habit forming as any other and I posit that religious individuals behave very similarly to drug addicts when their addiction is threatened. Because it's their security blanket. The world is a harsh place and it's more so for some then it is for others. Some choose to dull the pain with drugs, because when they're high, life isn't so painful or scary. The same is true of religion. Take away the belief in a God or an afterlife and what do you have. Doubt, uncertainty and the gnawing, nagging question of what happens after you bite the dust. The idea that once you die, that it's just lights out and that your consciousness just abruptly ends forever is terrifying. I'll admit to wishing that there was an afterlife and I'll also freely admit that neither I nor anyone else really knows for sure, but my rational mind tells me it's all just wishful thinking.

But I digress. Needing a security blanket is fine. We're all allowed to believe whatever we want in order to get through the day and there's nothing wrong with that. It's when religion comes in that there becomes a problem. Just as the drug dealer approaches the addict with the wonder drug that will make all his worries and troubles go away, so to does the preacher or priest come to you with his religion promising that it will take away your fear of death and the unknown. What he doesn't tell you is that the price for this peace is your freedom of choice and your freedom to think for yourself. From then on the church will use fear to keep you thinking and acting as they choose. Fear of God's wrath. Fear of being judged by your peers. Fear of being cast out. We are social animals and naturally seek the acceptance and companion ship of a group and it is this part of human psychology that religion uses against us. Religion uses our fear to rule our thoughts and actions and what makes it the most dangerous drug of all is that it has the best PR. Society looks at religion and sees a force for good and that is why it is the most dangerous drug there is.

 

[Rikurzhen]

I'll admit to wishing that there was an afterlife and I'll also freely admit that neither I nor anyone else really knows for sure, but my rational mind tells me it's all just wishful thinking.

I quote you here in order to note that you make a claim to be in possession of a rational mind.

But I digress. Needing a security blanket is fine. We're all allowed to believe whatever we want in order to get through the day and there's nothing wrong with that. It's when religion comes in that there becomes a problem.

-We're all allowed (thank you for allowing us) to believe whatever we want.
-There's nothing wrong with believing what we want.
-There's a problem with believing in religion.

I too have a rational mind and this sure looks contradictory to me. Isn't religion part of the set "Believe whatever you want?" That seems like a very open set. It includes everything.

How could a rational mind make such an illogical argument?

Just as the drug dealer approaches the addict with the wonder drug that will make all his worries and troubles go away, so to does the preacher or priest come to you with his religion promising that it will take away your fear of death and the unknown. What he doesn't tell you is that the price for this peace is your freedom of choice and your freedom to think for yourself.

How is this any different than an atheistic liberal finding religious solace from liberal dogma?

Even if we exclude the modern-day religions of liberalism and environmentalism, people can find escape for the worries of the world by turning to reading fiction, by watching TV, by drinking alcohol, by smoking a joint, by having hot, sweaty sex. Escape is escape.

Secondly, your claim that religious people don't think for themselves is flawed. When they choose to believe they have done so by applying what they've been taught against their own life experience and have decided to believe the tenets of the religion. Those who choose not to believe fall away from the religion. What you really need here is a longitudinal study of religious people which continues to track those who fall away over time. Clearly they're falling away because they have come to disagree. It would be supremely irrational to conclude that those who chose to stay have done so only because they haven't thought about what they've been taught.

From then on the church will use fear to keep you thinking and acting as they choose. Fear of God's wrath. Fear of being judged by your peers. Fear of being cast out.

For a rational person you sure don't seem to grasp the concept of internal validity. Your position is self-refuting. If a religious person comes to not believe, then fear and judgment cannot convince them to believe. The Church or the Pastor are not doing the thinking for them for these folks no longer believe. For those who do believe, fear and judgment are not necessary to keep them within the flock for they've thought about it and see the sense of it all.

All that remains is the category of people who no longer believe but pretend to believe. They're an interesting group but they don't fit your description of being dupes who let the Church think for them. These people have their own reasons for remaining within the flock, reasons that they've thought about, for they clearly understand that they don't believe but they clearly remain with the community of believers and act as though they believe.

In no case are there people who let religious people do their thinking for them.

We are social animals and naturally seek the acceptance and companion ship of a group and it is this part of human psychology that religion uses against us.

And you're likely no different. You see yourself as an iconoclast, a maverick, a free thinker, and yet you conform to the stereotype of Atheist and bring shame upon us all, by being an attacker of religion. You're not content to live your life by your own standards, you need to proselytize like a Jehovah's Witness going door-to-door.

Because you so closely match the stereotype of Atheist it's likely that you also find comfort from being a part of that community. Just like religious people find comfort from belonging to a group.

You claim that wanting to belong to a group is something that religion uses against people. Does that mean that Atheists wanting to belong to an atheistic group because they find comfort from being in the company of people who share their ideals are also being used by the Atheist movement. Are they dupes too?

 

[PostmodernProph]

I take insulin so I will live.....

 

[Chuckt]

That's right folks, I said it. Religion is a drug just as addictive and habit forming as any other and I posit that religious individuals behave very similarly to drug addicts when their addiction is threatened. Because it's their security blanket. The world is a harsh place and it's more so for some then it is for others. Some choose to dull the pain with drugs, because when they're high, life isn't so painful or scary. The same is true of religion. Take away the belief in a God or an afterlife and what do you have. Doubt, uncertainty and the gnawing, nagging question of what happens after you bite the dust. The idea that once you die, that it's just lights out and that your consciousness just abruptly ends forever is terrifying. I'll admit to wishing that there was an afterlife and I'll also freely admit that neither I nor anyone else really knows for sure, but my rational mind tells me it's all just wishful thinking.

Security blanket for what? I'm concerned about the here and now and when I tell people I am a Christian, just watch the attacks that come upon me.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

That's right folks, I said it. Religion is a drug just as addictive and habit forming as any other and I posit that religious individuals behave very similarly to drug addicts when their addiction is threatened. Because it's their security blanket. The world is a harsh place and it's more so for some then it is for others. Some choose to dull the pain with drugs, because when they're high, life isn't so painful or scary. The same is true of religion. Take away the belief in a God or an afterlife and what do you have. Doubt, uncertainty and the gnawing, nagging question of what happens after you bite the dust. The idea that once you die, that it's just lights out and that your consciousness just abruptly ends forever is terrifying. I'll admit to wishing that there was an afterlife and I'll also freely admit that neither I nor anyone else really knows for sure, but my rational mind tells me it's all just wishful thinking.

But I digress. Needing a security blanket is fine. We're all allowed to believe whatever we want in order to get through the day and there's nothing wrong with that. It's when religion comes in that there becomes a problem. Just as the drug dealer approaches the addict with the wonder drug that will make all his worries and troubles go away, so to does the preacher or priest come to you with his religion promising that it will take away your fear of death and the unknown. What he doesn't tell you is that the price for this peace is your freedom of choice and your freedom to think for yourself. From then on the church will use fear to keep you thinking and acting as they choose. Fear of God's wrath. Fear of being judged by your peers. Fear of being cast out. We are social animals and naturally seek the acceptance and companion ship of a group and it is this part of human psychology that religion uses against us. Religion uses our fear to rule our thoughts and actions and what makes it the most dangerous drug of all is that it has the best PR. Society looks at religion and sees a force for good and that is why it is the most dangerous drug there is.

Marx said it first. "Religion is the opiate of the masses."

 

[Steven_R]

people can find escape for the worries of the world by turning to reading fiction, by watching TV, by drinking alcohol, by smoking a joint, by having hot, sweaty sex

I am intrigued by your ideas and wish to subscribe to your newsletter.

 

[Chuckt]

That's right folks, I said it. Religion is a drug just as addictive and habit forming as any other and I posit that religious individuals behave very similarly to drug addicts when their addiction is threatened. Because it's their security blanket. The world is a harsh place and it's more so for some then it is for others. Some choose to dull the pain with drugs, because when they're high, life isn't so painful or scary. The same is true of religion. Take away the belief in a God or an afterlife and what do you have. Doubt, uncertainty and the gnawing, nagging question of what happens after you bite the dust. The idea that once you die, that it's just lights out and that your consciousness just abruptly ends forever is terrifying. I'll admit to wishing that there was an afterlife and I'll also freely admit that neither I nor anyone else really knows for sure, but my rational mind tells me it's all just wishful thinking.

But I digress. Needing a security blanket is fine. We're all allowed to believe whatever we want in order to get through the day and there's nothing wrong with that. It's when religion comes in that there becomes a problem. Just as the drug dealer approaches the addict with the wonder drug that will make all his worries and troubles go away, so to does the preacher or priest come to you with his religion promising that it will take away your fear of death and the unknown. What he doesn't tell you is that the price for this peace is your freedom of choice and your freedom to think for yourself. From then on the church will use fear to keep you thinking and acting as they choose. Fear of God's wrath. Fear of being judged by your peers. Fear of being cast out. We are social animals and naturally seek the acceptance and companion ship of a group and it is this part of human psychology that religion uses against us. Religion uses our fear to rule our thoughts and actions and what makes it the most dangerous drug of all is that it has the best PR. Society looks at religion and sees a force for good and that is why it is the most dangerous drug there is.

Marx said it first. "Religion is the opiate of the masses."

No its not. It is sex, drugs and rock and roll.

 

[PratchettFan]

That's right folks, I said it. Religion is a drug just as addictive and habit forming as any other and I posit that religious individuals behave very similarly to drug addicts when their addiction is threatened. Because it's their security blanket. The world is a harsh place and it's more so for some then it is for others. Some choose to dull the pain with drugs, because when they're high, life isn't so painful or scary. The same is true of religion. Take away the belief in a God or an afterlife and what do you have. Doubt, uncertainty and the gnawing, nagging question of what happens after you bite the dust. The idea that once you die, that it's just lights out and that your consciousness just abruptly ends forever is terrifying. I'll admit to wishing that there was an afterlife and I'll also freely admit that neither I nor anyone else really knows for sure, but my rational mind tells me it's all just wishful thinking.

But I digress. Needing a security blanket is fine. We're all allowed to believe whatever we want in order to get through the day and there's nothing wrong with that. It's when religion comes in that there becomes a problem. Just as the drug dealer approaches the addict with the wonder drug that will make all his worries and troubles go away, so to does the preacher or priest come to you with his religion promising that it will take away your fear of death and the unknown. What he doesn't tell you is that the price for this peace is your freedom of choice and your freedom to think for yourself. From then on the church will use fear to keep you thinking and acting as they choose. Fear of God's wrath. Fear of being judged by your peers. Fear of being cast out. We are social animals and naturally seek the acceptance and companion ship of a group and it is this part of human psychology that religion uses against us. Religion uses our fear to rule our thoughts and actions and what makes it the most dangerous drug of all is that it has the best PR. Society looks at religion and sees a force for good and that is why it is the most dangerous drug there is.

Marx said it first. "Religion is the opiate of the masses."

Marx was wrong about a lot of things.

 

[PratchettFan]

That's right folks, I said it. Religion is a drug just as addictive and habit forming as any other and I posit that religious individuals behave very similarly to drug addicts when their addiction is threatened. Because it's their security blanket. The world is a harsh place and it's more so for some then it is for others. Some choose to dull the pain with drugs, because when they're high, life isn't so painful or scary. The same is true of religion. Take away the belief in a God or an afterlife and what do you have. Doubt, uncertainty and the gnawing, nagging question of what happens after you bite the dust. The idea that once you die, that it's just lights out and that your consciousness just abruptly ends forever is terrifying. I'll admit to wishing that there was an afterlife and I'll also freely admit that neither I nor anyone else really knows for sure, but my rational mind tells me it's all just wishful thinking.

But I digress. Needing a security blanket is fine. We're all allowed to believe whatever we want in order to get through the day and there's nothing wrong with that. It's when religion comes in that there becomes a problem. Just as the drug dealer approaches the addict with the wonder drug that will make all his worries and troubles go away, so to does the preacher or priest come to you with his religion promising that it will take away your fear of death and the unknown. What he doesn't tell you is that the price for this peace is your freedom of choice and your freedom to think for yourself. From then on the church will use fear to keep you thinking and acting as they choose. Fear of God's wrath. Fear of being judged by your peers. Fear of being cast out. We are social animals and naturally seek the acceptance and companion ship of a group and it is this part of human psychology that religion uses against us. Religion uses our fear to rule our thoughts and actions and what makes it the most dangerous drug of all is that it has the best PR. Society looks at religion and sees a force for good and that is why it is the most dangerous drug there is.

Your understanding of religion is extremely limited and woefully incomplete. Try employing that rational mind rather than allowing your personal beliefs to control you.

 

[Mad Scientist]

Marx said it first. "Religion is the opiate of the masses."

Have you ever read the full phrase?

Religious distress is at the same time the expression of real distress and the protest against real distress. Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, just as it is the spirit of a spiritless situation. It is the opium of the people. The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is required for their real happiness. The demand to give up the illusion about its condition is the demand to give up a condition which needs illusions.

Karl Marx: Is Religion the Opiate of the Masses?

What we have is a critique of society that has become heartless rather than of religion which tries to provide a bit of solace. One can argue that Marx offers a partial validation of religion in that it tries to become the heart of a heartless world. For all its problems, religion doesn’t matter so much — it is not the real problem. Religion is a set of ideas, and ideas are expressions of material realities. Religion is a symptom of a disease, not the disease itself.

 

[Moonglow]

Religion a drug? Hmmmm, Love is the drug, I'm thinking of.....

 

[Avatar4321]

"Religion is a drug" is quote from a lazy man who doesn't want to put in any effort to learn about his Creator.

 

[AtheistBuddah]

That's right folks, I said it. Religion is a drug just as addictive and habit forming as any other and I posit that religious individuals behave very similarly to drug addicts when their addiction is threatened. Because it's their security blanket. The world is a harsh place and it's more so for some then it is for others. Some choose to dull the pain with drugs, because when they're high, life isn't so painful or scary. The same is true of religion. Take away the belief in a God or an afterlife and what do you have. Doubt, uncertainty and the gnawing, nagging question of what happens after you bite the dust. The idea that once you die, that it's just lights out and that your consciousness just abruptly ends forever is terrifying. I'll admit to wishing that there was an afterlife and I'll also freely admit that neither I nor anyone else really knows for sure, but my rational mind tells me it's all just wishful thinking.

But I digress. Needing a security blanket is fine. We're all allowed to believe whatever we want in order to get through the day and there's nothing wrong with that. It's when religion comes in that there becomes a problem. Just as the drug dealer approaches the addict with the wonder drug that will make all his worries and troubles go away, so to does the preacher or priest come to you with his religion promising that it will take away your fear of death and the unknown. What he doesn't tell you is that the price for this peace is your freedom of choice and your freedom to think for yourself. From then on the church will use fear to keep you thinking and acting as they choose. Fear of God's wrath. Fear of being judged by your peers. Fear of being cast out. We are social animals and naturally seek the acceptance and companion ship of a group and it is this part of human psychology that religion uses against us. Religion uses our fear to rule our thoughts and actions and what makes it the most dangerous drug of all is that it has the best PR. Society looks at religion and sees a force for good and that is why it is the most dangerous drug there is.

Your understanding of religion is extremely limited and woefully incomplete. Try employing that rational mind rather than allowing your personal beliefs to control you.

It isn't my personal beliefs that come into play here it's my unbiased observation of religious history. I used to be a Christian and unlike many atheists who left the church because they felt ostracized or unaccepted, I loved my church and felt very close to my fellow believers. But first and foremost I have always been a student of history and I'm thankful for that fact because it led me to eventually open my eyes to the truth about religion. You see as I studied other religions and mythologies it became apparent that these religious doctrines were manufactured as a way to create law and order through fear and superstition and it was the day I realized that this applied to my own religion that I became an atheist. I accept that in many cases early religion played an important role in taking us from nomadic hunter gatherers to the first civilizations and I accept that if helped to establish societal order by making early man think that their would be dire consequences in the afterlife for unacceptable actions. But we are steadily outgrowing religion and have come to a point where it does more harm than good and has been abused by the powers that be for too long.

 

[AtheistBuddah]

"Religion is a drug" is quote from a lazy man who doesn't want to put in any effort to learn about his Creator.

I searched for years to learn about my creator and the only thing I learned is the unfortunate truth that there is no creator.

 

[Big Black Dog]

That's right folks, I said it. Religion is a drug just as addictive and habit forming as any other and I posit that religious individuals behave very similarly to drug addicts when their addiction is threatened. Because it's their security blanket. The world is a harsh place and it's more so for some then it is for others. Some choose to dull the pain with drugs, because when they're high, life isn't so painful or scary. The same is true of religion. Take away the belief in a God or an afterlife and what do you have. Doubt, uncertainty and the gnawing, nagging question of what happens after you bite the dust. The idea that once you die, that it's just lights out and that your consciousness just abruptly ends forever is terrifying. I'll admit to wishing that there was an afterlife and I'll also freely admit that neither I nor anyone else really knows for sure, but my rational mind tells me it's all just wishful thinking.

But I digress. Needing a security blanket is fine. We're all allowed to believe whatever we want in order to get through the day and there's nothing wrong with that. It's when religion comes in that there becomes a problem. Just as the drug dealer approaches the addict with the wonder drug that will make all his worries and troubles go away, so to does the preacher or priest come to you with his religion promising that it will take away your fear of death and the unknown. What he doesn't tell you is that the price for this peace is your freedom of choice and your freedom to think for yourself. From then on the church will use fear to keep you thinking and acting as they choose. Fear of God's wrath. Fear of being judged by your peers. Fear of being cast out. We are social animals and naturally seek the acceptance and companion ship of a group and it is this part of human psychology that religion uses against us. Religion uses our fear to rule our thoughts and actions and what makes it the most dangerous drug of all is that it has the best PR. Society looks at religion and sees a force for good and that is why it is the most dangerous drug there is.

I'd rather be addicted to Jesus than to meth.

 

[Rikurzhen]

That's right folks, I said it. Religion is a drug just as addictive and habit forming as any other and I posit that religious individuals behave very similarly to drug addicts when their addiction is threatened. Because it's their security blanket. The world is a harsh place and it's more so for some then it is for others. Some choose to dull the pain with drugs, because when they're high, life isn't so painful or scary. The same is true of religion. Take away the belief in a God or an afterlife and what do you have. Doubt, uncertainty and the gnawing, nagging question of what happens after you bite the dust. The idea that once you die, that it's just lights out and that your consciousness just abruptly ends forever is terrifying. I'll admit to wishing that there was an afterlife and I'll also freely admit that neither I nor anyone else really knows for sure, but my rational mind tells me it's all just wishful thinking.

But I digress. Needing a security blanket is fine. We're all allowed to believe whatever we want in order to get through the day and there's nothing wrong with that. It's when religion comes in that there becomes a problem. Just as the drug dealer approaches the addict with the wonder drug that will make all his worries and troubles go away, so to does the preacher or priest come to you with his religion promising that it will take away your fear of death and the unknown. What he doesn't tell you is that the price for this peace is your freedom of choice and your freedom to think for yourself. From then on the church will use fear to keep you thinking and acting as they choose. Fear of God's wrath. Fear of being judged by your peers. Fear of being cast out. We are social animals and naturally seek the acceptance and companion ship of a group and it is this part of human psychology that religion uses against us. Religion uses our fear to rule our thoughts and actions and what makes it the most dangerous drug of all is that it has the best PR. Society looks at religion and sees a force for good and that is why it is the most dangerous drug there is.

Your understanding of religion is extremely limited and woefully incomplete. Try employing that rational mind rather than allowing your personal beliefs to control you.

It isn't my personal beliefs that come into play here it's my unbiased observation of religious history. I used to be a Christian and unlike many atheists who left the church because they felt ostracized or unaccepted, I loved my church and felt very close to my fellow believers. But first and foremost I have always been a student of history and I'm thankful for that fact because it led me to eventually open my eyes to the truth about religion. You see as I studied other religions and mythologies it became apparent that these religious doctrines were manufactured as a way to create law and order through fear and superstition and it was the day I realized that this applied to my own religion that I became an atheist. I accept that in many cases early religion played an important role in taking us from nomadic hunter gatherers to the first civilizations and I accept that if helped to establish societal order by making early man think that their would be dire consequences in the afterlife for unacceptable actions. But we are steadily outgrowing religion and have come to a point where it does more harm than good and has been abused by the powers that be for too long.

I take back some of the harshness I directed at you earlier. You do make some intelligent points about the historical rise of religion.

The problem here is that you accurately point to the utility of religion in creating a governable society and then you presume that humanity has outgrown the need for religion.

I see no evidence that religion is a rational overlay on the mind, something that can be dispensed with. What I do see evidence of is a religious mode of thinking. The oldline Puritans had a particular character about them with respect to religion. Their descendants now fill the ranks of godless liberals but that same character trait is present. They've simply directed their religious impulses to the non-traditional new religions of Liberalism and Environmentalism.

Man is born with racism in his heart. That is the new version of Original Sin. To live without racism is the new version of living a pious life. Burning heretics is old school. Burning racists is new school.

The same types of parallels can be drawn for the Church of Environmentalism.

I don't buy your claim (not argument) about religion doing more harm than good. I've lived in San Francisco and I've lived in religious heartland USA. Religion as a guiding force in people helps them live to a religious standard and I far, far, far, prefer to have religious people as my neighbors than I do having my fellow godless non-believers. The religion of others actually improved my quality of life. As an Atheist I'm free-riding on the community that these people have built and there no damn way that I'm going to do anything to undermine the good that they've built. Attacking religion is a fool's game. If you don't believe, then don't believe.

My point is that I see plenty of evidence that when most people abandon religion they don't simply exist without religion, most people choose a substitute dogma. The problem with the new religions of Liberalism and Environmentalism is that while they do appeal to fanatics, their structure hasn't withstood the test of time and they haven't been shown to be beneficial to a community. That's the great thing about religion - it's a great tool to help form community.

If I had the power to start a whole new society and design it from the ground up, I'd definitely include some kind of religious institution into the cultural mix. It wouldn't have anything to do with God and Angels and Jesus, but it would be something which bound the community together, incorporated many of the great lessons found in the Bible, etc. In short, it would incorporate most everything but the mystical.

Where I can agree with you is that SOME religions cause more problems than good, Islam being the posterboy. If Islam was wiped off the face of the Earth I wouldn't blink an eye and I expect life on Earth would be better for all of us so long as the for Muslims didn't migrate over to the Churches of Liberalism or Environmentalism, which are a close 2nd and 3rd behind Islam as problematic religions.

It's not religion as a category which is the problem, it's the particulars of some religions.

 

[AtheistBuddah]

I'll admit to wishing that there was an afterlife and I'll also freely admit that neither I nor anyone else really knows for sure, but my rational mind tells me it's all just wishful thinking.

I quote you here in order to note that you make a claim to be in possession of a rational mind.

But I digress. Needing a security blanket is fine. We're all allowed to believe whatever we want in order to get through the day and there's nothing wrong with that. It's when religion comes in that there becomes a problem.

-We're all allowed (thank you for allowing us) to believe whatever we want.
-There's nothing wrong with believing what we want.
-There's a problem with believing in religion.

I too have a rational mind and this sure looks contradictory to me. Isn't religion part of the set "Believe whatever you want?" That seems like a very open set. It includes everything.

How could a rational mind make such an illogical argument?



How is this any different than an atheistic liberal finding religious solace from liberal dogma?

Even if we exclude the modern-day religions of liberalism and environmentalism, people can find escape for the worries of the world by turning to reading fiction, by watching TV, by drinking alcohol, by smoking a joint, by having hot, sweaty sex. Escape is escape.

Secondly, your claim that religious people don't think for themselves is flawed. When they choose to believe they have done so by applying what they've been taught against their own life experience and have decided to believe the tenets of the religion. Those who choose not to believe fall away from the religion. What you really need here is a longitudinal study of religious people which continues to track those who fall away over time. Clearly they're falling away because they have come to disagree. It would be supremely irrational to conclude that those who chose to stay have done so only because they haven't thought about what they've been taught.

From then on the church will use fear to keep you thinking and acting as they choose. Fear of God's wrath. Fear of being judged by your peers. Fear of being cast out.

For a rational person you sure don't seem to grasp the concept of internal validity. Your position is self-refuting. If a religious person comes to not believe, then fear and judgment cannot convince them to believe. The Church or the Pastor are not doing the thinking for them for these folks no longer believe. For those who do believe, fear and judgment are not necessary to keep them within the flock for they've thought about it and see the sense of it all.

All that remains is the category of people who no longer believe but pretend to believe. They're an interesting group but they don't fit your description of being dupes who let the Church think for them. These people have their own reasons for remaining within the flock, reasons that they've thought about, for they clearly understand that they don't believe but they clearly remain with the community of believers and act as though they believe.

In no case are there people who let religious people do their thinking for them.

We are social animals and naturally seek the acceptance and companion ship of a group and it is this part of human psychology that religion uses against us.

And you're likely no different. You see yourself as an iconoclast, a maverick, a free thinker, and yet you conform to the stereotype of Atheist and bring shame upon us all, by being an attacker of religion. You're not content to live your life by your own standards, you need to proselytize like a Jehovah's Witness going door-to-door.

Because you so closely match the stereotype of Atheist it's likely that you also find comfort from being a part of that community. Just like religious people find comfort from belonging to a group.

You claim that wanting to belong to a group is something that religion uses against people. Does that mean that Atheists wanting to belong to an atheistic group because they find comfort from being in the company of people who share their ideals are also being used by the Atheist movement. Are they dupes too?

I will start by acknowledging your first statement with my apologies for not being entirely clear on what I meant by saying that people are allowed to believe whatever they want and that a problem arises when religion gets involved. My objection is not to people believing in religion. My objection is to religion taking advantage of people's need to believe in something (preferably something pleasant, like an afterlife with a loving God) Religion then uses these people to rise money, money which is often misused to build monolithic cathedrals and mega churches while largely ignoring the poverty that many suffer. Too often I have seen Catholic priests take families into his office and chastise them for not tithing enough. Meanwhile they are struggling to make ends meet while he drives a Bentley. Too often in my studies of European history have I found examples of people with mental illness treated as if they were possessed and burned at the stake or forced to go through trepanning because religion claimed to have all the answers and spurned critical thinking or the search for answers. So no, my statement was not paradoxical because I do not condemn people for their beliefs, I condemn the faith healers and the charlatans that abuse those beliefs.

To your next point as to how this is different to blind adherence to liberal dogma, it is not. I question everything and everyone and discourage such a level of submission to anyone or anything. Also not all forms of escape are the same because not all forms of escape involve the submission to peer pressure in order to be part of a group though I admit that a fair number of the examples you gave do. However that does not mean that your statement holds up because it is not true 100% of the time.

Now I'll skip to your last point for the sake of not writing an assay here. I do not consider myself to be any different when it comes to the social nature of human beings. I seek the acceptance and companionship of my peers just as much as the next person does. Again I was not looking down on people for this because it's in our nature. I was looking down on religious organizations for taking advantage of this part of our nature.

 

[AtheistBuddah]

Your understanding of religion is extremely limited and woefully incomplete. Try employing that rational mind rather than allowing your personal beliefs to control you.

It isn't my personal beliefs that come into play here it's my unbiased observation of religious history. I used to be a Christian and unlike many atheists who left the church because they felt ostracized or unaccepted, I loved my church and felt very close to my fellow believers. But first and foremost I have always been a student of history and I'm thankful for that fact because it led me to eventually open my eyes to the truth about religion. You see as I studied other religions and mythologies it became apparent that these religious doctrines were manufactured as a way to create law and order through fear and superstition and it was the day I realized that this applied to my own religion that I became an atheist. I accept that in many cases early religion played an important role in taking us from nomadic hunter gatherers to the first civilizations and I accept that if helped to establish societal order by making early man think that their would be dire consequences in the afterlife for unacceptable actions. But we are steadily outgrowing religion and have come to a point where it does more harm than good and has been abused by the powers that be for too long.

I take back some of the harshness I directed at you earlier. You do make some intelligent points about the historical rise of religion.

The problem here is that you accurately point to the utility of religion in creating a governable society and then you presume that humanity has outgrown the need for religion.

I see no evidence that religion is a rational overlay on the mind, something that can be dispensed with. What I do see evidence of is a religious mode of thinking. The oldline Puritans had a particular character about them with respect to religion. Their descendants now fill the ranks of godless liberals but that same character trait is present. They've simply directed their religious impulses to the non-traditional new religions of Liberalism and Environmentalism.

Man is born with racism in his heart. That is the new version of Original Sin. To live without racism is the new version of living a pious life. Burning heretics is old school. Burning racists is new school.

The same types of parallels can be drawn for the Church of Environmentalism.

I don't buy your claim (not argument) about religion doing more harm than good. I've lived in San Francisco and I've lived in religious heartland USA. Religion as a guiding force in people helps them live to a religious standard and I far, far, far, prefer to have religious people as my neighbors than I do having my fellow godless non-believers. The religion of others actually improved my quality of life. As an Atheist I'm free-riding on the community that these people have built and there no damn way that I'm going to do anything to undermine the good that they've built. Attacking religion is a fool's game. If you don't believe, then don't believe.

My point is that I see plenty of evidence that when most people abandon religion they don't simply exist without religion, most people choose a substitute dogma. The problem with the new religions of Liberalism and Environmentalism is that while they do appeal to fanatics, their structure hasn't withstood the test of time and they haven't been shown to be beneficial to a community. That's the great thing about religion - it's a great tool to help form community.

If I had the power to start a whole new society and design it from the ground up, I'd definitely include some kind of religious institution into the cultural mix. It wouldn't have anything to do with God and Angels and Jesus, but it would be something which bound the community together, incorporated many of the great lessons found in the Bible, etc. In short, it would incorporate most everything but the mystical.

Where I can agree with you is that SOME religions cause more problems than good, Islam being the posterboy. If Islam was wiped off the face of the Earth I wouldn't blink an eye and I expect life on Earth would be better for all of us so long as the for Muslims didn't migrate over to the Churches of Liberalism or Environmentalism, which are a close 2nd and 3rd behind Islam as problematic religions.

It's not religion as a category which is the problem, it's the particulars of some religions.

No harm done. In truth I could have worded some things better and been more clear about some of the points I was trying to make.

Though disagree with what you said about people being born with racism in their hearts

Also I agree that there are examples of communities that benefit from religion such as the one you live in but I would ask the question "Are these communities safer and more wholesome because of religion or is it because they are smaller more tight knit communities and the religious portion is just a coincidence?"
But in either case I do not think that religion overall is bad, nor do I try to overtly attack it as a whole. I just want them to leave minorities that do not adhere to their beliefs (such as homosexuals) alone to do live the life they choose to live so long as it causes not harm to the community or anyone in it.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Pretty funny coming from a guy that claims to be a Buddhist, which is a religion.

 

[Rikurzhen]

My objection is to religion taking advantage of people's need to believe in something (preferably something pleasant, like an afterlife with a loving God) Religion then uses these people to rise money, money which is often misused to build monolithic cathedrals and mega churches while largely ignoring the poverty that many suffer.

That's not religion, that's a practitioner of religion. Mother Theresa was also a practitioner of religion. If religion as you paint it defined her actions, then she'd have misused the donations sent to her and built a self-serving Nunnery in the slums.

Secondly, those Mega-Churches are not a surprise to the parishioners. They chose to fund their construction because it is part of their community. It's like a more elaborate version of an Amish barn-raising. Instead of donating labor, and knowing labor will in the future be donated to you, to help raise a barn, these parishioners donate money to build a Church where they can all attend.

Thirdly, religion is not communism. There is an aspect of helping thy neighbor but that rides alongside a relationship with God and the communion of brotherhood with fellow believers. Building a church helps some people get in touch with God, and it helps most people develop community for it allows them all to congregate together in the same space at the same time to experience one event - the church service. That's how you form community.

Now obviously, the larger the flock the larger is the church to hold them all. Those Mega-Churches which you oppose don't just have 50 people who are being sucked dry to fund a church designed to seat 10,000. Those Mega-Churches are usually filled up with people.

Too often I have seen Catholic priests take families into his office and chastise them for not tithing enough. Meanwhile they are struggling to make ends meet while he drives a Bentley.

You travel in some peculiar circles. If the Catholic priest is driving a Bentley it's most likely a gift he received. I'll let the Catholics on here who know more about Church governance get into the nitty gritty details but I'm pretty damn sure that the priest didn't buy a Bentley out of church funds.

Too often in my studies of European history have I found examples of people with mental illness treated as if they were possessed and burned at the stake or forced to go through trepanning because religion claimed to have all the answers and spurned critical thinking or the search for answers.

Sure, but so what? They didn't know any better at the time. Why are you, an Atheist, judging religions as though they possessed God's infinite knowledge when you know they don't? They're human creations which suffer from the weaknesses of humans. What I think should be obvious was that they thought they were doing good, just like modern day liberals think that they're doing good. They're saddled with being mired in ignorance but that can't be helped. You're painting a false dichotomy here - you're judging their actions by contemporary standards. There was no criticism of those actions which was based on contemporary standards. No one back then was standing up and objecting that the person being targeted as being possessed was in fact a schizophrenic and that this was a mental illness, etc. So they weren't rejecting critical thinking or correct answers.

The important point on this issue is to observe behavior over time and the most important point is to observe behavior today. That avoids the trap of judging the actions of yesteryear by the standards of today. Do you want to be hauled before a court run by your grand-children and charged with crimes for how you acted today in circumstances that you find to be completely reasonable but which are considered horrendous crimes in the future?

Looking at the past can be educational and help shape your understanding of today because you get to see a path that was traveled rather than just looking at a snapshot of events frozen in time. What you're doing is akin to judging a reformed alcoholic for once having been an alcoholic. Which is more important, their past history or that they've been clean and sober for 10 years?

So no, my statement was not paradoxical because I do not condemn people for their beliefs, I condemn the faith healers and the charlatans that abuse those beliefs.

Then your beef is not with religion, it's with people who use religion to bad ends. Do you imagine that even the staunchest defenders of religion are OK with charlatans ripping off the faithful?