Faith without evidence is detrimental

Mormon's don't believe that their underwear is supernatural. Mormon underwear is basically the same as a "WWJD" bracelet. That is incorrect according to official doctrine. Even if it were correct, if I used Catholics’ belief that when they take communion that it the literal meat and blood of Jesus, would that have made a difference? This country, the United States of America, was founded and built on Christianity and has become the most powerful nation in the world, and is only 240 years old. The premise that the United States is the most powerful country because of religion is incorrect. South America is far more devout to Christianity per capita than North America. The United States is ranked in the bottom third in religiosity. https://en.wikipedia.org... We are not at risk of overpopulation. That is incorrect (http://www.howmany.org.... ) and does not answer my point. Is your point that it is logical and good for society for Catholics to ban contraception? How are unwanted and unplanned pregnancies a good thing? I assume the only reason you were unable to rebut my point is that it is a ridiculous and damaging belief and no good defense exists. The Bible says nothing about seeking medical attention. The two main Christians denominations (Christian science and Jehovah's Witness) that deny medical were both created during the 1800's. Both deny Biblical scripture in many aspects, and almost Christianity itself. These would not pertain to Faith, but false teachings, where the person is not only accountable, but the teacher also. You are making exactly my point– Faith without evidence is detrimental. And, yes, it did exactly pertain to faith. Faith (definition) - Faith is confidence or trust in a person or thing; or the observance of an obligation from loyalty; or fidelity to a person, promise, engagement; or a belief not based on proof; or it may refer to a particular system of religious belief. Source: https://en.wikipedia.org... As you can see from above, faith is not just believing one religion. Faith is the foundation of every religion that has ever existed. Without faith, they could not have ever existed. The Quran, like the Bible, is clear on murder and suicide. You seem to defend both Christianity AND Islam. I assume since you realize that they have different beliefs, you would have to concede that they cannot both be right. If someone let their child believe in Santa Claus until he was middle aged, wouldn’t you assume the parents did a poor job of teaching their children logic and critical thought? The study that secular children treat other children with more kindness than religious children. This argument has no basis for truth. There are more than two billion children in the world, and this study only looked at 1170, from six different countries. There is not one single control with religion or lack thereof, region that they were born, house hold income, color or ethnicity, moral teachings of parents, or anything. All of this comes into play, but none of this was taken into consideration. It was just a scientific way of taking a stab at religion. To say that 1170 children is not a statistically significant sample is completely incorrect and any statistician would agree. The study was simple: In a given population, do children raised in religious families treat others differently than secular children in the same population? To say the results were skewed only to make religion look bad is to say the data was falsified by scientists for ulterior motives. This statement fits the very definition of cognitive dissonance. Cognitive Dissonance (definition) - In psychology, cognitive dissonance is the mental stress or discomfort experienced by an individual who holds two or more contradictory beliefs, ideas, or values at the same time, performs an action that is contradictory to one or more beliefs, ideas or values, or is confronted by new information that conflicts with existing beliefs, ideas, or values. The problem with cognitive dissonance is that people don’t realize when they are the one that has it. The paradox is that once they realize they have it, they no longer have it. Again, your fallacy Faith issue. You have faith that God doesn't exist. Actually, as I already mentioned to the first time you made this claim, I am agnostic. I am agnostic because I don’t know but I am open to ALL reasonable evidence that is observable and does not violate the laws of the known universe. That is as far opposite of faith as one could be. The rest of your argument was in defense of Christianity. Christianity is only one of about 2700 religions (that we know of) that all claim they are the true religion. This debate wasn’t about Christianity. It was about three things: A lot of people around the world continue to believe a lot of insane things. They believe in those insane things without any evidence whatsoever. They believe that believing things without evidence is a good thing. I am stating that believing things without any evidence is not a good habit to cultivate and sometimes can lead to very bad things. I believe I have sufficiently proven all of my points.