Yuyutsu - Yes, there are myriads of little-gods (with a small 'g'), but coming closer to one does not count as religion, so that excludes footbrawl, thugby, consumerism, politically-correct-ism, etc.

Have you been keeping an eye on those two discussions about what some girl was supposed to have said & how some footbrawler was offended and so on and so forth ?? Those have to be easily the longest winded wastes of time since that 'Blue Hills' radio show was canned (from memory it went on for 36 years or something equally stupid) , well the page after page after page ad nauseum of total umitigated crap about (#*%#&*%)# a stupid sport played by grown men who should have more sense proves beyond any shadow of a doubt that it IS a God (yes with a big 'G'). Its played on Sunday (well I think it is, either that or Saturday anyway, either are someones sabbath), it occupies a cathedral (check out the one in Brisbane near Milton railway station), and its followers are more fanatic than any other religious franchise other than possibly islam & the pentecostals.

mac
You didn't assume the state is an enemy, you assumed it's a god.

“If one assumes that there exists above and beyond the individual’s actions an imperishable entity aiming at its own ends, different from those of mortal men, one has already constructed the concept of a superhuman being.”
Ludwig von Mises

But you don't only assume that, you assume that the State morally superior, that has superior knowledge about what people's values should be, that it represents the people better than they represent themselves, that consensual relations are vicious and only permitted subject to coerced relations, and that a problem of crime is best solved by investing a monopoly of crime.

Besides, who are you to talk about the problem of crime if you think the use of force to violate people's personal and property rights is the basis of a good society? The problem is, you think crime is virtuous if done by the State .

You are a good example of the modern day religion of state worship. Your only defence is to squark "neo-liberal!" as if this somehow disposes of all ethical and pragmatic issues in your favour.

Yes and lets see, secular freedom

freedom to have sex with as many partners as you want and guilt free (except for the massive increase in teen suicide and stds)
freedom to gorge oneself and end up having to have one's tummy banded
freedom to have sex and then dispose of the consequenes by throwing the baby in the bin
freedom for women to have their 'rights' and yet over 25% of them end up on anti depressants

freedom to not discipline children and now the elderly are beaten daily for a couple of dollars

freedom to watch all the porno you want and yet kids are being fiddled with at a higher rate than ever before.

secular freedom really equals terrible bondage but don't let facts get in the way of secular dogma

freedom to perve at naked teenage girls but if you are a secularist call it art

freedom to dump your missus for a younger model and let the taxpayer pick up the tab for your kids

yes lovely secular freedom.

Dear Mac,

<<You're begging the question by assuming the state is an enemy, where did I assert that?>>

On the contrary - you stated that the state is NOT an enemy. I challenged that.

<<Can you live without the state? If so in what way?>>

People lived for hundreds of thousands of years without a state!

I do realise that it would be difficult now, after all the damage already done by states over around a couple of millennia, killing off all alternatives, especially now that we have such a high human population.

For now then, let's start by shrinking the powers of the state and leave the total elimination of the state for a better day.

<<Presumably if threatened by criminals you would call the Police and if by fire, the Fire Brigade>>

Yes, that's about as much as the state may legitimately do. I am not complaining about that part.

The problem is that the above is just a fraction of what the state does. Other than this "good cop" show, the state does so many other things without a legitimate moral justification.

Dear Praxidice,

Fortunately I have no idea what you are talking about. Is this a heresy on my behalf?

Dear Runner,

Without the choice to do wrong there is no choice to do right.
Without vice there is also no virtue.
The role of the church is to educate, the role of the state is to protect those who want to be protected:
neither has an authority to enforce morals, which in fact could only hinder religion.
It is better to take refuge in the Lord than to trust in humans.
Trust in God!

This reference and the associated website gives a much more comprehensive overview of the various dogmas by which we are propagandized - even while still in utero.
http://www.firmstand.org/articles/separation_of_church_and_state.html

This reference also provides a unique perspective of the overwhelming power of the the now world dominant paradigm of scientism. Part 4 gives a unique assessment and criticism of the power of conventional exoteric state religion - the kind of entirely reductionist exoteric religion that Runner promotes - and the IPA too for that matter.
http://global.adidam.org/truth-book/true-spiritual-practice-3.html

This reference describes the all pervasive nature of the anti-psychic, anti-Spiritual, doubt mind that mis-informs our entire culture, including all of conventional exoteric religion.
http://www.beezone.com/AdiDa/nirvanasara/chapter1.html

Jardine,
You forgot to add that secular fundamentalists also have a belief in the supernatural, the all seeing eye of "World Opinion".