Do you think the world would be a better place without religion?

[Shadowrun]

See Subject.
I think that things like don't murder and steal will be outlawed even without religion but things like charity might even be more rare than they are now.

[ReborningAngel]

Things like dont murder and dont steal are already illegal and morally right unreligious people do exist, Im one of them, but I do agree, we are highly unusual.

I care about animals, I donate to charities and all that jazz, but Im not religious.

[Boomhauer]

The world would be a better place without intolerant religions (ie. those that say their view is right). That's gotta knock out at least Christianity, Islam, and probably most cults.

Intolerant religion can be blamed for alot of evil in the world.

[ReborningAngel]

People just need to be open minded and acceptive of one another and each other's beleifs and realize if they beleive in something it might not be right and the other person's beleifs just may be and they need to respect that and respect the fact that each person beleive in whatever they feel deep down in their hearts is the correct religion.

Thats just how I've always felt about it and if you dont beleive in anything and think it just doesnt exist, you should still respect the fact that other's do.

[madnak]

All religions are intolerant.

[Prodigy54321]

yes..but there is a difficult question behind this..I will make a post on it..I don't want to hijack your thread

[MidGe]

Of course, the world would be a better place without religion. You immediately eleiminate all religions based wars and atrocities and since no-one would see themselves as chosen everyone may care even more about others welfare, since helping others indiscriminately is the only +VE behaviour as a whole.

[guesswest]

[ QUOTE ]
People just need to be open minded and acceptive of one another and each other's beleifs and realize if they beleive in something it might not be right and the other person's beleifs just may be and they need to respect that and respect the fact that each person beleive in whatever they feel deep down in their hearts is the correct religion.

Thats just how I've always felt about it and if you dont beleive in anything and think it just doesnt exist, you should still respect the fact that other's do.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's no longer about 'personal belief' - these beliefs are impacting everyone else, just look at the world. We have Moslems strapping bombs to themselves because they believe their martyrdom will be rewarded in paradise. We have Jews waging a 40 year war in the Palestinian territories because they believe god promised them the land. We have Catholic priests in sub-Saharan Africa, where millions die annually of AIDS, preaching the evils of condom use in villages where they're often the only source of education and information.

It's not necessarily religion that's the problem, it's dogma. But religions (especially the Abrahamic religions) tend to be heavy on dogma. We don't need to outlaw religion, what we need to do is stop giving religion a free pass in public discourse, especially in the media. Any other factual claim is subject to criticism and is required to defend itself. Religion gets to declare itself exempt by waving the 'faith' card and we leave it be in the name of respecting other peoples beliefs.

[FortunaMaximus]

A less violent place? Well, no. We're carnivorous primates for the most part. Sure, remove the atrocities served in the name of God, or whatnot. Fair enough. There's plenty still to fight over.

Property, territory, iconic figures that have nothing to do whatsoever with religion except on the thinnest of threads. Helen of Troy? One can get clouded by comparatively recent events in history, but step back and look at civilization's wars and conquests. The Romans left individual faiths well enough alone in their expansion. Believe in what you will, but pay tribute to Rome.

It's convenient to blame Christianity, et al. for the wars and atrocities, but considering that we arose to the top of the heap on this planet, as it were, by merely being more ingenious and violent than other species, you'd have to think there'd be very little difference in the overall volume of violence, but the intents would be less clouded. It'd at least remove the obvious hypocrisy.

Still, reading up on the Crusades recently, I wonder. Take the Children's Crusade of +/- 1212 AD. Would this have happened in a more rational world? It depends on the influences that would have filled the void.

On an individual level, our access to information and to knowledge is ever-increasing, and with that, the diffusion of intent which monolithic organizations, be they governments or the power bases of organized religions relied upon in the past to keep the masses under a reasonable amount of control is eroding. Cause and effect. The more you know, the less you are likely to take things for granted.

Still, faith in something bigger than oneself is what gets many people out of bed in the morning and doing what they have to do. The modern age has given us many things. It, however, has rendered most of civilization unable to fend for themselves without society's supports built over the ages. While it's fair to say if you removed refrigeration and easy access to food supplies, a decent percentage of us could revert to a pre-Industrial existence fairly well. Many, however, would not make the transition successfully.

The same can be said of religion and faith. Remove it and many will not make the transition. Will this make a better world? While many of the biggest hypocrites espouse and use their religion to advance their agendas, there are simply too many people that need these structures to function in society. Too few shepherds and too many sheep.

The biggest threat religion faces today is its potential to drive people to do morally insane acts because their leaders tell them it is right, it is just. I miss the Cold War. MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction) certainly was perfectly fine to grow up in most of the time. Barring one or two close calls, neither side would dare, and if they did, well, good night, civilization, good morning, Second Bronze Age.

In this day and age, it's no longer possible to have that sort of slightly uneasy comfort. The where or when of such a conflict isn't cleary defined. Even access to nuclear capability has been balkanized, and that may be the worst-case scenario. If a dirty nuke goes off in a major American city, for example, the Americans certainly can't retailate by turning half of Russia into a glass coffeetable. A variant of MAD works in the favor of most of the Mideast. They can't render it inhabitable simply because most of the Arab world literally sits on the lubricant on which modern global industry needs to function. In the end, any advances Christianity makes on Islam is destined to be Pyrrhic and vice versa. Nobody wins here. And they keep going anyway.

[Cauldron]

there would be no terrorism as we know it today.