May May,

"In a free, modern and democratic society every person has the absolute human right to follow any religion, any belief and any philosophy they choose. They have the right to proselytise, preach, educate and influence."

Why on earth do you keep making statements, such as the above, as though it were fact when it is demonstrable wrong?

Dear May,

<<In a free, modern and democratic society every person has the absolute human right to follow any religion>>

"Free" and "Democratic" are a contradiction in terms.

By definition, 'democracy' means that a majority can dictate their way of life to minorities, including curbing their religious freedom.

Add "modern" to the mix and you get a scary situation where modernism is imposed on minorities who do not believe in it.

---

Dear Hippie,

<<Broad encouragement of the wider use of reason and logic in all areas of life does have a chance of creating changes for the better>>

You (and others) assume a monopoly of atheism over reason and logic. Nobody, however, past present or future, acts purely out of reason and logic, including the religious, the theist and the atheist. We simply accept different axioms on what "good" is, then proceed logically to their conclusion. Such axioms are called "values" and cannot be logically derived from nature or from any other external source as they have no objective existence.

A good definition of religion is "A way of life".

The Oxford dictionary tells us that religion is ..."The belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods:"

So, it follows that atheists don't believe in superhuman controlling powers.
I am definitely an atheist then!

As a nurse, I frequently get told I am an angel, so I must be a 'good' atheist. : )

I would define religion as a system of communally shared
beliefs and rituals that are oriented toward some
sacred, supernatural realm.

Whatever our religious beliefs may be, we usually learn
them from other people through socialisation into a
particular faith (or through resocialisation if we convert
from one faith to another). The religious convictions
that anyone holds are influenced by the historical and
social context in which that person happens to live.

Someone born in ancient Rome would probably have
believed that Jupiter is father of the gods; at
any rate he or she would certainly not have been a
Southern Baptist or a Hindu.

Of course we're not passive prisoners of our upbringing,
but even people who decide to convert from one religion to
another or who decide not to follow any particular
religion almost inevitably select their view or new faith
from the unique range of options that their particular
culture happens to offer at a particular point in its
history.

There are a large number of religions, many of whose
members are convinced that theirs is the one true faith and
that all others are misguided, superstitious, even wicked.
The same intolerance can also come from non-believers.

Religion is a universal social institution, it takes a
multitude of forms. Believers may worship gods, ancestors,
totems, they may practice solitary meditation, frenzied
rituals, or solemn prayer. For many years it was widely felt
that as science progressively provided rational explanations
for the mysteries of the universe, religion would have
less and less of a role to play and would eventually
disappear, unmasked as nothing more than superstition.

But as I've stated previously on this forum -
there are still gaps in our understanding that science
can never fill. On the ultimate important questions -
of the meaning and purpose of life and the nature of morality.
Few citizens of modern societies would utterly deny
the possibility of some higher power in the universe, some
supernatural, transcendental realm that lies beyond the
boundaries of ordianry experience, and in this fundamental
sense religion is probably here to stay.

"Few citizens of modern societies would utterly deny the possibility of some higher power in the universe, some supernatural, transcendental realm that lies beyond the boundaries of ordianry experience..."

If by this you mean few people would deny the possibility that we don't know everything, Foxy, I readily agree.

But - and as Christine Aguilera knows it is a big but - the consistant themes of theistic religions are their claims to knowledge and certainty of truths, not possibilities, beyond external testing or experience.

We could take a leaf from the physicists playbook and put the word 'dark' in front of things we don't fully know (think Dark Energy or Dark Matter) and ascribe all the supernatural and transcendental realms and gods as the Dark Force.

"...and in this fundamental sense religion is probably here to stay."