Should religion be eliminated

[ding]

I'm not an expert in religion at all...

but

I think.....why eliminate Religion and take away that little bit of faith that people have?

why

Because there are so many people here who are convinced that religion has done nothing good and is responsible for so much bad.

I just wish more of them would take this opportunity to tell us how evil religion has been and make a really good case for abolishing it.

 

[Crepitus]

Naw, not really. Why? Do you think it's a good idea?

I keep asking you guys about it and you tell me nothing good has come from it only bad. If religion is the root cause of evil in this world, then the moral thing would be to abolish it. Right?

Naw, people are the root cause of evil in the world.

You mean it isn't because of religion?

Religion can do bad things yes, but only because people are gullible enough to believe that crap.

So if you cut out religion the people cannot be led astray, right?

Well no, there's lots other forms of fanaticism around.

 

[skye]

I'm not an expert in religion at all...

but

I think.....why eliminate Religion and take away that little bit of faith that people have?

why

Because there are so many people here who are convinced that religion has done nothing good and is responsible for so much bad.

I just wish more of them would take this opportunity to tell us how evil religion has been and make a really good case for abolishing it.

I don't care for religion in general that much.....

I do care about Faith!

 

[ding]

I keep asking you guys about it and you tell me nothing good has come from it only bad. If religion is the root cause of evil in this world, then the moral thing would be to abolish it. Right?

I think your (implicit) argument here is poorly reasoned: in a nutshell you're ignoring the fact that there are costs and uncertainties associated with change in the real world. Someone can consistently believe both that religious institutions are a net negative in the world but also believe that it is not possible to abolish them without causing worse problems. It's basically the same kind of flaw that underpins certain kinds of utopianism.

Politics provides plenty of useful examples of this problem. I'm fairly sure that the world would be better off if no one took heroin recreationally. But I'm also fairly sure that the negative effects of the drug war in the US and criminalization of drug use has caused worse outcomes than other possible responses. Similarly, I think the world would be morally improved if various national governments were abolished, but I also think I have good reason to suspect that direct military intervention to destroy them would create situations worse than the status quo in those countries.

So the first point is that your logic only works if you assume that we have infinite power to shape the world to be the way we want it to be, with no cost. But that's not true. The second point is maybe more subtle but I think equally important: it's also coherent to have a point of view but recognize a lot of uncertainty around potential outcomes associated with attempts to change the world. There are limits to our power but also to our knowledge of the future, and both limits suggest that a certain kind of conservatism about social change is warranted, and is even consistent with a negative view of some phenomenon. That is the logic I'm using when I say I think we'd be better off if most religious institutions were dramatically different than they are, but that I do not think some means of changing them are good.

It's the same logic that you use to say certain national governments should be abolished I suspect.

Mind you I am not advocating abolishing religion. I'm just speaking for all the people who have told me how horrible religion has been.

 

[well named]

It's the same logic that you use to say certain national governments should be abolished I suspect.

I think you may have misunderstood the argument, since I said that I would not intervene to abolish them in various ways even though I think they are bad. Just like I would not act in certain ways to abolish various religious institutions even though I think they are also bad.

 

[ding]

I keep asking you guys about it and you tell me nothing good has come from it only bad. If religion is the root cause of evil in this world, then the moral thing would be to abolish it. Right?

Naw, people are the root cause of evil in the world.

You mean it isn't because of religion?

Religion can do bad things yes, but only because people are gullible enough to believe that crap.

So if you cut out religion the people cannot be led astray, right?

Well no, there's lots other forms of fanaticism around.

Can you think of any that casts a wider net than organized religion? Do you have any idea how many people belong to an organized religion? It's a shit load.

BTW were you the one who voted yes?

 

[ding]

It's the same logic that you use to say certain national governments should be abolished I suspect.

I think you may have misunderstood the argument, since I said that I would not intervene to abolish them in various ways even though I think they are bad. Just like I would not act in certain ways to abolish various religious institutions even though I think they are also bad.

You are right. My bad.

 

[well named]

I'm just speaking for all the people who have told me how horrible religion has been.

I understand what you're doing, but I'm pointing out that the logic of your response to those people doesn't make a lot of sense.

 

[BreezeWood]

.
the evil in religion is not the various metaphysical deity's yet for a single appearance rather the representation they project as their faith without a shred of evidence ... and the outcomes throughout history they blindly repeat including persecution and victimization of the innocent.

 

[ding]

I'm just speaking for all the people who have told me how horrible religion has been.

I understand what you're doing, but I'm pointing out that the logic of your response to those people doesn't make a lot of sense.

I'm glad one of us does.

I've got ten no votes and only one yes vote.

And no advocate for banning religion who is willing to step up and argue for it even though one of them voted for it.

 

[ding]

Maybe later we can get someone in here who isn't afraid to speak his values for eliminating religion.

 

[OnePercenter]

• No, but it should be taxed like any other for profit business.

 

[ding]

• No, but it should be taxed like any other for profit business.

You mean like unions?

 

[Crepitus]

Naw, people are the root cause of evil in the world.

You mean it isn't because of religion?

Religion can do bad things yes, but only because people are gullible enough to believe that crap.

So if you cut out religion the people cannot be led astray, right?

Well no, there's lots other forms of fanaticism around.

Can you think of any that casts a wider net than organized religion? Do you have any idea how many people belong to an organized religion? It's a shit load.

BTW were you the one who voted yes?

Nope, I voted no. If you wanna devote your life to worshipping an imaginary father figure who am I to say "no"?

 

[ding]

You mean it isn't because of religion?

Religion can do bad things yes, but only because people are gullible enough to believe that crap.

So if you cut out religion the people cannot be led astray, right?

Well no, there's lots other forms of fanaticism around.

Can you think of any that casts a wider net than organized religion? Do you have any idea how many people belong to an organized religion? It's a shit load.

BTW were you the one who voted yes?

Nope, I voted no. If you wanna devote your life to worshipping an imaginary father figure who am I to say "no"?

So you don't want to subordinate religion? Even though it is responsible for so so much bad?

 

[Crepitus]

Religion can do bad things yes, but only because people are gullible enough to believe that crap.

So if you cut out religion the people cannot be led astray, right?

Well no, there's lots other forms of fanaticism around.

Can you think of any that casts a wider net than organized religion? Do you have any idea how many people belong to an organized religion? It's a shit load.

BTW were you the one who voted yes?

Nope, I voted no. If you wanna devote your life to worshipping an imaginary father figure who am I to say "no"?

So you don't want to subordinate religion? Even though it is responsible for so so much bad?

Subordinate it to what?

 

[ding]

So if you cut out religion the people cannot be led astray, right?

Well no, there's lots other forms of fanaticism around.

Can you think of any that casts a wider net than organized religion? Do you have any idea how many people belong to an organized religion? It's a shit load.

BTW were you the one who voted yes?

Nope, I voted no. If you wanna devote your life to worshipping an imaginary father figure who am I to say "no"?

So you don't want to subordinate religion? Even though it is responsible for so so much bad?

Subordinate it to what?

To treat or regard as of lesser importance than not believing in God. To lower in rank and position to atheism.

 

[Crepitus]

Well no, there's lots other forms of fanaticism around.

Can you think of any that casts a wider net than organized religion? Do you have any idea how many people belong to an organized religion? It's a shit load.

BTW were you the one who voted yes?

Nope, I voted no. If you wanna devote your life to worshipping an imaginary father figure who am I to say "no"?

So you don't want to subordinate religion? Even though it is responsible for so so much bad?

Subordinate it to what?

To treat or regard as of lesser importance than not believing in God. To lower in rank and position to atheism.

So, subordinate it to atheism? Isn't it already?

 

[ding]

Can you think of any that casts a wider net than organized religion? Do you have any idea how many people belong to an organized religion? It's a shit load.

BTW were you the one who voted yes?

Nope, I voted no. If you wanna devote your life to worshipping an imaginary father figure who am I to say "no"?

So you don't want to subordinate religion? Even though it is responsible for so so much bad?

Subordinate it to what?

To treat or regard as of lesser importance than not believing in God. To lower in rank and position to atheism.

So, subordinate it to atheism? Isn't it already?

But you could codify it. Make them wear little crosses on their sleeves or a tattoo on their forehead so they could be treated like the second class citizens that they are.

Are you sure you didn't vote yes?

 

[ding]

Can you think of any that casts a wider net than organized religion? Do you have any idea how many people belong to an organized religion? It's a shit load.

BTW were you the one who voted yes?

Nope, I voted no. If you wanna devote your life to worshipping an imaginary father figure who am I to say "no"?

So you don't want to subordinate religion? Even though it is responsible for so so much bad?

Subordinate it to what?

To treat or regard as of lesser importance than not believing in God. To lower in rank and position to atheism.

So, subordinate it to atheism? Isn't it already?

So is that a yes?