I think that religion didn't cause anything good but only start wars, create gilt , hold science back , repressing women's rights, repress sexual subjects , promotes violence racism sectrianism backwardness discrimination ignorance , violates human rights , opression of homosexuals , bigotry , hatred , extremism , terrorism . But sometimes it helps people cope with their problems. I want to hear your opinions and arguments. Plus excuse my English since it's a second language.
PS : I meant abolish not by forcing but using logic and reason.
Yes. Reiligions should be abolished beacuse it keeps faith in god. God? Which we have never seen in our life. Just imagining. Mordern age is the age of Science and proves. there is no evidence of god till date.
I've already abolished religion in my life, but as far as 'abolishing it for others', well, it's like when someone has the flu, you don't abolish the flu. The problem of religion is too dispersed.
I think all people should have access to a scientific education: that would slowly remove religion from public life.
Also, fixing the income disparity would help in the fight against religion and superstition: religion is prominent wherever there is poverty.
Some people just can't cope without some imaginary friend.
To answer your question, no. Religion should not be abolished. That would be wrong, and on a similar line as to what religions have done throughout history. Instead, religions should be studied, religious ideas should be openly discussed, ridiculed, taken apart by argumentation and plain and simple, religious ideas should be left to stand on their own merits (which are close to zero), just like any other ideas. If we continue this, little by little, more and more people will see religion for what it truly is: Mythology. And more and more people will side with reason and abandon their "faiths" to the point where eventually (after many, many years) religion will be almost non-existent.
For Americans the first amendment (free speech) is an important touch stone here. So I don't no how you can ban religion without infringing on people's right to free speech etc.
That amendment is absolutely essential to a rational and secular society so best not to mess with that.
So straight up banning of religion I would not favor. However I would be agreeable to removing all the tax incentives that religion enjoys. Let them pay tax on their buildings and their profits. Remove the charitable deduction from the tax code in all instances where the money goes through a religious organisation.
Make sure that no tax money is ever involved in support of religion. Including religious schools. if folks want their kids to have a backward education let them pay on their own dime.
Christianity is on the way out. (More quickly everywhere but the USA) but there is the Islam thing which is a bit resurgent. So their needs i think to be a look at making sure Sharia is not supported in any way, make sure no government support for any religion is the key.
Maybe in time rellgious holidays can be removed from the public calendar. To be replaced by rationally spaced out rest festivals perhaps celebrating science, the arts, and culture generally. People who want to celebrate religious festivals could do it on their own dime in their own time..
We shouldn't control what people think or believe - I certainly don't want to live in such a dictatorship. It's probably only a minority of religious people who give their religions a bad name.
However, people should be educated in the realities of this world. Absurd beliefs should be challenged, and ancient texts held to scrutiny and unbiased criticism. Children should not be offered ridiculous stories such as the creation, the flood and the crucifixion and be told that these things actually happened (at least, not without some evidence to back up this claim). Children should not be threatened with eternal punishment for extremely minor misdemeanors. Religious organizations should not be given special treatment , and should certainly never above the law.
Finally, non-believers should be treated with respect, and our freedom from religious thought and interference should be paramount.
Religion should not be abolished neither atheism. The faith in god belongs to a desire of a person. We can't force someone to believe in god neither can we force someone not to believe in god. We can just make a cause. Everybody are good in their own place. SO I SUPPORT ATHEISM.
Hi Krozan, I agree entirely, people should be educated about science and reality and if they choose to ignore reality and science to take up religion as their world view, then amen (which means, So Be It).
Also, some, very silly religions are good for us to make fun of and it would be a shame not to have them around to laugh at. We would miss them if they were gone.
Variety, is the spice of life!
Yes, we should not limit their choices, we can and should only educate people about choices, not make those choices for them.
BTW, you seem to be having a lot if Internet technical issues during chat, I wonder if the Nepal authorities monitor your Internet activities.
I believe religion has to be abolished from the public sphere. Of course, to attempt to abolish religion is as fascist as to abolish atheism. I have personally felt the terrible harm religion imposes on some people and get away with it. Family violence, degradation of women, racist opinions, homophobic attitudes, trying to get Intelligent Design into public schools. I could go on, however, I think I made my point.
I am an atheist, in fact I am more correctly an anti-theist. I don't care what anyone else thinks, just keep your toxic belief away from my.
Being atheist opens up all kinds of doors to question authority, challenge dogma that is not based on evidence, think through to solutions based on reasoning. Many more people now can say out loud that they do not believe or have no faith in a super-human deity, and rely on the forces of nature to inform us.
I'm really glad to learn you are with our group.
No, I do not think it should be "abolished" (as in a legal vehicle to do so).
Just because I do not like a particular set of beliefs or speech does not mean I wish to censor them.
To do that is to invite censorship in return; such laws could have a nasty tendency to come back on others.
I prefer free speech and the ability to persuade others their views are faulty or lacking, not abolish them because I disagree with them.
On the other hand, I do support reigning in egregious religious pressure against the secular state. They may play in our sandbox as long as they follow its rules.
When the Bible (or any other holy book) is upheld over the Constitution, however, that makes the claimant "above the law" in his own eyes, and thus an enemy to domestic tranquillity. We have laws against that already.