But stop and think about it. Do you really think all these were driven by faith in God, or by other darker motivations that exist in the hearts and minds of men regardless of belief in God, and religion was twisted and used as a more palatable motivation for the gullible masses?
I agree that religion is often twisted and used as a motivation for the gullible masses. I also think that in the absence of religion, those with "darker motivations in their hearts and minds" would be hard pressed to draw others to their causes without religion.
Having not studied the crusades, I can't comment on your analysis. However, I have always agreed that bad people will do bad things, in the presence or absence of religion. That is not my point. My point is that the vast number of people who have been involved in atrocities in the past, pick any example you like, have been good and religous people. Not only has their religion not induced them to behave morally, it has, as you suggested above, been used to induce them to behave imorally. Therefore, given that religion does nothing to make people "good", and since it is also used to make some people "bad", then why have it at all? It sounds like you are trying to make the argument that people are just abominable by nature, and they would be much worse without religion. I hardly think that argument holds water.Get rid of religion and people will still behave abominably toward each other.
Yes. You are talking about "social darwinism", which is utter nonsense.Do you really think that an atheistic world won't obtain some moral lesson about right and wrong from evolutionary theory in the absence of religion?
What about blind nationalism? Rascism? Tribalism? Greed? Lust for Power? You don't think these will go away just because you've dispelled the concept of God do you?
No I don't think they will disappear. But I do think that without the "opiate of the masses" it would be impossible to rally together the masses of people required to cause destruction on the scale that we have seen in the past and are seeing now. Yes, you will still have power hungry leaders. You will still have racism and so on. But you will not have that spark that religion provides that incites people to irrational hatred.
People commit atrocities for many reasons: religion often gets used as a screen but the essence of mans inhumanity to man stems from our own greed and stupidity.
Yes but that is my point. Take away the screen. Remove the excuse. Then the results of that inhumanity will be less atrocious.
For myself, I strongly believe in the separation of Church and State and this is my response to the issue you've mentioned. My reasons for this are not to protect the state from religious influence, but rather to protect my faith from the corrupting influence of worldly power.
I also wholeheartedly believe in the separation of church and state, for the opposite reason though.
Alisa, I'm sorry, but this comes across to me as if you don't think anyone else has the right to believe as they wish (if their opinion differs from yours). As a matter of principle, this is no different than the religious right-wingers forcing their opinions on Gay rights down the throats of everyone else. Dangerous territory, Alisa. Morally, you're only one step away from using force/politics/education to enforce your worldview on others. Arguably, folks like Dawkins have already crossed that line with respect to education.
All adults obviously have the right to believe whatever they want. That is not what I am talking about here. You claim that you have chosen to have faith, and to believe that god exists. But I am willing to bet that you didn't awaken one morning and say, gee, I think there is a god, and I have faith that he exists. No, I am willing to be that religion was taught to you. This is the right I am talking about. The right for a child to grow up without being taught religion. Do you feel at all uncomfortable when you see people teaching their children to support one political candidate or party over another, when it is obvious that the child cannot possibly understand politics? I do. And I feel just as uncomfortable that 3 year olds, or even younger children, are taught to believe something that they are clearly too young to make up their own minds about.