Would no religion really benefit anyone?

Sure there are religious wackos, terrorists, god driven mass murderers, and delusional religious freaks.  I'm not talking about those.  I'm talking about the everyday citizen of any given country who happens to believe in their god.  They have some faith, some hope that believing in this god will benefit them later, regardless of whether or not this is a valid belief.  Like believing that "if you're good this year, Santa will bring you more presents" or "if you tip the waitress you'll have good karma brought to you" or "if you work really hard for the company, you'll have an excellent retirement package  and won't get laid off."  In other words, hope is the driving factor behind many of our actions.  To eliminate religion would eliminate people's day to day hope. 

Even if their beleifs are "scienticifally incorrect," think of all the people in the US that cling to God to get through their own lives.  Look at black churches that have joyous singing and dancing.  The Bible typically refers to its followers as sheep, and that's what they are.  But isn't it better than being convinced that there is no god?  To actually KNOW or have it forced upon them that no god can possibly exist?  You'd have people with no hope, purpose, or reason to differentiate right from wrong.  Sure, some people can act morally on their own, but others can't.  They need a reason to not steal or kill or cheat on their wives, and with no moral or spiritual "penalty," what do people have to lose?  Do you really want a completely atheist society?  Religion makes an excellent behavior control system, just like government laws, accepted behaviors, popular beliefs and opinions, TV advertisements, and political statements from our current political leader.  The validity of these systems may be wrong in some instances, but at least they offer some kind of order.   

>>59
>anything else but what it is.

things dont just "is" out of nothingness, they come into being. especially 'perfect & beautiful' things.. or a thing so complex and intricate it may always escape complete quantification by even our fully developed perceptions

for a thing to come into being, some force or action must be initiated to bring such a thing into being, this is the empirical view at its core

causation breaks both micro and macro sciences at their terminus
it must be reconciled.

>>should a puddle be astonished that it is exactly the same shape as the depression in the ground in which it lies?

this is too narrow a question. you should be asking how that depression in the ground was created, once you can answer that.. perhaps what created that depression in the ground will become more apparent

then maybe you can stop moping about being just a puddle...


>>You are once again digging around in your navel for belly-button lint and presenting it as pearls of wisdom.

hey, my navel is full of lint tonight! i have to present this somewhere?

mind using a new analogy... i tire of this one