Posted on 02/21/2009 6:34:26 AM PST by Crimson Politics
“ALSO IGNORES” contrary evidence. Yes, there is no clear scientific evidence for God, and so you should consider that before you believe in religion. Have you considered it?
The contrary evidence here is that there is no solid evidence. The problem is, the argument can be made that such evidence is difficult to get, or for humans it is not possible. That is a valid argument for me, and hence believing in religion is not “stupid” or “wrong.”
I don’t believe anyone used the legal definition of a conspiracy. And conspiracies don’t indicate illegal action, it could just be “wrongful” action. Religion is not always wrongful, but it can be used wrongfully as a tool to create hatred or to promote war/battle.
The idea is, you shouldn’t take religion so seriously as to go and kill someone for it. That’s the main point. Because religion is so abstract and the lines are so vague, people misinterpret religion, they spread hatred or violence, while at the same time pretending they are angels worshiping God.
The reason, it is mentioned as a conspiracy theory, is because much like a conspiracy theory, people take the theory as reality, and they act on it and hurt others. That was the comparison. Not that conspiracy theories and religions are 100% exactly the same.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.