Religion does more harm than good (Continuing)

Here are my rebuttals:Regarding your earlier point: Religion 'separates', as you say. But has that stopped the majority from working together? Do people ostracise Christians, for example, or Taoists, at your workplace or school? Likely, it doesn't matter as a person's faith holds no sway over a person's abilities or talents or efficiency in work. It helps people endure, in fact, when they would have long since given up.As you said, the crusaders fought only for territories. Your point solidifies my point that religion was only a convenient excuse for war. Take the Japanese in WW2 for example. They conquered, murdered and raped—not for religion, no, but for the claim that they were 'unifying' East Asia. The truth was that they were running out of resources and therefore eyed surrounding countries. With or without the excuse of religion, humans are fully capable of irresponsible and irrational violence. We carry them out by twisting our reasoning any way we possibly can. In Japanese textbooks and schools, Japan refuses to see their part in WW2 as conquering others for their advantage. They'd rather teach lies —that they were expanding their culture, spreading their positive influence around the world— to their students than admit their country was in the wrong. In fact, before the use of internet spread, Japan taught their students that they were provoked into WW2 when the U.S. dropped atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki for no apparent reason. This is the type of behaviour humans are capable of, even without the inteference of religon. Therefore, I conclude that religion has little to do regarding significance in starting major conflicts. Unless you can prove otherwise by introducing a major conflict stemmed purely from religion, without hidden agendas or ulterior motives.Regarding your rebuttal of my point: Perhaps I should have made it clearer as the word 'good' is too general a term. Each religion's laws always seek to edify both the person and society. No matter the methods, the intent is to better society, and the result is almost always ultimately for the greater good. Religion does sacrifice or take advantage of things such as ignorance and morality, but in the end, they strive to improve the life of mankind.Second: Religion has existed for eons. It (be it with rules or fear of gods) has assisted mankind in creating a society with more organisation—an orderly world controlled and managed by dependable rules and practices. "Religion is not exactly the thing"—this is a brief statement. Of course, one has family and friends and the government that also seek to instil law and order in a citizen. But I could argue that religion is a (and quite a large) thing for most people. People turn to religion when they are at their weakest. It is not always depressed people, I was giving an example. Certainly, doctors do not force religion therapy on a patient—that would be largely ineffective and ridiculous. Religion 'comes' to a person when they lose all hope and go: "What do I have to lose, anyway?" Not all attempts to 'connect' with a religion has been successful, but it has in many cases, inspired a person to continue with life. Scroll through any 'God saved me' forum. Most stories you can only believe if you have experienced it yourself. I have not, therefore I do not. But I can however, see the results.Most motivational speakers on the other hand, use facts, I agree. But it only works with and when people [who] are able to think rationally and logically. When one is under pressure, or facing a physical challenge to the limits of their endurance, such as holding out their arms for an hour straight (believe me, its far harder than you think), people turn to 'beg' or 'talk to' the omniscent being they feel is in charge of the time—if only to relieve their mental suffering (brought about by the physical suffering) for a few moments. It increases their presumed endurance. In fact, this does not only apply to religious people. It applies to everyone who has been largely influenced by the belief that some god exists somewhere"religious or not.Third: Religion does nothing to reveal stress or otherwise. I don't believe I've ever mentioned anything about revealing stress, only relieving it. Therefore, this rebuttal is off-topic and moot.Fourth: You mentioned, and I quote: "That [not taking responsibility for one's actions] is absolutely against every moral statement in every single people's beliefs." Not true. This is a sweeping statement that can be quickly disproved if I state that I feel it's okay to not be responsible. You say that there is no place for religion to reduce stress, but I beg to differ. Religion puts a person's mind at peace. Is that not stress reducing to a point? People should take responsibility, yes, but few actually feel obligated to do so if they are not spurred on by some belief. It's not whether they want to carry out their responsibility, but whether they do it or not that contributes to society. Few humans are entirely altruistic or do good without conditioning. Even this 'karma' is the belief that you wil receive good but only if you do good, and vice versa. Therefore, religion is good in the sense that their laws always seek to edify both the believer and the society. New (rebuttal): "Money has changed religion's idea" may be true, however, that is the fault of money and the selfishness/greed of people. Not religion. Every religion's purest goal, as I mentioned above, is to edify both the believer and society. They may differ in methods, but the intent is ultimately positive towards mankind. You are entirely right as to what we 'should' do, yet very few of us have enough willpower and self-discipline to do so. Why are there so many dropouts? Why so few leaders in our society as compared to sheep? If we are able to create such an perfect, sincere, ideal society, there would not even be a need for law enforcers. But we are far from that. Religion or having a belief therefore boosts what we lack in terms of determination, discipline and perseverance. It is in fact, actually not the easiest way to get away from our responsibilities—we still carry them out as religion does not excuse a person from their duties—but it makes the going, the endurance process, far easier.My contentions:I will continue my point that religion does good. Contrary to popular belief (ohmygodallthesepuns), religious beliefs themselves do not mainly foster sense of giving, but the ties and loyalty a person has to their religious congregation will increase the amount they donate to charity. It can be summarised as: the more important religion is to a person, the more money a person will donate to their respective charities. (Evidence below.) Whether you're going to argue otherwise, think about this. If religion (or beliefs) itself does not make people want to donate, what makes you think that a lack of religious beliefs will make the amount donated any greater? Also, I will reiterate my point above that religion seeks to edify society. For example, I'll use Buddhism and Hinduism, both originating from India. Firstly because they are religions that have not actively participated in 'recruitment' and therefore shows a more candid view of religion as it has a larger percentage of true believers. They both have their various ethics like encouraging people to be honest, refrain from selfish desires and maintaining religious harmony. Religion is not the main cause of most wars or conflicts.My last point is for everyone to think about. If religion suddenly ceases to exist, what would our seven billion large population do? My bet is that a huge percentage of people would gradually turn to worship another human being, or turn them into gods themselves in a crude imitation of religion—not unlike what humans have done in the past. Take the literature classic Lord of the Flies by Nobel Prize-winning English author William Golding, for example. Pre-teen boys stranded on the island managed to worship a pig's head, dubbing it the Beast, giving it gifts, even without much prior knowledge or exposure to religion. Would that not be worse than taking up an existing belief, be it logical or not? Religion as it exists is therefore good, in a sense, that it prevents people from straying off a worse path. Even if it takes advantage of society's ignorance and humanity.Religious persons are more charitable: http://ideas.time.com...Religion plays a part in creation of society: http://www.garvandwane.com...Japan's role in WW2: http://afe.easia.columbia.edu...