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?


Religion Versus Democracy
Jesus said that whoever is not for him is against him. So it would follow that because the Constitution of the United States does not mention Christianity and does not allow you to require a religious test "as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States" that it is anti-Christ. There are plenty of examples in history of Christians endorsing secularism such as this and then when they have the power to enforce their religion they use it.
Democracy is a form of egalitarianism and based on the importance of treating people as equals. Democracy is not an appeal to ignore the fact that all people are not equally good or intelligent or successful. It is rather a way of behaving towards them. It is a practice. If Jesus Christ were alive today and if he were God it would follow that his vote and his decisions matter. In comparison, nobody else's matters. Christianity and gods are therefore in principle anti-democratic. They are not in practice for their gods are not here but that still makes them undemocratic in spirit.
Hating the sin is not just about hating the fact that people chose to do wrong. It is hating the wrong action. So you should hate it when an insane person has sex outside marriage as much as you would hate it if they did it deliberately. The hate sin love sinner tripe demands that you be very strict indeed. If an unbeliever won't go to Mass, that person is still a bad harmful person if going to Mass is right and good and God's law. It must not be tolerated. Catholics are bound to hate this action whether or not it is intended to be a sin. To complain that being compelled to go to Mass is against one's rights will invite the retort: "But what about our rights as Catholics to hate what you do?"
Religion that believes in God says that God is love and perfect and so must come first. In other words faith comes first. So if I believe my faith honours God best I have the right to prevent religious freedom for others and undermine democracy. Even if there is no God, the God in your head who you think exists is going to be put first and that is extreme even if it does not translate into action. Your faith then becomes the only God if there is no God.
A religion may be against democracy on one or more of the following grounds 
#The state should be the slave of religion - theocracy.
The logical option for the believer in God is this one - the Church should rule. The nation should be a theocracy. If God is the perfect lawmaker then the closer the state matches his laws and endorses the faith the better.
Religion is a threat to democracy and to our autonomy. It is full of fanaticism for it insists that God who you do not see or hear comes before even the parents you do see and hear.
However a religion being anti-democratic does not mean it is necessarily pro-theocracy. A God religion that is not pro-theocracy is confused and still a potential threat to democracy.
The state only gets its authority from being right. Unjust laws are a contradiction for there cannot be a duty to keep them. Most agree that the laws should be kept when they do little harm or when the harm can be prevented but they should still be opposed and protests and talks should take place with a view to abolishing them. But if you break them the only thing you do wrong is to bring a penalty on yourself. You did not do wrong in breaking the law in itself for the law has no authority and so the law was asking for it. It follows that if the law of the land does not fit God’s idea of what goodness is then it should be made to conform for anything an all-good being thinks must be right.
When God comes first that means that anything that God is left out of is not based on morality and so it is immoral to even tolerate it. If bad is intolerable then bad that offends such a good God is even MORE intolerable. Its infinitely intolerable.
The Church says that God comes first or that we should only think about others because he wants it meaning that the person is only valuable because God thinks they are. If a person is valuable in themselves the Church evilly refuses to care about that. This implies that Church and state should be one and the Church should be superior to the state. Why? Because being a person doesn’t give you rights in itself according to the God doctrine. So you need religion then to give you rights. You might like to say you need religion to invent the rights for you.
The religious doctrine that without a God to sanction the state, the state can have no authority clearly implies that the Church must treat the state as its subject and rule the land for when the state has only relative authority and in so far as it fits what God wants it to be.
# Jesus never authorised democracy
Jesus said that we must love the Lord with all our hearts which means we must love his law with all our hearts for it tells us how to love him and it means we must love his Church with all our hearts for it is his representative on earth. Jesus said that people must give to Caesar what is Caesar's and God what is God's. This does not advocate democracy though many say it does. Rather Jesus was saying that the dictatorship of Caesar should be put up with. Jesus was actually banning democracy. The writings of Paul tell us that the early Church's attitude was that evil rulers were put in place by God for a purpose and are to be respected for that reason.
#People are too stupid to govern themselves through democracy - a monarchy is necessary
Many non-religious people think this too. Atheists often find human nature stupid. But religion makes this perception worse. Christianity says we are born twisted and warped and antagonistic to the God that loves us and are mad enough to go to Hell forever to keep away from him. Christianity like many religions tries to increase the force of the objection to democracy.
#Only members - or saintly members - of a particular religion should have democratic rights. They have the wisdom to govern. They should have the dominant influence.
If you really believe your religion is the best thing for the world or your country, if you really believe God comes first, then the only time you can countenance democracy is when you urge people to democratically elect that God and the Church rule over them. There can be no doubt that if a religion is pro-democracy it must want that. The members of the Church and the clergy have to command that people do whatever it takes to do that.
Christianity says you must love the sinner and hate the sin for Jesus said you must prefer your eye to be gouged out than to sin with it. This doctrine is about control. If you hate sin you must not tolerate it. It is failing to love the sinner if you tolerate it. The Church has to pretend that it loves the sinner in the hope of getting away with its intolerance and thirst for power.
1 - Love sinner. 2- Hate sin. There is two. Jesus said that love of others is not as important as loving God so hating sin must be the most important of the two. The more you hate sin the more you love God for God cannot stomach sin. That is what it means to call God holy. Holy means separate or separate from sin and evil. Naturally you should worry about hating sin more than loving the sinner.
Hating sin is said to be loving the sinner indirectly. Non-intentionally is the correct word! Sin is bad for the sinner and must be destroyed. That was how the Law God gave to Moses could say that you must love everybody and still command you to put homosexuals and heretics to death by stoning. That was how Jesus could say that love was what this Law was all about despite the barbarism.
If you love the sinner and hate the sin you will find it easy to forgive even if you have to exact the death penalty. The doctrine of loving sinner and hating sin puts a grave burden on those who cannot forgive and calls them liars if they say they cannot. You forgive persons not sins or wrongs. Love the sinner when rephrased as forgive the sinner and hate the sin is simply nonsense. To hate the sin is to hate the sinner even if you also love the sinner. You would need a God to teach the doctrine before you could believe it. You need a totally 100% authority to justify believing in a doctrine like that. The doctrine then implies that it is a duty to believe in God and because the state is to look after the people and protect them it should not tolerate secularism. You would only be able to love sinner and hate sin if God enabled you by means of a miracle. Again this implies the state needs to preach God and God religion. Atheists and Buddhists for examples then need to be excluded from the country or consigned to the gas chambers.
Hating the sin is not just about hating the fact that people chose to do wrong. It is hating the wrong action. So you should hate it when an insane person has sex outside marriage as much as you would hate it if they did it deliberately. The hate sin love sinner tripe demands that you be very strict indeed. If an unbeliever won't go to Mass, that person is still a bad harmful person if going to Mass is right and good and God's law. It must not be tolerated. Catholics are bound to hate this action whether or not it is intended to be a sin. To complain that being compelled to go to Mass is against one's rights will invite the retort: "But what about our rights as Catholics to hate what you do?"
#Democracy may lead to religious rights being taken away,
The state is for everybody and works for the welfare of everybody. Religion only works for its own members and excludes those who are living in sin or gay or who have babies outside of marriage. The state comes first. When religion and the state are in conflict we should give our allegiance to the state and the state should be pluralistic and tolerant and totally divorced from religion. Religious fanatics should be excluded from politics. The state has the right to force religion to change its doctrines if these doctrines are harmful to the people. We refuse to stand by while fruitcakes like the pope meddle in politics to the detriment of the people thus putting a divine being who may not exist before real beings.
#Democracy does not care much about what God demands
Religion has many eccentric morals which will come into conflict with the state.
Religion has to oppose democracy for it sees humanity as preferring to go against God who knows what is best. Religion often says that democracy means giving most people not what they should have but what they want so if they want marriage banned you ban it. If most want child molestation legalised then legalise it. But that will never happen so religion is attacking straw men here. They do not like democracy for it advocates, and cannot function without, the right to free speech which permits blasphemy. Religion sees Adam and Eve as the first democrats who rebelled against God to take the forbidden fruit. God disapproved implying that democracy is an evil (Democracy is not a good form of Government).
If God forbids divorce then the lawyer who is a believer in God and his word cannot participate in divorce tribunals. He would not be true to himself if he worked against the laws his conscience tells him comes first. That is sheer commonsense. To say he should provide his services to those who disagree with him and seek a divorce is to say a man should practice euthanasia or abortion despite believing they are murder just to please other people. It is saying nobody should stick to their principles. I agree with the statement of Pope John Paul II made in January 2002 that Catholic lawyers have no right to take part in divorces and are forbidden to.
God has all power but that does not give God the right to tell people what to do. And the fact that God is good still does not give God the right to boss people for before we can listen to him we have to be sure he is good meaning that we should know what good is and obey without him.
This tells us that strictly speaking nobody has any authority at all unless we give it to him. God has no right to give anybody authority. That is up to us.
If we can be good without God then he should not be bossing us for bossing is an evil thing and needs to be necessary to be justified. So God represents immorality and evil and unjustifiable power – the last thing is just what the clergy want him for. We are his slaves. Any rewards he gives he gives not because we are sons but they are like the gifts a slave master can give his slave. If it is right to have a slave then it is hard to see how it could be right to be kind to the slave if we don’t wish to be. If a person should not be compensated for their work they should not be compensated for their work. Rewards make God worse not better for they are not what he can think he ought to give though they are good for us. The answer that God made us out of goodness and therefore is entitled to treat us as his property in a good way is wrong for God should not need anything from us. He should have made us for goodness and not for himself.
Parents make their children but their children are never their property even when they are in prams. The idea of us being divine property is useful to any religious leader who wants us to feel inferior for his own sinister agenda.
The First Epistle of John says that the man who thinks he can love the invisible and untouchable God while hating the neighbour he can see and touch is being foolish. The implication is that loving people is more understandable than loving God for you can’t be as sure that there is a God as you can be that there are people. This totally contradicts and rejects the zany Jesus of the Synoptic gospels who insists that as the rep of God he comes before parents and wives and children and that God is to be loved above all things and things are only to be cared for because God says so and not for themselves.
The Roman Catholic Church through keeping the clergy away from the laity as a separate caste and clothing them in strange robes and involving them in secrecy and arcane rituals and using them as the usual teachers of the people is able to put an aura of divine authority around them. They seem like speakers of the oracles of God. The Church likes to use a little ditty, "Jesus never said hear the Bible but hear the Church". This gives Catholics a fear of contradicting the Church or a reluctance to think for themselves. The Catholics are the sheep and the priests are the shepherds. Too often then when a Catholic opposes contraception or abortion or whatever, it has less to do with having good reasons and more to do with the priests saying those things are wrong. The Gestapo were made to feel the same way. Its dangerous and lazy and immature. If you are confident in your arguments against or for something you are showing your insecurity by appealing to authority. Those Catholics who principally believe that birth control or euthanasia are wrong for the pope says so are showing that they aren't as sure as they pretend and are trying to hurt you. If God set up the Church then he set up a system of emotional and political manipulation. The true democrat eschews such things. Democracy is rule by the people and if they are being lied to and tricked and bullied then the result is not democracy.

Roman Catholicism is clear that anybody who opposes evangelistic activity or who promotes contraception should not be voted for. Some might reason that they will do much good that will make up for this aberration so that it is okay to vote for them. But the Church says the tendency is for anti-Christian laws to be made and stay made so there is no justification. There is no doubt about it: the Church is a danger to us all when it tries to manipulate our futures with its attempts to determine how we shall vote.
Barack Obama in January 2008 stated, "At some fundamental level, religion does not allow for compromise. It's the art of the impossible. If God has spoken, then followers are expected to live up to God's edicts regardless of the consequences. To base ones life on such uncompromising commitments may be sublime, but to base our policy-making on such commitments would be a dangerous thing."
This is grave heresy according to the gospels and the Christian faith. Clearly, a Christian cannot be a democrat or be involved in democratic politics. Obama is indicating that religion is uncompromising and dangerous which contradicts religion's claim to be right and good and guided by God.
Religion must be counteracted for even if most of its supporters do not believe in the fusion of Church and state the clergy can lead them to do so provided they have religious beliefs for them to use as a foundation for fanaticism which they do have. So the beliefs have to be destroyed as a precaution.


No religion, claiming to be the one true faith or the follower of the one true Saviour Jesus, can accept democracy and be true to itself.

The Amplified Bible

A Critical Review of Humanist Manifestos 1 & 2, Homer Duncan MC, International Publications, Lubbock Texas.
A Shattered Visage The Real Face of Atheism, Ravi Zacharias, Wolgemuth & Hyatt, Tenneessee, 1990
A Thief in the Night, John Cornwell, Penguin, London, 1990
A Woman Rides the Beast, Dave Hunt, Harvest House, Eugene, Oregon, 1994
All Roads Lead to Rome, Michael de Semlyen, Dorchester House Publications, Bucks, 1993 (page 120 recounts Cardinal Konig of Vienna’s testimony that the Vatican helped Nazi war criminals to escape)
Apologetics and Catholic Doctrine, Part 1, Most Rev M Sheehan DD, M H Gill & Son, Dublin 1954
Apologetics for the Pulpit, Aloysius Roche Burns Oates & Washbourne Ltd, London, 1950
Blind Alley Beliefs, David Cook, Pickering & Inglis, Glasgow, 1979
Catholicism and Fundamentalism, Karl Keating, Ignatius Press, San Francisco, 1988
Christianity, David Albert Jones, OP, Family Publications, Oxford, 1999
Convert or Die, Edmond Paris, Chick Publications, Chino, California, undated
Correction and Discipline of Children, John R Rice, Sword of the Lord, Murfreesboro, Tennessee, 1946
Crisis of Moral Authority, Don Cupitt, SCM Press, London, 1985
Documents of the Christian Church, edited by Henry Bettenson, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1979
Does America Need the Moral Majority? William Willoughby, Haven Books, New Jersey, 1981
Does Conscience Decide? Bishop William J Philbin, Catholic Truth Society of Ireland, Dublin
Ecumenical Jihad, Peter Kreeft, Ignatius Press, San Francisco, 1996
European Union and Roman Catholic Influence In Britain, David N Samuel, The Harrison Trust, Kent, 1995
Fascism in the English Church, A London Journalist, Henry E Walter, London, 1938
Fifty Years in the “Church” of Rome, Charles Chiniquy, Chick Publications, Chino, California, 1985
God and the Gun, The Church and Irish Terrorism, Martin Dillon, Orion, London, 1998
God Is Not Great, The Case Against Religion, Christopher Hitchens, Atlantic Books, London, 2007
‘God, That’s not fair!’ Dick Dowsett, OMF Books, Overseas Missionary Fellowship, Belmont, The Vine, Sevenoaks, Kent TN13 3TZ] Kent, 1982
Handbook of Christian Apologetics, Peter Kreeft and Ronald Tacelli, Monarch, East Sussex, 1995
Human Rights, Michael Bertram Crowe Veritas, Dublin, 1978
In God’s Name, David Yallop, Corgi, London, 1987
Is the Roman Catholic Church a Secret Society? John V Simcox, Warren Sandell and Raymond Winch Watts & Co London, 1946
Is There Salvation Outside The Catholic Church? Fr J Bainvel SJ, TAN, Illinois, 1979
Jesuit Plots, From Elizabethan to Modern Times, Albert Close, Protestant Truth Society, London undated
Jesus the Only Saviour, Tony and Patricia Higton, Monarch Tunbridge Wells, Kent, 1993
New Catholic Encyclopedia, The Catholic University of America and the McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., Washington, District of Columbia, 1967
Radio Replies, Vol 1, Frs Rumble and Carty, Radio Replies Press, St Paul, Minnesota, 1938
Radio Replies, Vol 2, Frs Rumble and Carty, Radio Replies Press, St Paul, Minnesota 1940
Radio Replies, Vol 3, Frs Rumble and Carty, Radio Replies Press, St Paul, Minnesota 1942
Religion of Peace? Why Christianity is and Islam Isn't, Robert Spencer, Regnery Publishing Inc, Washington, 2007 - a curious book in that it simply doesn't mention how Christian Scriptures incited believers, eg Calvinists, to attack and destroy other believers who were thought to be heretics and doesn't mention the infallible decrees of the Roman Catholic Church commanding the violent destruction of heretics but wants to give the impression that unlike the Koran, the Christian Scriptures and the Christian religion do not make calls for religious violence
Religious Freedom, A Fundamental Right, Michael Swhwartz, Liguori Publications, Missouri, 1987
Roman Catholicism, Loraine Boettner, Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Company, Phillipsburg, New Jersey, 1987
Rome – Our Enemy, Clifford Smyth, Puritan Printing, Belfast, 1975
Secular Humanism – The Most Dangerous Religion in America, Homer Duncan, MC International Publications, Lubbock, Texas. Undated.
Sex Education in Our Public Schools, Jack Hyles, Sword of the Lord, Murfreesboro, Tennessee, 1969
Sex, Dissidence and Damnation, Jeffrey Richards, Routledge, London 1994
Spy in the Vatican 1941-45, Branko Bokun, Tom Stacey Books, London, 1973
Summa Theologica of St Thomas Aquinas, Part II, Second Number, Thomas Baker, London, 1918.
The Christian and War, Robert Moyer, Sword of the Lord, Murfreesboro, Tennessee, 1946
The Church of Rome, Wilson Ewin, Bible Baptist Church, Nashua NH USA
The Encyclopaedia of Heresies and Heretics, Leonard George, Robson Books, London, 1995
The Inquisition of the Middle Ages, Henry Charles Lea, Citadel, New York, 1963
The Last Temptation of Christ, Its Deception and What you Should Do About it, Erwin T Lutzer, Moody Press, Chicago, 1988
The Pestilence of AIDS, Hugh Pyle, Sword of the Lord, Murfreesboro, Tennessee, 1987
The Rise of the Spanish Inquisition, Jean Plaidy, Star, London, 1978
The Sacred Executioner Human Sacrifice and the Legacy of Guilt Hyam Maccoby Thames and Hudson, London, 1982
The Secret History of the Jesuits, Edmond Paris, Chick Publications, Chino, California, 1975
The Truth About the Homosexuals, Dr Hugh F Pyle, Sword of the Lord, Murfreesboro, Tennessee, 1978
The Truth that Leads to Eternal Life, Watchtower, New York, 1968
The Unequal Yoke, John R Rice, Sword of the Lord, Murfreesboro, Tennessee, 1946
The Upside-Down Kingdom, Donald B Kraybill Marshalls, Hants, 1978
The Vatican Connection, The Explosive Expose of a Billion-Dollar Counterfeit Stock Deal Between the Mafia the Church, Richard Hammers Penguin, Middlesex, 1982
Their Kingdom Come, Robert Hutchison, Corgi, London, 1997
Unholy Sacrifices of the New Age, Paul de Parrie and Mary Pride, Crossway Books, Westchester, Illinois 1988
Vatican USA, Nino LoBello, Trident Press, New York, 1972
Vicars of Christ, Peter de Rosa, Corgi Books, London, 1993
Walking with Unbelievers, Michael Paul Gallagher SJ, Veritas Dublin 1985
War and Politics The Christian’s Duty, Peter Watkins, Christadelphian Bible Mission, Birmingham
What About Those Who Have Never Heard? Radio Bible Class, Grand Rapids, Michigan, 1986
Whatever Happened to Heaven? Dave Hunt, Harvest House, Publishers, Oregon, 1988

Fascist Romanism Defies Civilisation by Joseph McCabe
Democracy is not a good form of Government by Citizens for the Ten Commandments
Is Christianity a Cult?