Would the world be a better place without religion?

[That's the Spirit]

I agree with this mainly because i'm an atheist:

1) Think of all the conflicts that religion has started and is starting now (this isn't chronologically listed):

The Crusades, was that really necessary?

English Civil War Catholics v Protestants

Al-Quaeda claiming to be trying to install a nation run by the laws of Islam when truly they are killing their own people e.g. suicide attacks.

Other hardcore Muslim organisations e.g. Al-Shabab in Somalia or in Nigeria/Mali cutting through regions and schools (literally in schools). All these events (there are more) were/are simply trying to create a religiously run state. These would have never of happened because of religion.

2) Religion slowed down the scientific revolution down SO much. People like Galileo were jailed because he proved religion wrong and they knew it. We could be so much more advanced technologically/medically; perhaps we could have found a cure for cancer or MS?

There are probably many more reasons why, but i'm too tired to think right now.

Simply, I think these reasons outweigh the positives of religion.

[itsanthonym]

I do agree with you, except without the influence religion has had over history, the world today would be a VERY different place. Without Gandhi's Hindu faith, India may have never gained Independence, without Romero's Christian faith El Salvador would still be under heavy persecution etc.
But yeah, I'm more or less atheist, and I do see the world better without religion. I'd love to be more advanced scientifically.

[AlexOnToast]

I almost hate to say it, but yes, probably. We would lose some really beautiful art and music tho, which would suck. I have very good morals regarding life, and i've never been part of a religeon, I was just brought up like that, as everyone should. Religeon still says that even tho i'm a good, charitable person, the fact that i dont believe in an almighty presence who controls me means im going to suffer for all eternety nonetheless.....

[Sir Suomi]

Considering the Arts and Literature, no. There have been a great deal of masterpieces that have been inspired by the various religions, and it'd be a damn shame if they'd had not been created. Warfare is debatable. Many people rally behind religion as their cause, but majority of these so called "Holy Wars" have had other motives behind them. However, you were correct on scientific persecution. Now, would we have created the cure for cancer, perfected space travel, etc? That's impossible to know. But it's still possible that it could have happened.

[That's the Spirit]

Considering the Arts and Literature, no.

Arts and Literature for lives?

[Sir Suomi]

Arts and Literature for lives?

I'm not saying that it's a very fair trade. But people die, regardless. Art and literature is forever.

[PerpetualImperfexion]

Define Religion: the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, esp. a personal God or gods.

By this definition, religion has caused only a small percent of conflicts in past history. You listed four very common relgious conflicts. An average person could easily list off 3-7 conflicts for each of those that was not caused by religion. The last one isn't really caused by religion either. Simple human corruption often hides behind religion. The craving for power is much stronger than a belief in an unseen force.

The point being, even without religion we would find other things to fight over. Like: conflicting beliefs not related to a deity, resources, etc.

Galileo did not prove religion wrong. He proved certain ideals held by a tyranical theocracy wrong. As an agnostic, it bothers me when people talk about proving religion wrong. It's literally not possible to disprove something we have never seen. At the same time though, it can't be proven. Please get that through your head.

The only thing belief in a deity would have prevented scientifically is the origin of the universe and everything in it. It is still possible for physics, chemistry, math, logic, and pretty much every other field of science to exist and be studied even with religion thrown into the equation.

[That's the Spirit]

Define Religion: the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, esp. a personal God or gods
Galileo did not prove religion wrong. He proved certain ideals held by a tyranical theocracy wrong. As an agnostic, it bothers me when people talk about proving religion wrong. It's literally not possible to disprove something we have never seen. At the same time though, it can't be proven. Please get that through your head.


Sorry, I meant he proved their beliefs were wrong that the earth was the centre of the universe meaning we are the most important beings.

This may sound ignorant (so I apologise) but I can't see how some supernatural being living outside time and space was able to create the world with a click of the finger. That just doesn't work for me and probably is the main reason of me being an atheist.

[PerpetualImperfexion]

Sorry, I meant he proved their beliefs were wrong that the earth was the centre of the universe meaning we are the most important beings.

This may sound ignorant (so I apologise) but I can't see how some supernatural being living outside time and space was able to create the world with a click of the finger. That just doesn't work for me and probably is the main reason of me being an atheist.

Well the catholic church did not base this belief on the Bible (their line of communication to their deity) and thus did not base it on religion.

In response to the second paragraph, that is a completely understandable position. Because I'm a person of science though, I prefer not to limit myself to the idea that there is no God. It is improbable, but so is our current existence. Thus agnosticism.

[That's the Spirit]

Also the inconsistent triad rules out the possibility of this 'omni-benevolent' God + the Bible/religious books also contradict themselves which I can't get my head around; either it is not 'The Word of God' or God is very fickle indeed.

[Cpt_Cutter]

Saying this as an atheist, No. As much as I don't really like the concept of religion, it has massively affected the culture of human history for the better, and led to some truly great works of art and literature. It also helps people who are in a bad place, giving them something to believe (Whether or not it is legitimate is irrelevant)

[Cygnus]

You see this is where I'm undecided, before I would say it would be way better because religion has caused many bad things and even more deaths, however people do need a moral compass to behave and religion does do that job to some extent, however I would lean towards saying that yes, the world might just be better without religion, but still not perfect.

[Typhlosion]

I disagree with you mainly because I live in a third world country. (And how does your religious stance matter on this topic?)

The main reason religion exists is because it maintains social cohesion. Religion provides one with hope, faith and belief that one's life will be better later on. That is, if you follow its rules. If you don't, you'll be sent to an unwanted spot where you'll have to pay one way or another (the christian realm, as an example, is hell).

An immediately good example was the "YOLO" (You Only Live Once) trend that plagued the western world. A lot of teenagers and young adults acted on the philosophy of no long term consequences and ended up doing some pretty stupid stuff, not only to themselves, but to many around them. One thing is living your life to its fullest, another thing is bungee jumping without the bungee and having your parents pay for they emergency hospital.

Something that happens quite often are bandits that converted and also spread their word. And it isn't a rare sight, to see an outlaw try to move on and hope for something better for him and for others. One robber less, and maybe a few more not-robbers more!

The opposite was very well exemplified on a video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w_1PESUK7x8) (found it just for you) where a land was divided in two: atheists and theists. In the video, a god claims that there is no heaven/hell and that he was leaving the universe, atheists' society was unharmed while theists destroyed themselves alike to the "YOLO" philosophy. No rules, why not? And unfortunately, many religious would act somewhat differently if such happened. Maybe not on the massive scale that the video shows, but there would be some bad changes.

I believe that religion is a great factor in social cohesion, and exemplified why.

On the matter of wars, there are so many and it's easy to single out wars related to religion. On Wikipedia's page List of wars and anthropogenic disasters by death toll
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_and_anthropogenic_disasters_by_death_toll) religious wars were three out of 32 (9%) with death tolls over a million, and contributed from 1% to 7%... so they aren't the most deadly either.

By the way, atheist.

[Walter Powers]

I think we need to differentiate further then simply "religion". "Religion can be a belief in anything.

If we're talking Islam, no. I don't think making women cover their faces or flying jets into the skyscrapers of those who don't make them do that is a positive thing for the world. I understand that's not what all Muslims believe, but the scale of these monstrosities is too much to overlook.

Christianity, by contrast, has bred pretty much every developed country on this planet and is generally a positive force for human rights. Christians will refrain from murder more then a nonreligous society because God tells them "thou shalt not murder." They'll also have sex later, are less likely to commit adultery, work harder, and a bunch of other things you should strive to do. A Christian society has much more morality then a non Christian one. That's a fact that can be defended by history.

How many people did the crusades kill, anyways? I'd put my money on the fact that it was nothing compared to the bloodshed done by the nonreligous USSR alone.

[Sir Suomi]

Christianity, by contrast, has bred pretty much every developed country on this planet and is generally a positive force for human rights. Christians will refrain from murder more then a nonreligous society because God tells them "thou shalt not murder." They'll also have sex later, are less likely to commit adultery, work harder, and a bunch of other things you should strive to do. A Christian society has much more morality then a non Christian one. That's a fact that can be defended by history.


Sorry Walter, but I'm going to have to disagree with you here. People will still commit sins, regardless if their religion states whether it's okay or not. They simply "bend the rules", and still commit what would be considered sinful acts. I know you may disregard the Crusades, but they did kill roughly 200,000 people which at that time was a decent amount of individuals, and they did it all under the rallying call that due to the fact that who they were killing were not Christians, it was okay to murder, rape, and torture the population. Another example would be the appalling amount of child molestation among Catholic priests, due to the fact that they are not allowed to have sexual relationships with women, so instead they preyed on the young male children, and they believed it was acceptable. So it is unfair to state just because someone follows a religious belief, that it means that they are less likely to do dreadful things.

[Lovelife090994]

I do not see where religion is the world's only problem. Corruption and evil are the problems. Religions and or belief sytems give many hope and moral compass or beacon. Religions inspire and can give rise to art, literature, charity, guidelines, historical accounts, etc. Many wish to have a religion and many don't, no problem there. I myself am Christian but because I love the Lord for myself and not by force. Christianly speaking in Christiandom those who are sincere Christians wish to work hard and live the best way they can by resisting sin and seeking repentence when sin is done. Most Christians would refrain from killing and thievery although some do and they face issues.
Plus it is easy to pick, choose, and blame. Many wrongdoings were done in religion's name but many things were done wrong period. Plus, many more conflicts had nothing to do with religon vs religion. WW1, WW2, the sacking of Rome, Stalin and Hitler's hate and more.

[daniel74]

I don't believe in any religion. Having said that I do not describe myself as an atheist.

My reason being I think that any labelling, stereotypes, prejudice or social divisors should not be present in modern society. We live in the 21st century and these things present barriers between groups who are, whether we like it or not, equal.

I completely accept many people follow a religion or belief without causing any conflict at all, and that religion is today rarely the cause of such events, and I have nothing against those who have chosen a different way of life to myself. We should just all treat each other as equals.

[tovaris]

Of course it would be a better place with no religion.

[Stronk Serb]

We don't need religion as a moral compass. We can do as well if not better without it.

[Human]

I think it was helpful in the past, but no more

[StoppingTime]

I think we need to differentiate further then simply "religion". "Religion can be a belief in anything.

If we're talking Islam, no. I don't think making women cover their faces or flying jets into the skyscrapers of those who don't make them do that is a positive thing for the world. I understand that's not what all Muslims believe, but the scale of these monstrosities is too much to overlook.

Are you ignorant to all of world history? Islam and Muslims as a whole were incredibly skilled in medicine, arts, architecture, mathematics, and the list goes on. If there was no Islam, the whole of world history from 630 CE and forward would be drastically different...and probably not for the better.


Christianity, by contrast, has bred pretty much every developed country on this planet

Or not? And what do you mean by 'developed?' In the context of what time period?



Christians will refrain from murder more then a nonreligous society because God tells them "thou shalt not murder."

This is a cute list. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_religious_leaders_convicted_of_crimes)


They'll also have sex later,

You sure about that?
(http://www.nbcnews.com/id/32884806/ns/health-childrens_health/t/teen-birth-rates-highest-most-religious-states/)

are less likely to commit adultery,

There are bigger problems in the world than adultery?


work harder, and a bunch of other things you should strive to do.

But where are the facts? You're just rambling on.


A Christian society has much more morality then a non Christian one. That's a fact that can be defended by history.

Then start defending, because there are plenty of non-Christian societies throughout history that functioned very well.


How many people did the crusades kill, anyways? I'd put my money on the fact that it was nothing compared to the bloodshed done by the nonreligous USSR alone.

Honestly I'm not even sure how they're comparable as they occurred with entirely different motives and in completely different points of human history.

___

Now to the question, no I don't think the world would be "better" without it. But it's a question that's so incredibly hypothetical that I don't even see how it can be debated.

[World Eater]

I think it would be better. Then again, what do I know?


This is a cute list. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_religious_leaders_convicted_of_crimes)

Ahhh yes I remember Shoko Asahara very well.

[Captain Canada]

Religion in my opinion is sort of a waste of time... It holds you back from certain things for a guy/girl that you cant even prove exists. And what do you do? Force it on to other people... But I can respect that people are religious (To each their own I guess)

[ImCoolBeans]

No, religion gives a lot of meaning to the lives of people who need it. To say the world would be a better place without that is pretty rash. What the world would be a better place without is prejudice, discrimination, violence and intolerance.

[MrBlueSky]

I feel religion has been more beneficial than detrimental to humanity. Obviously, the examples you listed demonstrate how religion can be corrupted or how differences in religion can lead to conflict. However, for the majority of religious people, their beliefs provide hope and a foundation upon which they can build their lives. It guides people, provides philosophical answers and gives support to people who suffer.

Even if taking a cynical approach, where you assume the teachings of all the various religions are wrong, they still have their place. Many charities are social betterment programs are founded on religious principles. Early schools and universities were religious institutions. People are often obligated to adhere to their morals because of their religion.

Many of the problems attributed to religion are more because of general human fallacy than specifically religion. People have always discriminated, competed and fought, whether it is through religion, politics, social divisions, sports, education, etc. This is not to say that the deaths, misery and bigotry to arise from religion are insignificant; they may be even more intense because of the hypocrisy of some of the actions, as well as the intense feelings religion creates. However, in the end, I still feel that religion has helped far more than hurt.

[Southside]

I think we need to differentiate further then simply "religion". "Religion can be a belief in anything.

If we're talking Islam, no. I don't think making women cover their faces or flying jets into the skyscrapers of those who don't make them do that is a positive thing for the world. I understand that's not what all Muslims believe, but the scale of these monstrosities is too much to overlook.

Christianity, by contrast, has bred pretty much every developed country on this planet and is generally a positive force for human rights. Christians will refrain from murder more then a nonreligous society because God tells them "thou shalt not murder." They'll also have sex later, are less likely to commit adultery, work harder, and a bunch of other things you should strive to do. A Christian society has much more morality then a non Christian one. That's a fact that can be defended by history.

How many people did the crusades kill, anyways? I'd put my money on the fact that it was nothing compared to the bloodshed done by the nonreligous USSR alone.

Yeah because all Muslims fly planes into buildings...Stop stereotyping

Always quick to diss Islam but never saying shit about the thousands of innocents we've killed in my homeland of Panama, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Japan, Vietnam just to name a few.

[Miserabilia]

Religion is used as our tool to explain something to ourselves when we don't know the true cause.
When people didn't know how weather worked, they made gods for it.
Sadly, alot of people go obsessed with their religion, or forget about what it originaly was about, and use it as an excuse to do terrible things.

So yes, I think that now, the world would be a better place without most religions. There might be some new religions that don't rely on older beleifs, that could be used in a more peaceful way, tho i'm not too sure.



If we're talking Islam, no. I don't think making women cover their faces or flying jets into the skyscrapers of those who don't make them do that is a positive thing for the world. I understand that's not what all Muslims believe, but the scale of these monstrosities is too much to overlook.

Christianity, by contrast, has bred pretty much every developed country on this planet and is generally a positive force for human rights. Christians will refrain from murder more then a nonreligous society because God tells them "thou shalt not murder." They'll also have sex later, are less likely to commit adultery, work harder, and a bunch of other things you should strive to do. A Christian society has much more morality then a non Christian one. That's a fact that can be defended by history.

What an incredibly offensive and ignorant thing to say..
First of all,
"scale of these monstrosities is too much to overlook." how about 1000 years of oppression, darkness, and pain, by Christianity™?

secondly
generally a positive force for human rights.
no. I don't think making women cover their faces

Do you even know how strict other religions then islam used to be?
It seems you do not understand that religions go thru fases, following the development in the region.
West-Europe is actually one phase ahead of the USA; west europe (especiallyy the north) is almost completely atheistic.
You see, old religions turn into big, strict religions. With all the three monotheistic religions this happens.
Christianity used to be extremely strict, and alot of the branches of christianity treated women terribly and gave them dresscodes too, you know. Every religions has/had its extremes.

A Christian society has much more morality then a non Christian one. That's a fact that can be defended by history.

This has more to do with the society itself then the religion; like I said, societies move in phases.
We are more advanced in science and therefore rely less on religion, making our religion into something that is just about moral standards, etc.
It is not because of christianity, which you can see by the way the religion used to be, quite the opposite of good moral.

[Kahn]

I feel religion has been more beneficial than detrimental to humanity. Obviously, the examples you listed demonstrate how religion can be corrupted or how differences in religion can lead to conflict. However, for the majority of religious people, their beliefs provide hope and a foundation upon which they can build their lives. It guides people, provides philosophical answers and gives support to people who suffer.

Even if taking a cynical approach, where you assume the teachings of all the various religions are wrong, they still have their place. Many charities are social betterment programs are founded on religious principles. Early schools and universities were religious institutions. People are often obligated to adhere to their morals because of their religion.

Many of the problems attributed to religion are more because of general human fallacy than specifically religion. People have always discriminated, competed and fought, whether it is through religion, politics, social divisions, sports, education, etc. This is not to say that the deaths, misery and bigotry to arise from religion are insignificant; they may be even more intense because of the hypocrisy of some of the actions, as well as the intense feelings religion creates. However, in the end, I still feel that religion has helped far more than hurt.

This is the best post in this thread and it should really put an end to the sensationalized bickering.

[darthearth]

I feel religion has been more beneficial than detrimental to humanity. Obviously, the examples you listed demonstrate how religion can be corrupted or how differences in religion can lead to conflict. However, for the majority of religious people, their beliefs provide hope and a foundation upon which they can build their lives. It guides people, provides philosophical answers and gives support to people who suffer.

Even if taking a cynical approach, where you assume the teachings of all the various religions are wrong, they still have their place. Many charities are social betterment programs are founded on religious principles. Early schools and universities were religious institutions. People are often obligated to adhere to their morals because of their religion.

Many of the problems attributed to religion are more because of general human fallacy than specifically religion. People have always discriminated, competed and fought, whether it is through religion, politics, social divisions, sports, education, etc. This is not to say that the deaths, misery and bigotry to arise from religion are insignificant; they may be even more intense because of the hypocrisy of some of the actions, as well as the intense feelings religion creates. However, in the end, I still feel that religion has helped far more than hurt.

Agreed. How can one quantify the positive effects religion has in the personal lives of countless people? I would think the summation of this goodness would far outweigh the negatives, there have been billions of lives helped greatly by the discovery of and the relationship with God. All those people are saints in heaven now, all because of religion. One must not limit one's concern to just this world, but the innumerable realms beyond.

[Walter Powers]

Sorry Walter, but I'm going to have to disagree with you here. People will still commit sins, regardless if their religion states whether it's okay or not. They simply "bend the rules", and still commit what would be considered sinful acts.

Of course. I never said they wouldn't. It's human nature to sin; the Bible acknowledges that. They'd simply refrain from doing it, because they want to got to heaven. Without a doubt, devout Christians, in my experience, IN GENERAL, are harder working and overall better people.

I know you may disregard the Crusades, but they did kill roughly 200,000 people which at that time was a decent amount of individuals, and they did it all under the rallying call that due to the fact that who they were killing were not Christians, it was okay to murder, rape, and torture the population.

Those were bad. I'm not going to defend them. But it's a small fraction of the tens of millions killed by nonreligous communists in this world. Also, the people who did that certainly weren't following a true Christian belief system in order to justify it.

Another example would be the appalling amount of child molestation among Catholic priests, due to the fact that they are not allowed to have sexual relationships with women, so instead they preyed on the young male children, and they believed it was acceptable.

I don't have much experience with Catholicism, I'd change that rule, but again, that is relatively small considering the good things Christianity has done for the world.

So it is unfair to state just because someone follows a religious belief, that it means that they are less likely to do dreadful things.
So you really honestly think that if somebody thought that they would go to a fiery hell for infinity if they didn't lead a good life, they wouldn't change the way they are living?

Of course it would be a better place with no religion.

How arrogant. You can't even bother to justify your answer.

We don't need religion as a moral compass. We can do as well if not better without it.

Really? Tell me, when in world history has a society functioned well without it.

I think it was helpful in the past, but no more

Why would it be helpful in the past but not now? Most of the same principles in leading a good life still apply.

Are you ignorant to all of world history? Islam and Muslims as a whole were incredibly skilled in medicine, arts, architecture, mathematics, and the list goes on. If there was no Islam, the whole of world history from 630 CE and forward would be drastically different...and probably not for the better.

Of course Islamists have contributed much to sciences and innovation in this world. I don't think it is because of their religion explicitly. Geographic conditions may have helped, and lets not forget the things that people were doing in China and central America during that time period, too. However, when we started picking up the pace of discovery, it was in Great Britain, which is and was heavily Christian.


Or not? And what do you mean by 'developed?' In the context of what time period?

Yes, all developed countries have had strong Christian influence. Western Europe, Anglo America, and Australia have been predominantly Christian beginning before they became industrialized. The few developed nations that aren't predominantly Christian, such as Japan, probably wouldn't be were it not for the actions of the others. I can't for sure say that Christianity is the core reason for successful nations successes, but this evidence certainly doesn't go against that idea.



This is a cute list. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_religious_leaders_convicted_of_crimes)

Yes, it's very cute that you'd try to use something as pathetic as this in a debate. Again, just because the religious teachings of a religion go against something does not mean that nobody will do it, for pete's sake, there's 2 billion Christians in the world! Some are going to be less then perfect roll models. But that doesn't mean that most people are better off morally without thinking they'll have to answer to a God.


You sure about that?
(http://www.nbcnews.com/id/32884806/ns/health-childrens_health/t/teen-birth-rates-highest-most-religious-states/)

This is why I don't watch NBC. They try to draw connections that really don't exist (like many others in the news media). Did it ever occur go you that the more religious states are also generally poorer (I'm thinking Bible Belt here). A much more significant fact js that a society has lower crime rates the more people who believe in hell. Even the Huffington Post acknowledges this fact:

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/1609247/

There are bigger problems in the world than adultery?

It's still a problem!

But where are the facts? You're just rambling on.



Then start defending, because there are plenty of non-Christian societies throughout history that functioned very well.

If you want to go pre Roman empire; sure. But the factor of the matter is that there is extreme correlation with the success. Of a society and Christian predominance.


Honestly I'm not even sure how they're comparable as they occurred with entirely different motives and in completely different points of human history.

Here you have a good point. Political science isn't my strong suit!

___

Now to the question, no I don't think the world would be "better" without it. But it's a question that's so incredibly hypothetical that I don't even see how it can be debated.

Yes, I've realized that, and that is why I'm regretting my contribution :) But i'll still respond to everybody.
I feel religion has been more beneficial than detrimental to humanity. Obviously, the examples you listed demonstrate how religion can be corrupted or how differences in religion can lead to conflict. However, for the majority of religious people, their beliefs provide hope and a foundation upon which they can build their lives. It guides people, provides philosophical answers and gives support to people who suffer.

Even if taking a cynical approach, where you assume the teachings of all the various religions are wrong, they still have their place. Many charities are social betterment programs are founded on religious principles. Early schools and universities were religious institutions. People are often obligated to adhere to their morals because of their religion.

Many of the problems attributed to religion are more because of general human fallacy than specifically religion. People have always discriminated, competed and fought, whether it is through religion, politics, social divisions, sports, education, etc. This is not to say that the deaths, misery and bigotry to arise from religion are insignificant; they may be even more intense because of the hypocrisy of some of the actions, as well as the intense feelings religion creates. However, in the end, I still feel that religion has helped far more than hurt.

Thanks for your contribution. I 100% agree!

Yeah because all Muslims fly planes into buildings...Stop stereotyping

Can you read? I specifically said "I understand that's not what all Muslims believe"!

Always quick to diss Islam but never saying shit about the thousands of innocents we've killed in my homeland of Panama, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Japan, Vietnam just to name a few.

See, here's the difference. The Muslims extremists are the attackers. If they just minded their own business, let us send girls to school and have homosexuality legal, they wouldn't force us to kill so many innocent people to prevent them from killing ours. It's sad we have to do it, but our military's job is to protect Americans foremost. WE pay for them.

I just wish we'd pursued the Reagan space laser. :)

Religion is used as our tool to explain something to ourselves when we don't know the true cause.
When people didn't know how weather worked, they made gods for it.
Sadly, alot of people go obsessed with their religion, or forget about what it originaly was about, and use it as an excuse to do terrible things.

So yes, I think that now, the world would be a better place without most religions. There might be some new religions that don't rely on older beleifs, that could be used in a more peaceful way, tho i'm not too sure.




What an incredibly offensive and ignorant thing to say..
First of all, how about 1000 years of oppression, darkness, and pain, by Christianity™?

First, Christianity isn't trademarked. It's a group of beliefs, not a corporation :)

Second, the crusades were wrong, true. But that was eons ago! Islamic extremism is on the rise TODAY!

secondly



Do you even know how strict other religions then islam used to be?
It seems you do not understand that religions go thru fases, following the development in the region.
West-Europe is actually one phase ahead of the USA; west europe (especiallyy the north) is almost completely atheistic.
You see, old religions turn into big, strict religions. With all the three monotheistic religions this happens.
Christianity used to be extremely strict, and alot of the branches of christianity treated women terribly and gave them dresscodes too, you know. Every religions has/had its extremes.

So? That doesn't excuse it. Mainstream Christianity has adapted with the times in this regard. Islam, largely, has not.


This has more to do with the society itself then the religion; like I said, societies move in phases.
We are more advanced in science and therefore rely less on religion, making our religion into something that is just about moral standards, etc.
It is not because of christianity, which you can see by the way the religion used to be, quite the opposite of good moral.

So you honestly think that a societies religion doesn't affect their definition of morality?

[Stronk Serb]

Of course. I never said they wouldn't. It's human nature to sin; the Bible acknowledges that. They'd simply refrain from doing it, because they want to got to heaven. Without a doubt, devout Christians, in my experience, IN GENERAL, are harder working and overall better people.

No, that is 100% generalization. My classmates are Christian and they are the biggest assholes I have ever seen, but my aunt and uncle are devoted Christians also, but they act a lot better towards everyone and treat them equal. And if they refrained from sinning, why did the Popes rape women, make orgies, screw their daughter-nieces, rob? Or why was rape, murder and theft common in Christian countries?

Really? Tell me, when in world history has a society functioned well without it.

Sweden and Norway are mostly atheistic and they are doing just fine.

Why would it be helpful in the past but not now? Most of the same principles in leading a good life still apply.

It wasn't really helpful, people still raped, robbed and killed, it happened a lot more in the Middle Ages, but with progress on law enforcement, things like this are becoming more rare.

Of course Islamists have contributed much to sciences and innovation in this world. I don't think it is because of their religion explicitly. Geographic conditions may have helped, and lets not forget the things that people were doing in China and central America during that time period, too. However, when we started picking up the pace of discovery, it was in Great Britain, which is and was heavily Christian.

Yes, but all that is based on Islamic knowledge from the archives and libraries from Cordoba. The largest Christian library had about a hundred books, in Cordoba, almost 10,000 books and scripts of old lost knowledge and new knowledge has been recovered.

Yes, all developed countries have had strong Christian influence. Western Europe, Anglo America, and Australia have been predominantly Christian beginning before they became industrialized. The few developed nations that aren't predominantly Christian, such as Japan, probably wouldn't be were it not for the actions of the others. I can't for sure say that Christianity is the core reason for successful nations successes, but this evidence certainly doesn't go against that idea.

It has nothing to do with Christianity, but the fact that half of the world was under Great Britain, France, Germany and other great powers. The colonies and other countries were simply raped of their natural resources. Look at Africa, if it weren't for colonization, it could've been better for all of them, or look at the Middle East, the same applies to them, and look at Asia.

Can you read? I specifically said "I understand that's not what all Muslims believe"!

You still diss on them equally. Did you know that all in the city of Cordoba, Christians, Jews and Muslims lived in tolerance? When the Spanish took Cordoba, they found thousands of books and scripts, the Muslim scholars spent time in meticulous studies of new and preservation of current knowledge, if you did that in maybe Rome, you would get burned on a pyre, because it's considered heretical.

See, here's the difference. The Muslims extremists are the attackers. If they just minded their own business, let us send girls to school and have homosexuality legal, they wouldn't force us to kill so many innocent people to prevent them from killing ours. It's sad we have to do it, but our military's job is to protect Americans foremost. WE pay for them.

I just wish we'd pursued the Reagan space laser. :)

Not this bullshit again It's pretty much your fault... And an orbital missile base is more effective then a goddamn laser. It doesn't use so much juice, and because it is in orbit, you can hit virtually any target you like.

So? That doesn't excuse it. Mainstream Christianity has adapted with the times in this regard. Islam, largely, has not.

Oh yeah? The Islamic community in Belgrade is pretty decent and has adapted to modern times.

So you honestly think that a societies religion doesn't affect their definition of morality?

No, the prehistoric religions didn't have a moral compass, nor the pagan religions of the early Middle Ages, but those societies functioned equally good. The pagan ones did, until the Christians came and put them to the sword and forced them to accept Christianity, or burn.

[Miserabilia]

Of course. I never said they wouldn't. It's human nature to sin; the Bible acknowledges that. They'd simply refrain from doing it, because they want to got to heaven. Without a doubt, devout Christians, in my experience, IN GENERAL, are harder working and overall better people.



Those were bad. I'm not going to defend them. But it's a small fraction of the tens of millions killed by nonreligous communists in this world. Also, the people who did that certainly weren't following a true Christian belief system in order to justify it.



I don't have much experience with Catholicism, I'd change that rule, but again, that is relatively small considering the good things Christianity has done for the world.


So you really honestly think that if somebody thought that they would go to a fiery hell for infinity if they didn't lead a good life, they wouldn't change the way they are living?



How arrogant. You can't even bother to justify your answer.



Really? Tell me, when in world history has a society functioned well without it.



Why would it be helpful in the past but not now? Most of the same principles in leading a good life still apply.



Of course Islamists have contributed much to sciences and innovation in this world. I don't think it is because of their religion explicitly. Geographic conditions may have helped, and lets not forget the things that people were doing in China and central America during that time period, too. However, when we started picking up the pace of discovery, it was in Great Britain, which is and was heavily Christian.



Yes, all developed countries have had strong Christian influence. Western Europe, Anglo America, and Australia have been predominantly Christian beginning before they became industrialized. The few developed nations that aren't predominantly Christian, such as Japan, probably wouldn't be were it not for the actions of the others. I can't for sure say that Christianity is the core reason for successful nations successes, but this evidence certainly doesn't go against that idea.



Yes, it's very cute that you'd try to use something as pathetic as this in a debate. Again, just because the religious teachings of a religion go against something does not mean that nobody will do it, for pete's sake, there's 2 billion Christians in the world! Some are going to be less then perfect roll models. But that doesn't mean that most people are better off morally without thinking they'll have to answer to a God.



This is why I don't watch NBC. They try to draw connections that really don't exist (like many others in the news media). Did it ever occur go you that the more religious states are also generally poorer (I'm thinking Bible Belt here). A much more significant fact js that a society has lower crime rates the more people who believe in hell. Even the Huffington Post acknowledges this fact:

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/1609247/



It's still a problem!

But where are the facts? You're just rambling on.



Then start defending, because there are plenty of non-Christian societies throughout history that functioned very well.

If you want to go pre Roman empire; sure. But the factor of the matter is that there is extreme correlation with the success. Of a society and Christian predominance.



Here you have a good point. Political science isn't my strong suit!


Yes, I've realized that, and that is why I'm regretting my contribution :) But i'll still respond to everybody.


Thanks for your contribution. I 100% agree!



Can you read? I specifically said "I understand that's not what all Muslims believe"!



See, here's the difference. The Muslims extremists are the attackers. If they just minded their own business, let us send girls to school and have homosexuality legal, they wouldn't force us to kill so many innocent people to prevent them from killing ours. It's sad we have to do it, but our military's job is to protect Americans foremost. WE pay for them.

I just wish we'd pursued the Reagan space laser. :)



So? That doesn't excuse it. Mainstream Christianity has adapted with the times in this regard. Islam, largely, has not.



So you honestly think that a societies religion doesn't affect their definition of morality?

So you honestly think that a societies religion doesn't affect their definition of morality?
Durr, yes.
The society determines the religion and morals, not the other way around.
Religion comes from people and how they see the world, it doesn't magicaly appear out of nowhere and teach them morals.
the first human villages and little societies had different religions, which slowly evolved into the religions we have now; the more a society goes forward in science for example, the less they are dependent on their religion.

Like I said, you will see the countries that are wealthy and healthy, like the scandinavian countries and north west europe in general, most of the population is atheist. You simply do not need religion anymore. Also, violence and poverty is distinctly lower then in the USA.

Ofcourse, in europe we have had the dark ages, which was the worst stage of the religion. After that, the people basicly determined they never wanted that again. So, they didn't. This doesn't mean everyone suddenly became atheist; it just means they would never allow religion to take over like that again.

Tho I am not saying the USA is going to have dark ages too, it's just that the USA never had them in the first place, since it was founded after the dark ages.
A completely new people in a new country.
So also a new type of religion; usa christianity is very different from other christianity for example what is still seen in europe.

[Vlerchan]

I'm only going to address the worst of this:

But it's a small fraction of the tens of millions killed by nonreligous communists in this world.Whilst we're taking the time out to attack each others political-leanings should I start listing the atrocities that were committed by (Christian) capitalists in the pursuit of profit? Well: we've go colonialism & imperialism; the slave trade; (largely preventable) famine - the Irish potato famine sticks out; most military interventions; various anti-communist 'purges' ... and shall I continue? I'm nearing one billion here now if I haven't surpassed it.

But here's my point: none of these atrocities had anything to do with religious values or lack thereof.

See, here's the difference. The Muslims extremists are the attackers.The Extremists are by-and-large the defenders. It was America who decided to install themselves in the Middle East.

If they just minded their own business.
This is so ironic I'm actually wondering if it was intentionally placed.

let us send girls to school and have homosexuality legal, they wouldn't force us to kill so many innocent people to prevent them from killing ours.
Where is this even coming from? I'd love an expansion here.

I just wish we'd pursued the Reagan space laser. :)
You realise that the SDI defied the laws of physics and wasn't workable? It's why they gave up.

And an orbital missile base is more effective then a goddamn laser.It's also a lot more illegal as far as the Outer-Space Treaty (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outer_Space_Treaty) is concerned:

Recalling resolution 1884 (XVIII), calling upon States to refrain from placing in orbit around the Earth any objects carrying nuclear weapons or any other kinds of weapons of mass destruction or from installing such weapons on celestial bodies, which was adopted unanimously by the United Nations General Assembly on 17 October 1963

On Topic: The question at hand is way too hypothetical to even begin answering.

[Sugaree]

I think what we have to remember is to look past what acts are done in the name of religion and look at what that religion teaches, and whether, as a whole, the world would be a better place without that particular religion. When you're talking about religion, you're not just talking about one collective whole, you're talking about multiple collectives that proscribe to different belief structures.

What people in this thread are focusing on is Christianity. They aren't focusing on Judaism. They aren't focusing on Buddhism. They aren't focusing on Confucianism, Taoism, Hinduism, or any other religion other than Christianity. But I don't expect anything else from this forum, it bashes Christians like no tomorrow because, yknow, Christians are just the devil (ironic, ain't it?).

Think of it this way: While some of the world's most evil acts have been done in the name of the Christian God, can we really blame the entire Christian religion for it? Can you blame the Crusades, which were called for only by the extremist bishops and clerics of the day and never officially authorized by the Vatican, and even today is now demonized by the Vatican, on the entire Christian population of the time when only a few actually supported it? It's nonsense to blame an entire population for the mistakes of a few. And that seems to be the entire progression of this thread.

Take the situation with Buddhists and Muslims in Malaysia. Believe it or not - and people don't realize this - but Buddhists monks in Malaysia are actually preaching to the people to go out and kill Muslims. But I don't see anyone here, or anywhere for that matter, criticizing all Buddhists for being Muslim hating bigots, even though they may be fine with criticizing Christians for the Crusades.

So, to the question as to whether or not the world would be a better place without religion: I stand undecided. Religion has given us a lot of great things, ranging from art to literature, but there's been a lot of bad things too. You got to weigh both when considering.

[Lovelife090994]

I do not see religion as a threat but clearly the people on this site see Christianity as a threat. Why? The thread asked for religion as a whole, not just Christianity. And who are some of you to deny a Christian their knowledge. Not everyone who is Christian is combative, and no Christian alive was in the Crusades.

[Canadian Dream]

We would have less conflict, but we would loose a huge part of history if it was so. You gave the example of the crusades, but it in fact was a pillar supporting the creation of the Renaissance. This itself is THE reason in why Europe populated Americas and that exploration was developped a lot. Religion is also giving us variety in the world, and it lets us discover and appreciate others' beliefs and values. Without religion, we are eliminating a big part of our identity, since we ressemble each other a little bit more without beliefs. Finally, it would be impossible not to have what we call religion. We can name it different tjings if we want to, human nature will always lead us to believe in different things. On the other side, it is true that many if not almost all wars would never have happened. But since wars are again oart of our heritage and identity, I think that our world is better with religion than without.

[Ashthefox]

Well, I don't think so. Yes, it may have lead to some really horrible things happening, but it also drove people to accomplish great things. The original American colonists all came to 'merica for religious purposes. Perhaps now it isn't needed, but it was helpful in the development of our society and culture.

[tovaris]

How arrogant. You can't even bother to justify your answer.




I didnt think something as obvious neded justifing.

[Loca]

I think it would not be a better place because what about the placebo effect on the people who are not healthy? They would die not for faith! People can be calmed by the subject of their god or deity. There are minority who take their belief a tiny bit too far but that is a minority not a majority.

[sqishy]

No, the world would not be a better place without it

it would be a horrible world to live in.

really and honestly

[chrisawesome]

Well, no. Things will equal themselves out, if there were no religion then we could agree better between others. But also religion keeps us good people, we know that there are consequences for bad actions not only from the law but from a higher power that we must obey.

[sharafbio]

I don't think so

[hockeyfan]

No, we wouldn't b hear.

[Zenos]

no I don't think it would be a better place

[Pulp501]

This will probably be an unpopular opinion, but I think the world would be best if everyone had the same religion. Religion can give us moral values, and a place to turn to in our time of need. For me, I probably would have killed myself without my religion to turn to, so no I think we are better off with it. For someone who believes their religion to be reality it is hard to think of a world where it doesn't exist, because to me that world couldn't exist because if god made the world, why would we not know about him.

[DisneyPrincess27]

I don't think the world would be better without it. I think the world would be better if people would stop fighting over religion and just accepted that some people have different beliefs.

[AlexOnToast]

No, we wouldn't b hear.

I've never been part of any religion.
I seem to still be here.
I'm not sure what you meant by that...

[Gamma Male]

Yes, the world would be much better off. Just imagine how much more advanced we would be right now if it weren't for the hundreds of years of scientific oppression by the Catholic church during the dark ages! And what about the spanish inquisition? The holocaust? The crusades? The wars in the middle east? How many of those things would've taken place without the support of organized religion?
I'm not saying the world would be perfect without religion. It just seems to me like religion is one of the best ways to get one group of people to murder, pillage, hate, and wage war against another group of people. The masses would certainly be a lot more difficult to control without it.