• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Assuming God(s) is fiction. Is religion more benificial or detrimental to society.

Assuming all gods are fiction:: Are world religions benificial or harmful to society

  • Total voters
  • Poll closed .


DP Veteran
Jun 24, 2005
Reaction score
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
Many times I've heard "what if your wrong." when people say "I am an atheist". It's a very common argument and most people using it have a false sense of cleverness when they use it. As if we atheists have never asked ourselves that question.:roll:

That being said I think it's time for the shoe to be put on the other foot. No silly arguments excusing the inactivity of nonexistant beings here. Theists I ask you "What if your wrong". I don't mean on a personal level with your inability to face a reality with no "purpose" or "higher call". I mean on a social level.

What's more I'll withhold any arguments I might present for the time being. It's a simple question ... the answears should fill a book or two.... In fact they do.
Re: Assuming God(s) is fiction. Is religion more benificial or detrimental to societ

I don't believe so. However at the same time, I don't think neccesarily getting rid of religion will make people less inclined to commit evil, if that was even possible.

Religion, like many other things, have been used and in some cases devised to exploit the hopes and beliefs of the commoners for their own personal and political gain.
The majority of people aren't capable of thought, independent or otherwise. Without the invention of an invisible sugar daddy in the sky, they'd probably wind up being an even bigger interference to the productive thinkers than they already are. As it is, the con artists take advantage of them, the masses have something to do Sundays, and they feel that they're worth something in the eyes of a make believe being.

The con artists are busy feeding off the easy marks, thus protecting the rest of us from their mischief.

People get employed building the churches, printing the Bibles and the Korans, and selling all sorts of trinkets like glow-in-the-dark Dashboard Mary's and grilled cheese sandwiches with Jesus on them. Loss of the Religion Scam would shut the economy down. We NEED God!

The alternative would be that all those people would have to learn how to think. And there's not enough of us to teach them.
Religious organizations "do good" largely, if not exclusively, for missionary purposes. Would these people be evil without their religion? Probably not. They would go out and help people independently - or with a secular organization. Contrary to the myth popular among the religious, there are a multitude of secular, humanist or atheist organizations. They just don't feel the agenda-driven urge to impose their beliefs upon others that much. Religions have incorporated the nature-given altruistic behavior (which is evident in all primates, religious or otherwise) and twisted it into a system of morality they can pass as their own. Since religions insist on infusing every new generation with their ideology, they are breeding extremists and sociopaths by providing these disturbed people with an ideological foundation. There may be few and far apart normally, but every single one is a danger to hundreds, and sometimes they get their armies rallied - for what their idea of a good cause may be.
I am an atheist and would say: "Religion has both it's good and bad sides and roughly balances out in the end "

Though one option was not even understnading it, two were all positive no nagative, other was all negative no positive. The last was saying it was even. So I chose that one though I believe a bit more nagative than positive.
Re: Assuming God(s) is fiction. Is religion more benificial or detrimental to societ

I can not say "religion has been more beneficial to society as a whole (true or not.)" because I do not believe it has been. Religion is the cause of some of the bloodiest wars and fallout of many nations.

I also can not say "religion has both it's good and bad sides and roughly balances out in the end" because they just do not balance. There are religions that are more followed then others, and this as history has proved is the cause of the bloodiest wars.

I do not believe "religion is the metaphoric "root of all evil" because religion can comfort many people.

So my choice would be I can not comprehend the no God concept.
Top Bottom