Sells, you are guilty of tap-dancing with words again.

>>Religion is any system of belief that holds the ultimate truth for the believer<<

Yeah but, no but.... sorry, Sells, that does not wash. I have the full OED in front of me, and none of its eight definitions comes anywhere close. Even leaving aside the more specific (e.g. 1a. "a state of life bound by monastic vows") the closest we get to your position is:

6 transf a. "Devotion to some principle; strict fidelity or faithfulness; conscientiousness; pious affection or attachment. Obs"

Note the transf. which means "transferred sense", i.e. not a literal definition. And the Obs. Obsolete.

The remaining six definitions are all ones the man on the Clapham omnibus would recognize e.g. 3a "Action or conduct indicating a belief in, reverence for and a desire to please a divine ruling power."

We are not all religious, Sells. Only religious people are religious.

>>So the fascism of Hitler, Stalin and Pol Pot are classic religious stances writ large<<

Utter nonsense. Hitler was Catholic, I think we can agree, so he might qualify. But neither Stalin nor Pol Pot claimed to have any religion at all.

>>Religion is harmful because its ideology blinds us to the truth.<<

Not at all. Religion is harmful when it pretends that it is the truth, instead of being just another lifestyle choice.

>>Christianity is not, strictly speaking, a religion in that it does not consist of blind ideology in its best forms but an unmasking of the truth<<

What is the claim "unmasking of the truth", if it is not the perfect description of a blind ideology?

>>There is no such thing as a nonreligious person<<

Oh yes there is. It is someone who is not religious.

A semantic house of cards Mr Sellick, collapsing at the approach of the slightest zephyr of logic. Not to mention a dictionary.

It is very interesting and somewhat enlightening that many of our contributors are rather concerned about the influence of the American ultra Christian Right on American foreign policy.

According to Dr Denis Kenny an Australian political scientist, formerly teaching in the US at Harvard University, who now contributes to Dissent, which edits mostly a mixture of the works of politicians, professors and Phd’s airing their views possibly more in a philosophical way.

In his conclusion of Part One of a two-part article explaining or debating on the effects that Greek philosophy has had on both our politics and on our Christian religion, presented here is his conclusion to his first article covering seven A4 size pages.

“Our Western world, and much of the rest of the world, contiues to operate politically, economically, culturally and religously on the basis of a set of assumptions which have been scientifically discredited over the years.

A continued adherence to these assumptions, and the dangerous certitudes which they give rise to in places like the US White House, and the Vatican among many other institutions sacred and secular on the planet, is at the best of neo-imperial arrogance, bringing on international and inter-cultural conflict, blind economic expansion, social injustice as well as eco-destruction.

The scientific developments of the 20th century demand that in this new 21st century, we begin to inhabit the new-found cosmology of a creative universe and learn to embrace the assumptions on which it is based.”

Of course, anyone who has studied the philosophy of history, knows that Dr Kenny is only reminding us that one of the strongest lessons of Western history is that religous faith by itself only mostly produces leaders who want to act like a God on earth, whereas the added study of scientific reasoning, which the liberal Christian knows is also part of the Grand Design, might help us to be more understanding even regarding the problems of our so-called enemies.

Ouch - that was tough to write. Feel a bit like a bleeding heart.

Cheers, George C - W

The last century has been the most secular in the history of the world, and it has also been the most bloody.

Excuse me?

The Crusades? The Inquisition? Witch burning in Salem?
I could go on but I think it is a point well made.

What ridiculous twaddle.

To tennyson's_one_far-off_divine_event, Martin Ibn Warriq,

So many mistakes so little time to reply. Let's deal with martin's fractured history first.
Quote "It was the Faith that saved Europe many times from conquest, lead to hospitals, universities, science, human rights, capitalism (the rise of reason) and it’s the only thing that will save it this time. " I'll give you an D- for that lot Martin.

1) Christianity did NOT save Europe from conquest. Not at ANY time. Name one time when people were threatened with invasion & fought NOT to protect their homes & families but because their faith demanded it. Just one Martin. :)

2) Christianity did NOT lead to hospitals & universities. Hospitals were in existance in ancient Sri Lanka [6 century BCE].
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hospital

Universities were first developed by the Greeks [Plato's Academy]. Do your homework Martin!

3) Science was used by the Chinese, Egyptians, Greeks & Romans centuries before christianity existed.
http://inst.sfcc.edu/~jbieber/HS/HSanclnk.htm
In fact Christianity was at first extremely anti-science.

4) The rise of capitalism in Europe was fought tooth & nail by the Church. I can provide you with the data if you wish martin.

5) The idea that humans had innate rights [rather than rights given by God which could be taken away by God's representative the pope] is first found in the enlightenment. NOT in christianity before that event.

To both Martin & Tennyson, who've both tried to smuggle in anti-evolution statements into this thread - here, do some homework. If you truely believe that evolution is so obviously wrong you should have no trouble explaining these facts.
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/list.html

gusi I agree with you totally. Religion is neutral. But fundamentalism both secular & religious is not. Fundamentalism of any stripe claims to have all the answers & it's motto is always "believe & obey or else". It is, I would argue, a corrupting influence. It breeds [though is not the sole source of] bigotry, intolerance, & hatred.

And on that note Martin, & Tennyson here is a site both of you will find VERY useful.

http://edwardtbabinski.us/fundamentalists/helpful_links.html

So avowed atheists, Stalin, Hitler, Mao & Pol Pot were all religious. Thats why they persecuted all religions, especially the Christian Churches. Now I understand - it's all so clear & logical!!
The facts of recent history are easily verified. There is no excuse for wilful ignorance.

Pericles, Sells is alas a sophist who can weasel out of anything.

Mercurius, you go to the heart of the matter – it all comes back to people, individuals. Whether or not there is a God, a Creator, each person is responsible for their own volition, their own actions. If religion can help people to understand their responsibility and the consequences of their actions so that they behave in a way which is conducive to harmony within themselves and with others, it’s helpful; if it doesn’t, it’s not. Clearly, the imperfect adherents of religion can act for good or for evil just as do non-adherents.