by William Falcone

Created on: August 16, 2009

The immediate answer to the question at hand is there can be religion. It is a false and dangerous idea to argue that a person shouldn't have a particular belief in religion or god.

But for the sake of argument let's "Imagine"for a moment a world with no religion. In this world of non-believers there would be less walls between people-both literally and symbolically. Without religion there might not be Israel. There probably would not have been the Holocaust and Adolf Hitler. There would not have been the Holy Crusades. There might have been less colonization with its emphasis on Christianizing indigenous people. These ideas are not difficult to "Imagine".

Religion can certainly be a barrier between different people and nation-states. " My way is best " and its ethnocentric philosophy is inherently dangerous. This is a philosphy of " you are with us or against us "-no middle ground. If there is no middle ground then tho only solution is conflict. Conflict may not always mean war. But differences in religious beliefs can, at times, be a catalyst that can escalate a conflict. For example it can be argued that the Catholics of Northern Ireland used terrorist tactics against the English backed Protestants only because of economic reasons. The Catholics were disproportionately poor and without a political voice. So economics and politics were certainly major players in that long conflict. But wasn't religion something that tossed this conflict over the edge-into violent acts of terror by both sides involved ? Can't the same be said for the Israelis and Palestinians ?

Religion can also be used to dehumanize one's alleged "enemies". Although disputed it was painfully obvious that President Bush was able to rally U.S. citizens to his side in the "war on terror". Didn't "terrorist" mean Muslim ? Isn't it easier to rally the troops when one can use this ploy to label the enemy as belonging to a religion that is against "us"; the Christian soldier and all the goodness that he stands for. Was this not the intent of "with us or against us "?

Of particular concern to agnostics,secularists, atheists, and humanists, is the idea that many people in the U.S. seem convinced that this is a "Christian nation " Since when ? Wasn't Thomas Jefferson a fairly secular Deist ? Didn't Mr. Jefferson and his peers take great pains to secularize the founding principles of this country ? Wasn't separation of church and state an important concept necessary to prevent the development of a theocratic republic ?

It seems a very vocal group in the U.S. would be quite comfortable with a theocracy. Again the "with us or against us " bunch who fail to see a middle ground in different philosophies.

Why do I think that the world would be worse without religion then if I can make a fairly strong argument that there "should be no religion"? The idea that anyone should think in a certain way is, perhaps, the biggest violation of one's human rights. Obviously people throughout history developed ideas,concepts, and philosophies to help them to adapt to the big questions of-Who am I? Why am I here ? What happens after life ? Thinking is what makes us human. I think, therefore I am.

All one has to do is venture out to the world of totalitarianism and its vicious thought patrol police states to know that is just seems wrong to try to control how people think. Do I think it is totally irrational to believe in god ? Of course I do. It just seems to be a contradiction of rational and scientific thought process. But should I tell others that something they believe in is wrong ? Of course not. After all, to err is human. My rational and humanistic belief system permits me to forgive even those who are completely crazy !

Learn more about this author, William Falcone.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.