Zirae

If it weren't religion, it would be race; if it weren't race, it would be accent; if it weren't accent, it would be disability. Let's face it, people will rip into each other regardless of religion. Usually, those who are cruel or even start wars on the basis of religion are only looking for an excuse and would still do it otherwise, under another pretence, if the option of religion were unavailable. I don't think claiming that there would be fewer wars or conflicts with the eradication of religion is a legitimate argument as, for one there is no evidence to support this, and on top of this it's highly unlikely.

As for the comments about indoctrination that are flying around, I agree that indoctrination is a breach of human rights. It's completely inappropriate in all contexts and situations, and should never be resorted to. However there is a very fine line between indoctrination and simply publicising. For example, adverts are not considered indoctrination but they can certainly have a similar effect on individuals; naturally it is not to the same extent as the indoctrination to which we refer, but nonetheless, it falls into that kind of area. While I agree that some "religions" thrive on indoctrination, and yes, there are churches and denominations of Christianity that rely on these methods - I only speak for my own faith here as I don't believe I am educated enough to speak for others, nor do I have the right - but these cannot be considered true representations of the Christian faith. Most Christians would be strongly against such measures. As with the conflict argument, the individuals and groups that resort to indoctrination have their own agendas, and if their excuse weren't religion, I'm fairly certain the majority would simply find a new excuse to continue behaving the same way in order to satisfy themselves.

And, let me tell you now, the majority of Christians I know were not converted at an early age or indoctrinated. I have a friend who was once a Muslim, a huge number of originally atheist friends - I even know a woman who used to be a satanist. There are people from all walks of life inside the church - it just depends which ones you visit. And when asked what brought them to Christianity, they have a myriad of stories to tell. One person told of how they awoke early one morning, and looked out the window, and just "knew" that there was more. (Their words, not mine.) Others describe how friends were so selfless; or how they just decided to pray on a whim; or they just eased themselves in out of curiosity. It's ignorant to generalise.

Finally, the religion is not responsible for the actions of an individual. While believers may share the same basic ideals or beliefs, there is a lot of room for deviation and interpretation. And this all depends on the characters of the believers, and hence people respond differently to the teachings. For example, we are all taught that animal abuse is wrong - not referring to religion in this context - but everyone reacts to this information differently. Some people just nod and go on with their lives; some petition and campaign; and some go out and blow up laboratories. Arson is pretty extreme, but would you then argue that it is wrong to teach people that animal abuse is amoral? It is down to the individual how they use the teachings of their faith.

And at the end of the day, if someone's faith provides them with emotional security and well-being, why would you want to take that away from them?


EDIT:

If there weren't Jews, Hitler wouldn't have ordered them killed, so there wouldn't have been a war. That's still a religious war, even if Hitler wasn't officially religious.

You do realise that Jews are a race as well, don't you? Genetically speaking. So it wasn't (just) a religiously motivated war, it was racist.