How do you abolish religion and still dare to claim we are a free society? Shall we all go out and get Mao suits?

In my opinion, religion is almost always the root cause of any conflict or tension. However, abolishing religion would only cause social collapse, both in the West and East

I'm an (outspoken at times) atheist. Even "anti-theist" depending on mood. I have no love for any religion I know of (I remain agnostic on deism and those religions I am know nothing about since how could I know?).

All that said, I think it's fair to look at what empirical data we have on societies and what they have accomplished and given the world because of—or IN SPITE OF—religion.

The entirety of western civilization came out of a Judeo-Christian religious background. Could it have gone further (or faster) under secularism? Sure, quite possibly. None the lest, even taking the "devil's advocate" position that religion harmed enlightened thought, we got there in spite of Christianity and Judaism. The Islamic world is given loads of credit for not destroying all ancient knowledge during the middle ages, but that was in fact the Islamic world's last valuable contribution to the world. They've give us nothing since (except a number of really excellent carpets I have in my home (since the non-representational patterns actually own something to their religion, otherwise it would be merely cultural)).

Has Christianity informed violence? Absolutely. The Holocaust can draw an unbroken line through Catholic (and later Protestant) history. When there was a good, theological choice that might have mitigated anti-semitism, it was almost invariably not chosen. That said, we are now past that in the West. This is not the same world it was in 1930—unless you are a Muslim. The trouble with Islam is that unlike Christianity, it is not "hijacking" to make it violent.

[QUOTE=Krauter;1594525]In my opinion, religion is almost always the root cause of any conflict or tension. However, abolishing religion would only cause social collapse, both in the West and East[/QUOTE Much truth behind those words that religion, are behind conflicts around the world

Implications like this are often made - if you are not religious, than you are automatically communist/fascist/Maoist. The idea is that since these three ideologies do not agree on theistic ideas, atheism automatically is any of these in return.

But that is wrong. Every German Shepard dog is dog, but not all dogs are German Shepard dogs.

Considering that the greatest crimes and acts of barbarism have been committed in the name of various religions and religious cults, from the Mayas to the medieval witch hunts and religious prosecutions in all parts of the Christian and Islamic and African and Mayan/American etc. world, there is also no argument in saying without theistic religions there cannot be any ethics and moral values. Morality obviously can develop even without present religious beliefs, or beliefs of a theistic nature. They even can develop despite the fact that any given theistic religion may be present. Any Christina/Jewish/Muslim set of moral values, is moral values. But not all moral values that we would characterize as humane by their rule and essence, must be Christian/Jewish/Islamic, or theistic. Buddhism for example is an atheist religion (if one wan ts to call it a religion), but is extremely responsible in the individual ethical behavior of a person, not by believing in deities, but by understanding the link between cause and effect.

Atheism does not automatically mean totalitarianism. Morals do not need religions as a basis.

Totalitarianism can be atheist (f.e. fascism), or religious (Islam). Morals can blossom to real humanism due to the presence of religious teachings, or - if the teachings are inhumane, right in resistance to or despite the presence of said religious teachings.

In the end, the final criterion deciding things: lies right inside the individual person. We call it conscience. That's why raping a woman or beating to death a poor beggar under the bridge always remain to be acts of evil, no matter what any religion may have to say pro or against it.

Somebody earlier in this thread worried if Castout was okay. I'm starting to worry as well now, his last activity was 4 days ago:-?
The chances that he's one of the few killed are, well, almost nonexistent but still, maybe it's getting too hot out there and he's got to hide or something?:-?

You misunderstood. I said nothing about being an athiest. I was talking about his idea to abolish religion. Freedom of expression, freedom of assembly, freedom of worship, all out the window with any kind of ban like that.

Human nature is the root cause of any conflict or tension. Religion might provide a handy excuse but it'd happen in an atheist world too.

I had an interest in knowing the situation, but no negative vibrations now, he's probably much more with jobs and stuff

[QUOTE=Vendor;1594650]I agree to a point. If you study early religion, governments couldn't help but use it as a tool to control the masses, even christianity. Doctrines such as hell and torture hardly existed in the christian church until 400AD.
Properly translated you won't find this hell in the bible. Rome needed tools of fear and guilt to control the masses, so pagan doctrines were mixed with christian doctrine.

However, even if you snub out religion, other belief system would seek to fill the void. Even though I'm more agnostic these days, even atheism is a organized belief system, same as socialism, communism, ect. Seems we will always have some type of system, either worshipping God or man in some form.

In the end it's about power and as long as greed exist, someone will think of something.

yes, I think/hope you're right:yep:

I was more about the second sentence you wrote, where it reads: Shall we all go out and get Mao suits? ;)

Yep you misunderstood. My reference to Mao had to do with state control over personal beliefs, not the beliefs themselves. Deny God all you want and I would never call you a Maoist, but attempt to control the beliefs of others and Maoist would be one of the more gentle things i'd call you.

Anyone seen, heard, Castout recently :hmmm:

I think you are wrong here.

http://atheism.about.com/od/definiti...smReligion.htm
I am a atheist, but not organized in any way.
I am just not a theist.

Atheism is not an "ism" in itself. It is the absence of certain isms, namely those referring to theistic content.

It makes no sense to say that a glass that is emptied of the water in it, still is filled with something different if that something is just the same like the empty air around.

Edit:
Ah, I see the link provided by Fish says the same.

Got a message from him 2/01/11, said he had to go out to get a dvd to copy IL-2 for me hope he didn't get mugged:hmmm:

his last activity was on the 6th. The chances he got attacked are almost nonexistent but still... It does worry me a bit:-?

Castout updated his blog on February 12, 2011
hope he's fine:-?

Yes,we must keep our fingers crossed!