Nouw said:
Space. Think about it.
CrazyCapnMorgan said:
That's almost as bad as killing them off. That's damn cold man.
That kinda made me laugh a little, especially given organized religion's history. Guess since so many people have offered their various flavors of "Makes no sense, WTF, harsh, etc.", I probably should elaborate. I wanted to leave it for people to use their imagination to figure it out, but I see it's rather a stretch for some. Let's look at my offending quote a little closer, shall we?
"Outlaw
organized religion."
A little secret about me, personally - I don't care much if anyone's religious or not. Part of how I judge the measure of a person's worth is based on their beliefs, but it's important to note that the term
belief does not necessarily imply
religion. It shares similar connotations with it, but it's extremely foolish (IMO, at least) to always associate the two in similar contexts. Personal beliefs are just that - personal beliefs. As a famous comedian once said "Beliefs are neat. Cherish them, but don't share them like it's the truth", and I wholeheartedly agree with it. As for the actual belief the person has, so long as it doesn't interfere with another person's life, freedom or beliefs, I'm fine with it. In other words: so long as it doesn't go
beyond the personal, all is kosher. When you look at organized religion's history as a collective, however, you'll find that rarely has it ever been
kept personal; hence George Carlin's nice little ending to his Complaints and Grievances HBO special "Thou shalt keep thy religion to thyself."
Such is the issue I bring forth. Look at what it's done and
continues to do. I've read the big three "holy books" of religion (Christianity/Catholic, Judaism and Islam) and all three imply, or invoke, the need for the follower to be fruitful and multiply AND to be adherent to a strict standard of philosophy and a way of life in order to be accepted as one of the faithful. You could argue that there are sources of overpopulation that are not connected to religion, and I would concede to that, but the fact that religion is behind most of the reasons for overpopulation in the world render that particular argument moot.
Now, the other aspect of this thread is the resource management. Overpopulation brings its own issue into this, as food consumption alone from nearly 7 billion people in the world is mind boggling. Starvation, poverty and the like aside, religion has always been a nice little tool for the poor. Gives them a level of comfort and, again, I can't argue against that. However, organized religion as a collective has the awe-inspiring title of "leading cause of human death" and in spite of all things technological and scientific, it has kept that title throughout human history and it isn't hard to see why. Religion, easily, can lay claim to some of the brutal, most bloody wars ever known. And wars...cost resources! Sadder still, wars can, and often do, potentially
destroy resources...
while, at the same time, costing resources to maintain! And these resources don't automatically come back. It takes time, a good deal of it unfortunately, and while large wars don't happen too terribly often, the destruction caused by even minor skirmishes these days can take a horrendous toll on the land all of us depend on to live off of. Of course, when differences clash, it's all a matter of who is more apt to defend their differences, and organized religion can claim a manner of zealotry and brutality to the point where there is no manner of reason or compassion whatsoever - which leads, inevitibly, to more conflict. All of the religious hatreds and tensions, to this very day, still linger in the societies where religion thrives (namely, almost all of them) and is still given relevance. Even the government of the USA (though some will steadfastly attempt to deny it) is largely influenced by outside religious figures. In truth, the government in America can be described as a theocratic fascism (the more correct term may be theocratic corporatism, however) rather than the democracy we are told it is. Look at what the hatred and difference that organized religion teaches and spreads and it's clear why these different organizations, and the institutions they can influence, represent such a threat to the survival of humanity overall and why there can be no sane solution to these problems to humanity without the removal of the organized part of religion.
And in case you still think what I proposed is harsh and extreme, consider this: there have been accounts in organized religion's history where they have
killed their own over minor and petty differences. It shouldn't be a stretch of the imagination what they might do to a complete outsider of the faith.
