John Smith wrote on Dec 30^th, 2013 at 9:50pm:



Eye-wateringly stupid - with due respect (very little respect is due to such a mindless load of BS).

If you bothered to actually look around you, you would see that religion, whether in Europe, Asia or America, has been the engine room of civilising development - and of social reform, which goes directly against your stupid and lazy 'religion is control of the masses' nonsense.

Next time, think first. For a minute or two.

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jan 10^th, 2014 at 6:18am:



Not really. Many reformers have been Christian. The cessation of the slave trade was spear-headed by Christians.

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jan 10^th, 2014 at 10:56am:


Not true. Atheism and Deism have a history dating back before the early 19th century. Agnosticism maybe more recent, but the concept of such a position goes back far earlier than the 1800's. Not everyone back then declared themselves to be Christians.

Soren wrote on Jan 9^th, 2014 at 9:26pm:


they were able to develop civilisation and develop socially BECAUSE they could control the masses ...

you don't have to agree with my views, thats why they are my views.

By the way, I suggest you go and see an optometrist if you have problems with your eyes.

Raven wrote on Sep 10^th, 2014 at 5:50pm:


And jihads, crusades, inquisitions, and raping children. Now we got Islam + Catholicism out of the way. 

I can hardly think of a reason TO be religious.

Sprintcyclist wrote on Sep 11^th, 2014 at 8:57pm:


Me either, but I think I could benefit from being spiritual.

The very moment that religion became "organised" it's link to spirituality became at best tenuous, at worst, non existent.

Organised religion, particularly in relatively recent history, is nothing more than a tool to exert power and control. Ironically, it is not the religious basis that is necessarily wrong either, however, it is the interpretations of said religion and the actions taken by people and then justified as being in the name of their brand that has done this.

Further, the reformation periods have been both driven by people representing religions and (here is the kicker...) resisted by members of the very same religious groups.

Slavery is an excellent example of this. Whilst reformation was certainly participated in by members of Christian groups and a range of "god fearing" people, slavery was simultaneously conducted by, supported by and profited by from members of Christian groups and a range of "god fearing" people. As such, it cannot be said that organised religion was in anyway fully responsible for reformation at least not without highlighting that it was simultaneously responsible for the very issues that required reforming...

In my opinion, organised religion is not actually in our species long term best interests. Just look at the bloody history also attached to organised religion, particularly when opposing religious views run into each other.

It may well be a case of "and then man made God in the image that most suited man's ego and ensured maximum leverage for a minority to exercise power over the masses...."