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
Gormley


Unnecessary things refute the rationality of asking,

"Why is there something rather than nothing?"
 
Why is there an atom in a solar system floating about all by itself rather than none? Clearly there is no need for it. If you believe that why something rather than nothing is the big question, then you are saying that why it exists is more important than how. If God just made it for the sake of it then maybe he doesnít love us at all and just made us for the sake of it too? Amoebas seem to be in that category too!
 
Evil is what is unnecessary. For example, sloth is unnecessary rest. Adultery is unnecessary sex because you have a wife or husband. A God who makes without need would be evil. His power is sacred so he cannot use it lightly.
 
So the atom is a problem. It is not needed. And so is the universe if it is not needed. Believers say it isnít needed.
 
God would not explain the universe. God is the worst possible explanation.
 
Religion says that its good if God did not create. God is perfect and if it is better to create then he had to do it. But it is clearly better that we exist than that we do not. It does not make sense to say that a perfect God made all things when that God is perfect whether he creates or not!
 
That only underlines our realisation that God is the worst explanation.