Rain drops keep falling on my head - Part II

After a much anticipated wait (not really), I am going to complete my contemplation on religion, the lack of religion and what religion really means. I do not claim to be a theologian, but rather a interested observer of how religion affects our current world. The following argument is unstructured and up for debate.

To me, religion is something that belongs in the last millenium. I think it has done more harm than good, has created more controversy than any other topic and stands in the way of progress. I am okay with people having a personal stake in religious activities, but as for social commentary and decisions, that should be left to the unbiased.

Before anyone jumps up and says, "Hey, religion has done a lot of people good. It provides the desperate with hope, etc," let me point out that before mass organized religion, people got along just fine. I look to Native Americans as an example. Yes, they did make war with each other, but nothing compared to devastation that later religions have wrought. Peace with the Earth and all of its inhabitants is what the early Natives believed in.

As for atheism, or the disbelief of a deity that is all encompassing and ever watchful, we see the same kind of fanaticism that religious zealots practice. This kind of "militant" atheism is in reaction to the extremism found in Abrahamic religions. This also sends the wrong message: That belief in a supreme deity is wrong and using fanaticism against fanaticism is the answer.

My position on religion is that of not having the belief in a supreme deity, until proven wrong. I would rather have my "faith" in science and logic, making the concession that the existence of god(s) is unknown and not definable. I also deplore the ritualistic nature of religion. The spread of a religious message seems more important than living piously or doing charitable works, as evidenced by the wealth of The Vatican, Hindu temples and tax breaks given to organized religious groups.

Another gripe I find ridiculous is the pitched battle between church and state. To govern properly, a federal government should be secular beyond any doubt. Those working for the government should keep their religiosity to themselves. Presenting any religious backed argument has no place in a political forum, if the government wants to remain unbiased. The religious may claim that religion in the government is a reflection of the general population, but what about the non-religious? Do they not deserve a voice. Classic case of the minority needing protection from the majority.

I do not mean to cause controversy or condemnation by anyone that is religious. I do mean to cause reasonable debate about religion, righting wrongs and possibly introducing the idea that questioning religious belief and authority is the right of anyone and should not be met with threats of violence by the religious.

Happy weekend!