What evidence is there that the world would be better off without religion? (evolution, myth)

[cleatis]

There has been fighting over religion so long as there has been religion. Which I want to make a very clear distinction on right now - I have absolutely NO problem with a person having faith and beliefs, no problem whatsoever. it's the religious institutions that I have a problem with. As I see it religious institutions have taken something that could potentially be a beautiful, helpful aid to humanity and turned it into a murderous political machine (and I'm starting to think that religion in the US is just another industry).

I think the world would be better off if religion kept its filthy hands out of our politics. If that could be done, I think the world would be a better place. As I have said on here numerous times: when it comes to laws that dictate who I can marry, who I can sleep with, what I can eat, smoke or drink, who I can hang out with and what I can watch and read, I need some more universal reasoning than what the guy across town feels in his heart about his god.

Honestly, I think that even if religion were abolished completely, there would still be the same issues because there will always be a group of people who get off on acting all old testament like. It's human nature to get all aggressive and bent out of shape about what your neighbor does, and it's also human nature to find others who are like minded to talk poo about what said neighbor does. I think this is what draws so many people to religion - it empowers their beliefs, and for them justifies it even further. For me removing religion is just like taking the dope away from an addict, they'll just find it from somewhere else. I think for humanity to ever really go anywhere progression-wise, we need to eliminate this drive for people to act this way in the first place, then they won't be on the lookout for something to justify and reiterate this behavior... just my $.02

[Simplefool]

Of course we would still have the wars and crime if there were no organized religion, it would just be done in a different name. The only question is whether it would be better for the world if humans were solitary creatures. Are the benefits of having organized structure worth the drawbacks? The only way to stop religious warfare is to change human nature, or unify everyone under one banner. (and I've heard that is a sign of the apocalypse ><). Curious question, cleats what were you referring to as universal reasoning? Where would you find such a thing? My favorite religious/spiritual idea is the classic do unto others line. Where did that morality come from? Surely it would be easier to take and do what you want, not caring how it affects anyone else.

[Dusty Rhodes]

What evidence is there that the world would be better off without religion?

How about, the world the way it is now, with religion?

[twiggy]

I would ponder on what the Palestinians and Israelis would have to fight about without religion? I'm sure they would find something but at least without religion it wouldn't look so ugly. If they were fighting over land because one side wanted more then honestly I would understand the fight a bit better.

[Tricky D]

I wouldn't be surprised if mankind would've been extinct without religion.
It simply is impossible for the 1st people to survive individually.

I'm no expert, but I doubt the family structure is capable of growing beyond a tribe, which means that it is too small to even support the smallest of nation.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by twiggy

I would ponder on what the Palestinians and Israelis would have to fight about without religion? I'm sure they would find something but at least without religion it wouldn't look so ugly.

The problem with framing a issue in religious terms (like the Israel-Palestine fight, or the gay/anti-gay issue) is that it becomes a moral issue. And nobody wants to be immoral. Essentially the participants have set themselves up to make no compromises (because again, who wants to be known as compromising on their morals?). So no matter how much it doesn't make sense (to fight over this piece of land, or to fight against gay rights), they will be implacable because it is the "moral" thing to do. If you believe your side has divine support, you will never ever entertain the possibility that you might be wrong or be willing to change your mind.

Originally Posted by Tricky D

I wouldn't be surprised if mankind would've been extinct without religion.
It simply is impossible for the 1st people to survive individually.

Seriously!? You're saying that humans couldn't survive individually, and so they needed religion to be able to live as social animals? Well then, I guess we better find out what religions other primates have been following, huh? Since they're social animals too, and they didn't go extinct. And who are the "1st people" anyway?

Originally Posted by Tricky D

I'm no expert

Well, you got that right.

[Tricky D]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

Well then, I guess we better find out what religions other primates have been following, huh? Since they're social animals too, and they didn't go extinct. And who are the "1st people" anyway?

We probably killed them because of our (modern) agriculture. Because of (modern) agriculture we destroy any species that feeds on the same recourses we do.
What humans have over other social animals is intelligence; unfortunately our intelligence did not prevent the belief that we humans are more important than other (social) animals.
Heck our modern science still isn't convinced that other animals feel emotions like we humans do.
Our modern agriculture does nothing else but wage war on our environment and we justify this war with the idea that because we're the dominant species we can do whatever we please.

And who are the "1st people" anyway?

Those who had to invent language.
Or do ya believe we were born with it?

Well, you got that right.

And what is your theory?
That man is born without religion, thus there never was any need for it?

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Tricky D

Originally Posted by Fuzz We probably killed them because of our (modern) agriculture. Because of (modern) agriculture we destroy any species that feeds on the same recourses we do.
What humans have over other social animals is intelligence; unfortunately our intelligence did not prevent the belief that we humans are more important than other (social) animals.
Heck our modern science still isn't convinced that other animals feel emotions like we humans do.
Our modern agriculture does nothing else but wage war on our environment and we justify this war with the idea that because we're the dominant species we can do whatever we please.
Those who had to invent language.
Or do ya believe we were born with it?
And what is your theory?
That man is born without religion, thus there never was any need for it?

Wow, congratulations! You contrived to miss every single point of my post. I guess I overestimated your ability to read beyond the literal meaning of the words. Don't have time now to re-state everything...maybe later.

[Dusty Rhodes]

Originally Posted by Tricky D

I wouldn't be surprised if mankind would've been extinct without religion.
It simply is impossible for the 1st people to survive individually.

I'm no expert, but I doubt the family structure is capable of growing beyond a tribe, which means that it is too small to even support the smallest of nation.

I'll agree that humans need a society, I do not agree that religion has to be a part of it. Mythology, can be amusing, but, it is not necessary.

[Simplefool]

If humans are going to be social animals, then there is naturally going to be a structure that forms. It doesn't have to be religion, but there will be something. The other thing that has to be is a difference in opinion. Therefore no matter what the social group is it will be at odds with other groups.