Originally Posted by
protonitron
A religion (by definition) is a spiritual relationship between a person with a deity or a supernatural being (or an apparently supernatural being).
I think you are trying to shoehorn religions in to an idealised definition. In the real world a religion is much more than just a relationship - it's an entire system, a doctrine, an institution.
Originally Posted by
protonitron
This relationship, in most cases, helps society as much, if not more than it hinders it. The rules about food are obvious: some preparation of food is more hygienic so cultures which command this religiously grow and so does there religion. Resulting in better hygiene for that entire regions population. The Muslim rules about cleansing yourself (washing) help sanitarium as well. Also most religions have good meanings within them which most believers focus on, like love and forgiveness in Christianity as well as helping the poor (Jesus did all these things whether out of holiness or out of being a good guy in general). I am afraid I don't know the central moral teachings of many other religions (respect for nature in Hinduism and lots of really truthful stuff in Buddhism).
Unfortunately this creates a lot of problems. Muslims still do not eat pork, ritual cleansing is no longer necessary, and Christianity has evolved to allow absolution from any crime (dante's inferno?).
Christians have long since abandoned Jesus's teachings about the poor (except arguably orthodox ascetics). What was once a well meaning ideal has been abandoned in favor of personal gain.
And on the other flip side, traditions that did used to have meaning (not eating pork) are held on to for esoteric purposes while the pragmatism behind them is lost.
Originally Posted by
protonitron
People can go to war without a God and would probably go to war no matter what. If someone came to you home and lynched your family (sorry for grotesque imagery but this needs to be emotive) you would probably think they were evil and that it was morally right to kill them or have them punished. a Christian would believe they should punish these people because of the Ten Commandments. A Muslim might claim it was for (I don't know if typing his name without proper techniques is acceptable I know Muslims find portrayal of holy things a difficult subject).
An interesting situation because a /true/ Christian or /true/ Muslim would not take it upon themselves to punish someone who does wrong. Both religions believe that you should endure hardship and not cause harm to others.
In this situation, theoretically, both would not attempt to punish the attackers. Of course, how many true followers of religion exist? Even America (the largest Christian nation in the world) has the death penalty, completely at odds with their supposed religion.
Originally Posted by
protonitron
I think it was the economic philosopher Karl Marx (also known as the father of communism) who wrote: "religion is like a drug" and I agree with him to a point. Drugs would be fine if they didn't cause sane people do dangerous things and hurt others and many drugs eventually end up killing the addict by an overdose. Have you ever seem anyone have a fatal fit from reading the bible too much? Such in some churches they crawl along the ground and pretend to be dogs but they don't tend to die as a result. I am not saying religion is harmless, just that it relatively harmless. Oh course there are crazy preachers but they were usually sane beforehand.
On the other hand this could be said about the good things people do for religion and you could argue that all charitable missionary work would be done by the same people if religion never existed.
Marx meant only negative things when he wrote those famous words;
Religious distress is at the same time the expression of real distress and the protest against real distress. Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, just as it is the spirit of a spiritless situation. It is the opium of the people. The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is required for their real happiness. The demand to give up the illusion about its condition is the demand to give up a condition which needs illusions.
