Do we prevent somebody being hurt by superstition or faith by rejecting and challenging those things? 

Is it mistaken to support organised religion in membership or donations?

If people do good because they are human, not because God prompts them then is it right to risk giving God any credit when they alone own their good?

Patrick H

Belief in God and in Religion Do Grave Harm
Does religion usually make a laughing stock of right and wrong?
Yes and then it dares to complain how most of its followers end up doing their own thing! What can it expect? To enter children into religion and expect it to help them become good is naive. If they become good, its merely because of the kind of people they are.
How does religion make a laughing stock of right and wrong?
By being so unfair as to saying silly things such as that missing Sunday worship is a serious sin. It is not. Or by saying silly things such as that harmless sex before marriage is so serious that it merits punishment in Hell forever.
What does love your neighbour as yourself really mean?
We are unable to love our neighbour that much but we can still be exceptionally good and kind people. Jesus' rule is just an insult to us. It can lead only to disheartenment and thus people end up hurt. It is a trap to set you up for a fall.
What is absolutism?
The doctrine that certain actions are always wrong no matter how good the consequences will be.
What is consequentalism?
The doctrine that an action is right if it does the least possible damage.
Can we believe both?
No. It has to be one or the other.
What is relativism?
It is the doctrine that right and wrong don't really exist in themselves. It is not an option. It is foolish for it says we can make actions good by wanting them to be good.
Is absolutism inconsistent?
Yes. Absolutists may say that birth control is never justifiable even in self-defence while killing is. They put a moral veneer on their vicious prejudices. There is no reason why say blasphemy could be always wrong while killing may sometimes be right. Absolutists never agree on what to forbid.
Is belief in God important if consequentalism is true?
No. Then you would have to agree that sometimes people need to not believe and than it all depends on the results. Belief in God and the bigotry of absolutism go together.
Do believers in God divide good deeds into those that are obligatory (duties) or those that go beyond duty (supererogation)?
Yes. They say you have a duty to keep a promise for example. They deny that you have a duty to take a wife and have children even if you are very eligible! That is an example of supererogation.
What does duty imply?
Duty implies a person should be forced to carry it out if necessary and should not be praised for doing their duty but they should be condemned if they do not try to do it properly. Doing good you are not bound to do is considered praiseworthy.
What is positive duty and negative duty?
Positive duty is when I owe somebody good for the good they did me - eg pay workers for working for me. Negative duty is when I am bound not to do something. I am bound for example not to defraud my labourers.
What is supererogation?
It is the teaching that there are many kinds of good you do not have to do. For example, if you keep your money for a cup of coffee you could do without and ignore the beggar who asks for help that is not a sin or wrong.
Can supererogation exist if there is a God?
Not if religion is right to say we owe him a perfectly good life as a debt for all he has done for us in making us and sustaining us and loving us. Everything we do is a duty to him then.
Do we need to believe in a God to turn to when we want our sins forgiven?
To be more interested in turning to God for forgiveness when we cannot really hurt an almighty and all-perfect being is bad. It is the people we hurt we should be turning to. To ask his mercy and not to apologise to those people shows audacity and laziness and alarming hypocrisy.
How does God religion ruin people by telling them that they will find happiness chiefly in God?
Its cruel for most people do not find that putting God first makes them happy. It is asking them to do something very difficult and its unfair and it could be for nothing. The saints spoke of a dark night of the soul - a crippling depression down to feeling abandoned by God.
Does human nature crave happiness and not God?
Yes. You adore and serve God to be happy. You wouldn't if it made you miserable. So its the happiness you want not God.
How does this fact show that belief in God is dangerous?
It shows those who say they love God are lying and it means they will become vicious if their belief is attacked for they see it as a threat to the happiness they derive from their self-deception. 
If there is a God, should we love him because he needs it?
He can't have any needs as he is almighty and perfect. Also a God with wants or needs would necessarily be imperfect and a non-God. If he is not perfect then he is not God. To serve a being and sacrifice ourselves for him when he has no need of it is unsatisfying and degrading. Religion says we should do everything we do for the love of God 100% for he is so good. It is asking for total degradation.
Is it fair to love a God who does not need your love?
No - not even if he deserves it! Justice and fairness are based on needs. To love another being is to give. A God who wants you to give to him is evil.
Has God any relevance in your life?
Even if there is a God he has no relevance to my life because everything I do, I do it to satisfy some desire I have and not him. I will not be conned into thinking he has. I am my own God and I do not need another.

What is wrong with Jesus' commandment that we must first of all love God with all our hearts, souls, mind, strength and potential and secondarily love your neighbour as yourself?
It plainly says that you must put God before yourself and others. It is an incitement to fundamentalist bigotry. It gives you the heart of a bigot even if your actions seem outwardly noble. No God should ever be put before yourself and the people who come into contact with you. That would be fanaticism.
Does the commandment imply that we must give our hearts to God, meaning we must not have feelings for others but only God?
Yes. Heart means the emotions. Jesus said elsewhere that to love our neighbour does not mean we have to have warm feelings. Its about doing God's will for them.
What happens if we are in love with God?
We will be dangerous when we see his laws broken and his religion scorned. It leads to religious hatred and strife.
Is it true that whoever is not for God is against him?
Yes. the word God implies that he is the being who alone really matters.
Should we love God for our needs or because we need to?
That is really serving ourselves not him. The believers adore God for they need to so they really serve themselves. They might as well worship a marble statue. They are idolaters in their hearts anyway. Belief in God is only popular because people think they need to serve him and love him. The truth is hidden from them. And such a ridiculous need makes them turn on those who wish to help society extricate itself from religion.
Is to love because we need to healthy?
No. Real love is not forced. The worship of God is a counterfeit of love and artificial love being hypocrisy and deceit is very dangerous.
Is it compulsion to tell a person that they must love God for he deserves perfect love and to sin is so grievous?
What is wrong with religion and God and Jesus commanding the love and worship of God?
You should just love. You should not be commanded to do it. Commanding is trying to pressure you - therefore your love will not be real.
Can you really love a being that doesn't need the love? Is it an insult?
To love God when it is no good to him is not loving him at all. It is about you not him.
Should we love people and treat God with indifference?
Of course! Love means to want the wellbeing of a person or thing. To want the wellbeing of God who doesn't need it is misusing energy. Spend it on those who need it. He can't blame you for there is nothing else he can expect.
What about the religious advice that when people suffer terribly they do not look to know why they suffer but seek to find God in their suffering?
That shows no concern if they fail to and end up suffering worse. Where are the scientific studies that show people think they find God?
What should atheists focus on more than the question if there is a God?
On proving that even if there is we should not give him any consideration.
What do religionists mean when they say that since there is a moral law, that implies that there is a God to make that law?
They are really denying the commonsense observation that the suffering of a baby is evil regardless of whether the suffering is necessary for a justifiable purpose or not. Since evil exists and is undesirable it follows that we should get rid of it. They are saying you can't regard it as evil unless you believe in God. They are evil for teaching this bigoted nonsense.
What else is evil about their doctrine?
Its fundamentalism. We all know that we sometimes have to do harm for a greater good and when that harm is essential for bringing that good about.
Is belief in God important then if it has nothing to do with morality or righteousness which means causing the least possible pain and suffering?
No. They are bigots for making a big deal out of the belief.
Is wrongdoing wrong because it is wrong or is it wrong because God forbids it?
If it is wrong whether there is a God or not then belief in God is not important and what matters is being productive to society. If it is wrong just because God forbids it then it follows child-rape would be right if God commanded it. Religion responds that God wouldn't command that for his nature is kindness. It says then that his will is not arbitrary. But this is still saying that things are right not because they are right but because God commands them.
Do we need God to believe in right and wrong?
No. To do good just to obey God means we are doing it to obey and not because it is good. No matter how much good we do our intentions are not good. We are degraded and we degrade those who we use to please God. We need to ignore God and/or disbelieve to mean to do real good.
What about the view that God does not have the intention to tell us what to do all the time for he has made us to be free rational creatures?
But God is supposed to always know what is best. If we make up our own minds and are wrong that means we unwittingly oppose him and what is right. The view contradicts the teaching that the more good we are the more free we are. If we really want to be free, we will listen to him all the time. If he does not tell us then he is not very supportive of our freedom!
Is its God's business what we do to another person?
No. Religion believes that it is what we intend by our actions not the actions themselves that counts. God enables the actions to happen and have the results they have for he is almighty. This means our responsibility is our intentions.
Is it true that to hurt another person or ourselves is to hurt God for he has lavished his loving care on us all?
God then has to be annoyed that his work on his child is mocked and not that the child is hurt.
Is it true that God does not like us hurting his child so we have to apologise to God for it?
No. You can't say sorry to God for hurting the child but maybe you can say sorry for upsetting God.
Should you say sorry to God for disgusting him by your sins?
The sins don't hurt him. He chooses to be upset so its his problem and he is not entitled to an apology. The God of the Christians is an interfering old prig by asking for us to come to him to say sorry for hurting people. Also, its an insult to the hurt person to say God comes first for that implies it is more important to be sorry for offending God than for hurting the person.
How does the thought that we need belief in God to be able to believe in things being objectively wrong fit all this?
To hurt a baby is to hurt the mother for she has loved the baby and done so much for him and loves him now. It is not objectively wrong. It is subjectively wronging her but not objectively wronging. So it would seem to be with God. God does not help the cause of those who want to use the concept to teach objective wrong.
Why say that it only seems that hurting God's child is hurting God just like cruelly hurting a baby would be hurting its mother?
Its not the same. God has no needs. The mother needs her child to be safe.
Is it true that we must apologise to God for hurting others for his law is that we must not hurt them?
You don't apologise to the judge for speeding. Its the law you have to make amends to. Law is not people.
Is it true that God alone can give our lives and deeds meaning and purpose?
Believers say yes for if we had eternal life on earth we would get bored. This is nonsense. It is like saying that the longer you live the more bored you get. It is one of their psychological manipulations to create a need for belief in God. Its a vicious insult to those who love life and who have the maturity to accept its challenges.
What about the view that if there is no God to answer to for our actions that we have no deterrent for doing evil?
It is not answering to people that is the main deterrent but the punishment.
What about the view that atheists say suffering disproves God which does not lessen anybody's suffering but rather takes away hope?
We should be hoping that we will cope and that if we can't we will get relief perhaps in death. You don't need God for either of these.
Are the atheists doing sufferers a favour by saying there is no God to help?
You will wonder why God lets you suffer. This is painful. You will not suffer that pain if you deny the existence of God. If you are in the throes of agony, crying to God will only worsen your pain for it will not be relieved.
Is there any justification for believing its God's business what we do?
None - no wonder religion never tries to give any and nobody has a clue why they should worry about God.
I know I exist and I know it 100% and any other knowledge is really just belief and not full knowledge and so what does this tell me about God?
That he has no right to lay down orders for me. I must make my own choices and rules.
If there is no law unless God makes it, what does that tell you about God?
That his commands are about authority, not about being right - even if they are right. Their rightness is merely incidental. God is therefore evil and unworthy of being served.
Do we obey others and do we respect authority?
We do not. Another says we must do something. We decide that we must do it therefore we do it because we decide to and not because of the authority. We may seem to obey and authority. We do not.
Has God made evil?
Yes - evil is a power. Unhappiness is a power. It is a real feeling - its not just the absence of happiness.
Why does religion say that God did not make evil for its not a power but is merely a lack - that is, it is something that is not as good as it can be?
They insult human suffering for the sake of saying God has nothing to do with evil. To say that evil is not a power but merely the absence of happiness is just callous and undeniably deceptive.
Are religious people humanists without admitting it?
Yes. They believe that even God can't make wrong right or vice versa. Many lie that they don't. Good is good whether there is a god or not.

Does God exist?
God does not exist for suffering is present in the world. He has the power to stop it but wonít so when it happens there cannot be a God.

Why does God not allow evil for a good purpose?
Because we donít have free will which means we are programmed by our past and some other factors to do what we do and so he can stop us doing harm by changing the programming.

Does belief in God imply that what we all see as evil might be good?
Yes for it says God can let us rip and tear at each other while we are forbidden to let our children do that. Religion says God is right for he needs to see if we will obey him or not. They assume that even when extreme evil is seen to happen so it is circular reasoning and with circular reasoning why not assume an opposite circle? God forbids that so he is evil in doing so and he his laws are anti-person.

Why is it evil to suggest even that God might exist?
Principally, because that means agreeing with the cruel way he has organised his creation and accusing us of being responsible for suffering when we are not Ė that is the greatest calumny possible. If God exists then happiness is wrong when he makes such a great injury to be good.
How does religion explain a good God creating or making evil?
They answer that evil is not a power or a thing. It is just the absence of good. But the point is not what evil is, a power or non-power but that it is evil. If God cannot make evil as a power in itself then he cannot let evil happen at all.
Does belief in a God who reveals himself to people threaten our wellbeing?
Yes. The doctrine says that God can ask us to do things that seem evil but we must trust in him for he knows it is the right thing under the circumstances. Religions of peace and religions of war both agree that what God says goes even if it seems awful. They are as bad as each other in their attitude. The mere attitude is disrespect for humankind.
Does belief in God damage the personality by taking away the reality check?
Belief in God's revelations, repudiates the reality check we need when we are trying to decide what is right and wrong or true and false.
Does the religionist have the right to call a religionist who differs from him mad or fanatical?
The religionist who, for example, says that a peace of bread is God's body gives up any right to criticise their neighbour who decides that he is God almighty. There is as much evidence for one view as the other. The religionist who condemns heresy or disagreement with his faith is a bigot and a hypocrite. The seed that might grow into violent sectarianism is sown.
Does mere belief in God alone pose a threat to us?
Yes. A being or God you can't see or really know should never be put before the people you see and touch. If you believe in God you have to believe that God's needs and wishes come before your own or those of other people. If it is right to have that attitude then there is nothing stopping one from going further and making religious rules to hurt people.
Does religion promote evil by making a laughing stock of doing the right thing?
Yes. That is why religious leaders are to blame if their followers do evil that they forbid.
What problem does religion pose for our civil liberties?
Democracy means the will of the majority of the people must be imposed whether it is good or not. To help a religion to thrive is increasing the number of people who can vote to conserve their benefits at the expense of non-religious people and members of other religions. Speak out against it. The long-term benefits are worth it.
What is wrong with needing God or belief in him?
To need God or anybody is to refuse to be happy if you donít get them. It is not love to blackmail people this way for love does not seek to control. Since it is you that refuses to be happy you can refuse to refuse to be happy.

Is using God to help yourself as abnormal as using crutches when you can walk without them?
Yes.  When you serve God you are doing it to make yourself happy which proves you can do it without him. Your devotion to him, like all strange behaviour, indicates fear and fear is the origin of all evil.

When you donít need God and practice religion what does that prove?
That you think that you and other people cannot manage on your own to be good. That is scary and cynical and uncharitable and undermines self-esteem.

How does finding peace in God imply antipathy towards your brothers and sisters?
It implies that your own resources and theirs are not good enough for you.

How does belief in God demand that truth be put first?
If God exists that is the most sacred truth for he is all-good and must come before everything else for nothing else is as good. So that truth comes first when God comes first. When a truth comes before human welfare all truth must be the same for a truth no matter how important is just a truth. Therefore to cause any misperception of the truth is wrong. If we promote truth all the time the world will soon be flooded with blood.

Why it is dangerous to say that God speaks to us?
Because it implies that we need him to tell us what is right and what should be believed. It is better to decide that for yourself especially when you only believe in Godís word because you have judged it to be true so why not judge for yourself in the first place?
What is the danger with believing in God's law?
Because law is set up to regulate imperfect humanity,. the law might be as good as it can be but it can never be perfect . Thus to say God exists implies that he makes laws we must obey even though these laws seem harmful and silly.

How does this imply that God could command what is harmful?
Because God wants us to believe things on his authority and that is dangerous meaning that God is hostile to real right and wrong.