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

Anyone who engages in the practice of psychotherapy confronts every day the devastation wrought by the teaching of religion. - Nathaniel Branden
It is the purpose of this letter to make the academic world and psychiatric profession realise that belief in God and religion are unhealthy and therefore must be categorised as abnormal.
What is normal? What is abnormal? The two questions go together. To ask one is to ask the other.
As nature has strange ways it would be a mistake to call something abnormal because it doesnít look right or is rare. Being evil is the only true abnormality. We can only call what is meant to hurt innocent people or what is evidently harmful abnormal. To suggest any different has the question ďWhatís normal?Ē left largely unanswerable. Evil is when the not good presents itself as the good. Evil cannot exist without detachment from reality.

Take the case of when young children lose their mother in death. To tell them in their grief that she is in Heaven translates as, ďYou are being selfish for mourning her. You should be glad she is happy in Heaven.Ē To even suggest that some people die rejecting God and will inevitably burn in Hell forever is to add a new worry to the grief of the vulnerable. We would rather there was no survival of death for our loved ones than for it to be even slightly possible for them to end up in such a place. The vulnerable will be disturbed in case the dead person went to Hell even if that is not very likely. And the fact that they might read in their Bible that Jesus limited salvation only to a tiny minority (Matthew 7:13,14) makes it all the worse. We are surer we will live on if this body of ours is preserved than we are if it dies. This fact makes it obscene and offensive for any clergyman to come along and tell the bereaved to love God and praise him for all he does including taking the dead person from earth. It is condoning what has happened when it is actually better to see it for the totally abhorrent evil that it really is. Religion has no real and lasting role to play in consoling the bereaved. It forces sceptics to ask how it could really care about the dead when it has bothered them with its silly and hard rules not caring if this life was the only one they would have and harping on about the next life and giving no proof that it exists? There is also the fact that religion blames us and not God for the evil in the world. If God permits a fatal car accident to happen it is to help us be better people or at least not get any worse. Obviously, an all-powerful God could have no other excuse. Is this the kind of thing that anybody, especially a child, needs to hear? And don't say that you believe in God but wouldn't or shouldn't say that to the child. In fact religion claims to be about pleasing God and not people. God is defined as the source of all good and all things are to be used to lead us to him so by by definition God alone matters. The child will have to understand and if God exists he will help the child through the upset. So we see that even if religious people will not tell a child, "Stop crying and trust in God for he knows what he is doing" their faith tells them they should.
What if the young mother died because she was a drug user and took a dangerous cocktail? Society and the Church will say what a wonderful woman she was and how nice she was. There might be a warning from them about how dangerous drugs are and how it is better to keep away from them. But there will be no moralising about what the woman has done. Nobody will say she freely abused her free will and chose evil. Is it the case that because emotions are so raw among the bereaved that doing that would cause more pain? If morality is so offensive then what do we have it for? Is the moralising there but just not talked about? Or does the Church approve of her? Does it neither approve or disapprove? If the Church excludes the notion of a person freely doing evil then it is nonsense to warn people against abusing drugs. The Church will not then pretend that it condemns immoral acts not the people who commit the acts. It will prove that it does not really believe in hating the sin and loving the sinner.
Religion condones God allowing terrible evil to happen. The religious attitude is worsened by the fact that condoning what has happened is entirely unnecessary. First of all, we donít need belief in God looking after us for it is no comfort anyway, After all, his idea of looking after us may include allowing something terrible to happen to us. Secondly, we can simply believe in an afterlife and derive comfort from that without God.
God religion in its ignorance and insensitivity demands that people suffering bereavement cope with the struggle to condone what they think God has done on top of their suffering. Intelligent believers will see that that is required of them.

The sympathy of the Church is useless because if there is a God that allows earthquakes and plagues to happen then to feel sorry for the victims is to say that God should not have done this to them or that the pain should not exist and that is blasphemy. It is selfish to feel sorry for people while feeling that God did right to allow the suffering to happen to them for that is doing what you think is wrong.

Children can be traumatised by the idea of God and Jesus seeing them going to the toilet or being bathed. Some paedophiles have told children that God sees them naked so they must let them see them naked too! The possibility of damage done by belief in God is enough to condemn the belief. It is not right to expose our children to danger. If children are hurt by a belief they will feel that their parents and society and the church put belief before them and this will cause great harm. The Roman Catholic Church urges mothers to die and leave their children. An example of this is when a mother has to refuse her husband in bed if he wears a condom to avoid giving her a fatal sexual disease and accept him only if he takes it off.
We are traumatised and scarred by what people do to us. God if almighty must take ultimate responsibility for all that happens to his creation. It follows that a child could be traumatised for life by an accident for he or she thinks God did it. The biggest doubt in religion is doubting that God is loving or knows what he is doing so trauma should be common.
If there is a God of infinite perfection he cares only for himself for it would be unjust for him not to when he is so great. Jesus said the most important commandment was to love God with all your being.  He recognised that to say there is a God implies such a thing.  Jesus wants us to love God above all things and with all our strength and to love others just for him meaning that we donít value them at all but him.  Jesus said that the command to love one's neighbour as oneself isnít as important.   So clearly the only reason people are to be helped is not for themselves but for God.  This evil doctrine has a number of implications. God does not let people suffer so that we may help them and be compassionate and patient. He does not let it happen so that we might help him by helping them. God is able to help himself. The only reason then is to please God by obeying him. God and ourselves are to ultimately care only that he is obeyed Ė it is not about helping people. Then you are not thinking of the suffering so there cannot be compassion for the victim and why feel sorry for God when his happiness cannot be marred? You cannot. It is hard and cruel to turn your compassion off for a suffering person in order to put your concern in pleasing God. And that is what God religion wants you to do. You will be left a psychopath if you lose your faith in God or if it lessens.

Should children who escape while their mother dies in an accident be told that God protected them and his blessing saved them implying that God did not bless and protect her? The bereaved are invariably plagued by guilt much of which is irrational and this is what religion tells them. It can only make things worse. It does no good to look at the number of people who claim to have been consoled by religion. They have been consoled not by religion but in spite of it. The subconscious mind will make the logical connections that will enable a religious commitment to do interior damage to the victim of religion which will result in anti-social behaviour and attitudes.
To make sin the greatest evil is to command mothers to prefer to see their sons dead through a car accident lying in their coffins rather than see them drunk or having pre-marital sex (see page 217, Apologetics and Catholic Doctrine, Part 2). Belief in God requires a totally abnormal and unhealthy emotional set-up. It can only produce mental illness. It is psychopathic. Theism commands that you prefer that God takes your life which it says he has the right to do rather than let you sin. The instinct for self-preservation is meant to be the strongest in us so commitment to God in sincerity is a form of mental illness.
Those who say they believe in God for they prayed and feel that prayer and God got them through hard times are using God as a fair-weather friend for they do not think of the suffering that hits them as coming from God. More evil. This comfort is therefore caused by guilt and fear. They are afraid in case God helped them and are scared of what might happen or come from him if they offend him by becoming ingrates. The comfort is the prime argument for a fatherly Godís existence among ordinary believers and the Church fosters it. This insults the millions in the world who have rarely tasted happiness and health. It says that God will not give this assurance to them and praises him for doing his will and practicing discrimination. People have to be told gently why they feel grateful to God and why it is unhealthy. You can trick your psyche into feeling secure in the midst of a mad world without God when you can do it with him. What is the most normal? To find a way to do it without him.
People who can't or don't do much good, feel good about themselves if they pray for others. We are made in such a way that we need to do good for others in order to feel good about ourselves. People need to feel they do good. Prayer for others is about indulging that. It is not really about doing good or caring if you do good. It is about feeling that prayer is doing something so that you can feel good about yourself. It is evil to use the plight of others so that you may pray for them and feel good. It should lead to others being neglected if it does not. If the person still helps others, it is not prayer that is making him or her helpful but other reasons.
Some say that belief in God is good for us for God does not judge or condemn or tell us we are bad or see us bad but instead he loves us and sees us as adorable. But nobody can take such a God seriously! It is like somebody saying that burnt toast is perfect toast. It does not match our own perception of ourselves as flawed even if basically good. Some say then that God does not condemn us but we condemn ourselves by refusing to open ourselves to his love and to let ourselves love as well as we should. Such a doctrine has to have consequences for us. If I exclude myself from God, then the Church can exclude me and say I have excluded myself!

If God exists, God is perfect and deserves all our love so he comes first. To tell anybody that their loved one was killed for a divine purpose is to tell them that they should be happy that the purpose will be able to be carried out instead of being very sorry that the person died for the purpose is more important. God logically implies that we should be careless with human life. He devalues it. God is a belief and to say God comes first is to say your opinion that he exists comes first. Yet we call people who put their opinion before people evil for that is what all evil people do and it is what makes them evil.

It needs also to be recognised that anyone who feels attracted to believing in sinister doctrines like eternal punishment for the wicked must have a sinister conscious or subconscious reason for believing in such.
Desire is behind everything we consciously do. Desire means, ďI want the fulfilment of seeing this thing to happen.Ē Therefore even the most altruistic of actions is really an egoistic one.
It must be recognised that the ability for us to be either altruistic or egoistic is a universal delusion fostered by the Christian Church and other cults. There is only one thing that we can be and that is egoistic. Even when we help somebody we want to under the circumstances and it is the fulfilment of the desire to help that we are really after and not helping the other person. We have a desire that craves fulfilment and we only help to fulfil that desire. It is meaningless to argue that there are selfish desires and unselfish desires for desires are just desires and are geared towards fulfilment. Selfish desires have no meaning apart from self-fulfilment and the so-called unselfish ones have the same meaning and motivation so there is no difference. It is argued that when helping another person we are not thinking of our own fulfilment. But the mind has to switch off the thought of the goal for we can only do one thing at a time and it is still there subconsciously. So it is still there. If the argument is true then it follows that when you work at a job you despise and which you are only in for the money that you are not working for the money only because you forget about the money most of the time to get the job done!
Every moment we have something in our mind we are not conscious of what came before we are only aware of a thought and the desire that causes the next thought so every moment we just submit to the strongest desire we are aware of. We are fulfilling ourselves all the time and what we donít want to do and do is done because it is what we wish to do under the circumstances. Even if we have free will we do not have free will to really sacrifice ourselves. When all we do is indulge ourselves there cannot be a God and strong and serious belief in God must be considered a neurosis. Why? Because there is no point in a God making us and allowing pain and suffering in a world in which we only please ourselves. God allowing suffering implies that suffering is necessary to make love possible so love is sacrifice. If God exists then the more we suffer the better. The subconscious mind will produce lack of self-esteem and perhaps even sadism and masochism as a result. Small wonder serious belief in God has always been destructive and authoritarian throughout the ages. A God who opposes the self can only be a projection of our own lack of self-esteem.
Believers in God say we must love the sinner and hate the sin for we are to judge actions not people. It is unhelpful because people will judge you for who you are more than what you do. Some will judge you 99% because of who you are. The message cannot console or help for it does not recognise how society thinks. If you think people are duty bound not to judge you for who you are that will only lead to anger and frustration for they will not do it. All that is bad enough but to say God demands it adds to the pressure.
Loving sinners and hating sins is dishonest because if you say Johnís essay is stupid that is the same as calling John stupid though many pretend it is not. Religion does this pretending which shows that religion is wilful dishonesty and false charm. This makes altruism impossible for it is meant to be free from lies but this bases it on lies. So egoism is the only option. It is bad enough to be an unbeliever and promote the lie of loving wrongdoers and hating wrong but it is worse to say that God does the same, to blacken the being you say is all good. Despite all its ďloveĒ for God, God-religion is intrinsically blasphemous and deepens vice. It encourages deception and God is evidently a crutch to get through life. It is only for the weak for most people are not very interested in prayer or God so it shows a lack of courage and self-esteem. Its an illness. It is intolerable selfishness to put God first like Jesus asked because that means it is yourself you are really worried about.
If you have beliefs you think they are for the best so you have to support people with your beliefs more than anybody else. That means if you are a Catholic you should save a Catholic life when you have a choice between a Catholic life and a Protestant one. That shows that beliefs should be based on reason and not on popes and revelations from Heaven and thought out for yourself. Anything else is divisive and sectarian. Religion is sectarianism even when it seems ecumenical. Religion cannot expect to have any credibility when it condemns sectarianism. It is exploitive and therefore anti-self-esteem.
The believers in God say that God loves us unconditionally and that we must love one another the same. Obviously, if we canít love unconditionally there cannot be a God. That is because to love X conditionally is to love what they do for us and not X. But unconditional love is not unconditional liking and we prefer to be liked. We prefer people to like us because we give them pleasure. If God gave us free will then it was a choice between unconditional love and evil so it certainly was not between pleasure and pain which implies that divine morality is cruel.

The notion of love being sacrifice proves the hypocrisy of the Church when it does not tell people it is a sin to deliberately fall in love for falling in love makes it a pleasure to care for the loved one and not a sacrifice. Dark doctrines are kept from the people so as to manipulate them. No religion that hides itself like that has any right to get paid for its services or to be called honest.

If there is a good God like Jesus and Moses said then he would do infinite good for us and deserves such good in return from us. This implies that sin is infinitely ungrateful. Itís an attempt to offer an unlimited insult to God. When God allows evil and suffering and allows millions to suffer terribly it is in the name of giving them a few virtues such as patience and compassion. When God permits evil and suffering to happen it must be for a greater good and that good must be for us to become holier and more unselfish. This evilly implies that it is not as evil to be crippled by accident as it is to commit adultery. In other words, God prefers to allow the accident to happen and take responsibility for it than let you commit adultery. This implies that morality is about obeying and not about making one another happy. Whatever that is it is not about right and wrong. Belief in God urges you in principle to be harsh on sin. Better to see it as harmful but not to go as far as that. Belief in God should be discarded. It is only a belief so why not?

We all believe that persons should be made happy. This implies that life is more important than happiness for if life is not then why care if living beings are happy or not? Theism gives God the right to take life and that makes it both callous and dangerous. No theist can say that capital punishment is always wrong because God could allow it. He could delegate his right to kill to us. When life is so important and absolutely valuable we have no business encouraging a belief that has even the slightest chance of endangering it.

Religion says the reason bad things happen to good people on earth is because all that happens is a part of Godís plan to make the world holier. The bad things are stepping stones in the great domino effect of events that will lead to Godís goal. Their indirect effects will produce it or give it the best chance of happening. This will lead to people being manipulated into obeying rules that make no sense but which are supposed to bring about the divine purpose.
Religion makes it a sin to desire your own safety or that of others for all you are to desire is the will of God. You are supposed to desire that only Godís will be done and if he wants to harm you or others you are supposed to accept it. Real prayer is the union of the heart and mind with God. Real prayer is not prayer or a sincere communion with God when it does not will only what God wills. It is just a pretence. All real prayer is, in essence, the petition, ďThy will be done.Ē It consists of confidence in divine power and submission to him. In other words, you do not ask God to keep you safe on the boat tomorrow. That is expressing a desire to be safe when what you should be desiring is that God do what he wants even if it means leaving you to drown in an accident. You are asking God to fulfil your desire instead of his own. Godís desire could be to send severe sickness or even death on you so he is terrifying even if he is love. If religion had the honesty to teach this more openly and forbid prayer as it is always done, people would see that it is only foolishness to expect anybody to gain comfort and psychological strength from prayer. Religion would lose its attraction so it keeps the sinister doctrine under wraps to deceive its followers. Prayer is dangerous for it makes people confident that however bad they become that they can fall back on God to help them change fast one day. That is fanaticism when one cannot be sure that God even exists.

The clergy pontificate about homosexuality being a disorder. Nobody is more disordered than their God because of whom they condemn homosexuals. If homosexuality were unnatural there would be no homosexual desires. Nature allows us to be irrational therefore it is not nature we should care about but rationality for it is best for us to be reasonable. If it does no harm then do not condemn it. Belief in God is evil because it implies that God designed men and women to sleep only with the opposite sex while without God we can forget about what God would want. The God belief is homophobic.

My basic mental component is consciousness. It works by being aware that it exists and that it can learn things through the five senses. What kind of machine is it? Nobody knows. A computer is sane not only when it does what it is supposed to do but when it is set up right to do that. A computer is insane even when it gives the right results if it is not right inside. The machine giving correct results does not prove that the machine is sane. When insanity can be obvious insanity when cannot insanity masquerade as sanity so that even the insane person is fooled? Remember we do not see the mechanics but the results so we donít know and the person only sees the results as well. Thus you donít know if your consciousness is sane or not or if it is the same make-up as that other people have. You donít have a clue. If it is insane then it follows that attempts to prove free will and stuff like God is a waste of time because anybody insane cannot have real free will anyway but only something that mimics it.
Evangelicals claim that they teach humility by making each person realise that he is just as sinful as everybody else. There are people kinder than others. The Evangelicals are disrespecting those people by tarring everybody with the brush.
Evangelicals boast that their gospel prevents the anxiety of having to work for one's salvation for Jesus does it all. But many feel awful that they are unable to do as much good as Jesus deserves in return for his kindness.
Evangelicals and Christians have to believe that God helps them to live a holier life than is normal. Imagine how disappointed they will be when they find out that Christians are no better or no worse than anybody else.
The vast majority of believers would be annoyed terribly when they experience some huge test and fail it. They would argue that God knew beforehand that this would happen and still sent the test. This might be incorrect logic but it is understandable. It is understandable enough to blame belief in God for the hurt and anger that has taken place.
Depression is an epidemic in these modern times. It is anger turned inwards or against yourself. People need to recognise the anger in them and admit it. But if there is a God, anger is a sin. If God makes all things and holds them in existence, then nothing really happens in spite of God but because of him. Anger would amount to being angry at the way God has planned things. So it is a sin. But it has to go somewhere. God in principle and in practice, leads to people getting depressed or more depressed.


Valerie Tarico points out in the book, Christianity is Not Great that Christians blame those who suffer psychologically from their Christian belief for their problems. They blame the victims. They say that the victims already had these problems in the first place or is not practicing the faith properly and that is why he or she is suffering. Or perhaps he or she is a counterfeit Christian.


Christianity can victimise and still blame the victim. As it uses circular reasoning and anybody can use circular reasoning, it follows that if you don't believe in Christianity then it is your own fault. It is a sin if you don't believe because God wants you to believe.

Tarico tells us that "Religious Trauma Syndrome as a diagnosis is in early stages of investigation". RTS often goes unrecognised. One reason is that the victim has been conditioned to self-blame. Another is how society is culturally Christian which lends credence to the faith and makes people reluctant to blame it. The victims will not be listened to as Christianity is too respected in society. The practice of suffering Christians going to pastors for counselling and not recognised mental health therapists shields the problem from the psychiatric profession.
People incorrectly assume that anybody with a mental illness could be dangerous. In fact that person is no more likely to hurt you than anybody else would even if the mental illness is serious and severe. It does not follow then that you have to do bad to be mad. Thus there is nothing insane about thinking that a religious person has a mental problem. Usually, the person might be considered ill if she or he is very devoted and prays a lot.
Religion and belief in God need to be attacked by mental health professionals. People who claim these beliefs have helped them are using a crutch for they are blinding themselves to the dark side of their faith.
APOLOGETICS AND CATHOLIC DOCTRINE, Most Rev M Sheehan DD, MH Gill, & Son, Dublin, 1954