Religion is a tool of control. Some of it is benign, even beneficial, but as with all power and money rich platforms, unscrupulous forces creep in because they see the opportunities and profit.

Yeah, that's all fine and good.

Just don't confuse "cocaine" with "cocaine laced with fentanyl." One is significantly worse.

Humans are the ones that are harming and dividing us. If religion is gone they'll find a new way to do it. Us vs them mentality is part of human nature and has always attached itself to anything that can be called ours vs theirs. Religion, politics, sports, skin color, language, the fucking phone brand you use, you name it.

The best counter example I've seen is Shintoism.

But on a separate note, i believe religion has an evolutionary advantage vs logic and reason, as evidenced by it being so prevalent throughout human history. So in the most literal sense, i believe humans wouldn't have any progress without religion.

In order to survive, humans need to build societies that can adapt to the ever changing environments we find ourselves in.

One possibility is to use pure science, logic, and reason: educate every child on the scientific method, teach them how to not fall for logical fallacies, to be skeptical, to demand extraordinary evidence to support extraordinary claims, to repeat experiments and engage in peer review, to create ethical frameworks, and have a logical justification for the actions you take...

Another possibility is to use religion: brainwash a kid on what "good" looks like, and show them how to put on blinders to anything that might threaten that. Johnny down the street is "sinning"? Make him stop, that hurts our society. Father Dale is touching kids? Don't lose sight of the goal, Father Dale is a great man, this is a personal struggle that we can help him through.

Which of those two methods of adaptation requires less energy? Because when an organism has to evolve, the organism that can do it using less energy will have the advantage. Religion, or the concept of morality in general, is a society's selection pressure on itself. The best we can do is acknowledge this, and learn to wield it as a tool. And I believe that many leaders throughout human history, both political and religious, understood this well.

Do you know about Myanmar?

Buddhists are also capable of committing violence in the name of their religion. Look at Myanmar

Met this Amish person once, didn't even known what Linux was. The heathen.

Buddhist nationalists do genocide all the same, like in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rohingya_genocide

"I use Arch, btw"

• Richard Dawkins

Oooh how do you do that user tag function? I couldn't find it when I looked just now and it appears as though we're using the same frontend...?

What I gather from the linked conversation: (In regards to a joke where a boy turns out to have a polygamous dad)

Sure, but that’s universal. Most of the Islamic theocratic have this problem, and it’s a point of general focus… but Islam is their excuse, not a functional cause. It’s not like Mormons did it any better.

Islamic theocratics are not the same as muslims. Theocracy is where the law of one's god is seen as the ruling body, and tend to be more of the extremists of a religion - in Islam's case, the ones more likely to use religion as a weapon of power to have multiple wives. Nothing in that conversation came across as "Being pro-Islam is being anti-feminism".

I'd also point out, the user made several efforts to ask for better explanation from those disagreeing, but everyone was just digging for more words from him instead of discussing openly. This is how disagreement is manufactured.

Wait, how do you get that? I also use Voyager, but not seeing that :/

Edit: it’s called user tags. It’s not shared as far I’m concerned.

I should have been more specific. Probably the standard pig headed refusal to acknowledge a point 🤷‍♂️

edit: yup that's exactly what it was. Their failed attempt to call me out is a reference to where I saw them refuse to acknowledge when they're wrong, or at least just keep it to themselves.