Do you have data, or is that just a reflection of your feelings? Either one is fine - I’m just curious.

@skado The only data I have is history.

@jlynn37
Data could come from history, if it were systematically extracted. But history, in and of itself, is not data. In that regard, history is no different from the present moment. We may get a visceral impression from it, but a systematic retrieval of data might show a completely different picture. I’m sure you know that.

@skado Then there is the fact that Ag Barr reminded us. History is written by the winners.

@Lorajay
One of the many problems faced when trying to extract truth from written accounts of what actually happened.

@skado Physical abuse is not the only form persecusion and ill-treatment perpetrated by religion. The emotional toll of religion's psychological weaponry such as coercion, thought control, indoctrination of superstition, threats of eternal punishment, the inculcation of concepts like sin and guilt, etc. over the millenia is incalculable. Combine that with religion's greedy practice of making impoverishing demands of alms and tithes from those who are already destitute, and the immoral, if not criminal, abuse of religion is beyond grotesque.

@p-nullifidian Hear, Hear.

@p-nullifidian
I assume the overwhelming majority of abuse, as well as inadvertent harm, committed in the name of religion is of the psychological variety. Still, I don't think it's a reliable measure of that harm to just use our visceral impressions. A great deal of abuse is perpetrated by humans in every field. Surely the pursuit of money and power is at least as bad, if not ten times worse. It would be extremely difficult to measure, so I resist making facile statements about what is the worst cause of human to human harm. I tend to think the greatest offender might be poverty and ignorance, but then that can be traced back to other people's greed, and religion is tangled up in that too. So it would be impossible, I think to single out one culprit, unless that culprit is just Homo sapiens.

@p-nullifidian
Without scientific data our guesses are no different from religion itself.

@skado I agree with you on visceral impressions and the lack of scientific data, but all we need do is read historical accounts, and extrapolate. This is a largely a subjective endeavor requiring soft skills to be sure. And while I would also agree that poverty and especially ignorance are at the root of unending misery, religion is another bane of humanity that has, in its various forms, done far more damage than good.

Throughout history, the altar has propped up the throne, and vice-versa. As nations rose to great power, so did their religion, and in the case of the Holy Roman Empire and much of the Islamic world, church and state have effectively been one. It requires little guesswork—just some empathy perhaps and a little knowledge of the culture—to contemplate the all-encompassing effect of religion. We know that in Europe and Latin America, many tens of thousands were tortured and garroted or burned at the stake for crimes such as heresy, witchcraft and homosexuality, from the 15th through the 19th century. But as I have previously stated, the greatest lasting damage has come in the form of psychological and pecuniary deprivation.

I don’t believe it is very useful to debate which was institution has caused the greatest abuse—both the church and the state have blood on their hands. But unlike the two-dimensional state, the church is able to wash its hands by adding a third party, a supposed divine sponsor for its madness, using psychological warfare to convince the majority that its soldiers of the cloth are acting on behalf of God. All of this is, admittedly, my opinion, nothing more.

@p-nullifidian
I don't want to come across as disagreeing with the substance of what you're saying, because I don't disagree with it, by and large. I just think it is more complex than Church = Evil. If we were to go about assessing all the good the Church has done (equally impossible to do) it's hard to guess where we would actually be right now if the Church had never existed. It's always easy to see the bad deeds, but not so easy to identify the good influence, collectively, in the hearts of sincere individuals.

It's very similar to government. How many books could we fill (have already been filled) with the historical misdeeds of governments over time? So does Government = Evil? Plenty would say YES! But in spite of its shortcomings, government has served a useful purpose. I think religion, if evil, is just another necessary evil, like government. It's part of Homo sapiens.

What most members of this site usually call religion, I would call religious fundamentalism. And religious fundamentalism and fanaticism rightly deserve all the condemnation they get from thinking people. But there are practices and teachings that have been preserved by the Church that not only don't deserve condemnation, but are arguably central to the success of civilization. I'm not claiming they necessarily originated in organized religion, but the Church has been instrumental in preserving, promoting, and patiently teaching principles of tolerance and peacemaking, among others. And the fact that it has also been corrupted by all the human error that corrupts everything else humans do doesn't change that fact. The bane of humanity is humans. Getting rid of religion won't get rid of any of the evils that have plagued it any more than getting rid of government will. Humans will always find an outlet for their animal nature.

@skado Eloquently stated, and I agree with much, if not most of it. I espcially resonate with "...religious fundamentalism and fanaticism rightly deserve all the condemnation they get from thinking people."

If we can perhaps agree that religion (or as you've stated, the Church) is too broad a brush to be painting with--as Sam Harris has said, religion is a term like sports and the only thing in common betwen a sport like kick boxing and badminton is breathing--we may then begin to identify the most destructive and harmful elements. I'm good with that. It doesn't mean I'm going to become a Quaker like my grandmother, but I can say that they're generally easier to get along with than the fundamentalists and fanatics you speak of.

@p-nullifidian
Yes! Great Sam Harris quote. I need to write that down and remember it. Thanks for that insight. That really sums it up well.

Hey, you got a new "pic"? Is that an oil painting?

@AnneWimsey Just a computer filtered image.

@Fred_Snerd For those who can’t get along with others, everything appears a threat

Good point.

Agree 🕊

@Fred_Snerd I am saying that all abuse is wrong, but religion offers an "out" for bad behavior, or an excuse for it.

“With or without religion, good people can behave well and bad people can do evil; but for good people to do evil - that takes religion.”
― Steven Weinberg

@Fred_Snerd Well, I guess what I am saying is that religion is the bane of humanity because it excuses abuse and often demands it.

@Fred_Snerd In my view, religion influences government, business and something else. Not vice versa.

@Fred_Snerd and who does the abuse?

@Fred_Snerd abusers are people.i'm just showing you that my comment that you quoted was spot on.

@Fred_Snerd that is not what I am saying at all. My point is that you're giving some kind of pass at religions, when religious abuses are widely and abundantly known all throughout history, way more so than non believers. The notion that community is somehow a deterrent is ridiculous. Abuse comes from human beings who have some shit for brains somewhere and no autocontrol, and that happens overwhelmingly more often by religious nuts than non believers. Inquisition, witch trials, burnings, beheadings, 9/11, ad infinitum examples of religious based abuse.

@Fred_Snerd don't. Just accept the historic facts.

@Fred_Snerd sure, fly or drive over here and no prob.

@Fred_Snerd up to you, you proposed it, you decide.

@Fred_Snerd that's the problem because you obviously can't read well, I didn't ay "accept anything", I said accept the historical facts I mentioned, which are all true.

Where did you get the evidence that Atheists commit more White collar Crimes. Or did you even get evidence for this.

@Fred_Snerd I understand that you had some suffering but you are contradicting yourself here. I actually have no enemies, they're all dead!

@Fred_Snerd I don't disagree with you that there are enough 'non-religious' people or that people who has weak or no affiliation with a religion do 'bad things' but I could explain to you how we both might be right while we're both talking about 2 different things. Religion is a certain belief which is "a pursuit or interest followed with great devotion." Meaning Hatred is a belief, Envy and Love too. So what you are suggesting is that Humans can do 'bad' no matter what, which is partially correct except that the first religion 'first humans' must have had is Klilling, either each other or other creatures to survive. In addition; When humans had mkre devoloped brains and started to create words and stories, their(old) thoughts emerged as 'religions' to make the world a much bloodier place than it was before!

@Fred_Snerd Not me, but I again agree woth you on that point. Materialism is sick but it is still 'Human'!

@Fred_Snerd Frankly I borrowed the idea from Bart Ehrman. He wrote an entire book on suffering called "Gods Problem" a great read.

@Fred_Snerd Preachers and professors tend to be the onlynpeople that I can talk to about religion, most simply don't have any idea what they are talking about.

@Fred_Snerd it’s def not THE source. It’s def A source. Religion is a catalyst for abuse though and therefor a bane. I’ll paraphrase Weinberg’s quote here. Left alone bad people do bad things good people do good things. Want bad people to be good? Make laws. Want good people to do bad things? Make religion.
I’ll liken it to a gun, is the gun bad or the bullets? One makes the other bad or worse. Same with abuse and religion. Remove either and things get a whole lot better forthwith.

It’s not a chicken or the egg question. It’s a synergistic thing.