Take a minute to check out this well articulated argument for religion as a wholly negative institution. The author makes an excellent point… what good has religion done that an atheist (or secular organization) couldn’t of done? Very little to none? So why tolerate its deadly baggage?

“As a horrifying video of the stoning went out on the Internet, the British arm of Amnesty International condemned the death of Du’a Khalil Aswad as “an abhorrent murder” and demanded that her killers be brought to justice.

Reports from Iraq said a local security force witnessed the incident, but did nothing to try to stop it. Now her boyfriend is in hiding in fear for his life.”

From the Daily Mail >

Adults killing each other over religion is sad. But when the young die needlessly, tragedies like this become even harder to understand and explain to oneself. Why did this young girl need to die?

“WASHINGTON — A hate-crimes bill passed Thursday by the House, extending coverage to people victimized because of sexual orientation, gender identity or disability, is attracting opposition from an unusual coalition of Christian leaders.”

“But some Christians are depicting it as a “thought-crimes” bill attacking 1st Amendment freedoms of speech and religion. A coalition of evangelical, fundamentalist and black religious leaders is mounting a furious assault on the bill, airing television ads and mobilizing members to stop its progress. And President Bush has said he may veto the measure.

If the bill, approved 237-180, were to become law, opponents say, a pastor could be held liable for giving a sermon against homosexuality if a listener later attacked a gay individual.

“This legislation strikes at the heart of free speech and freedom of religious expression,” said Andrea Lafferty, executive director of the Traditional Values Coalition. “Statements critical of sexual orientation or gender identity can be prosecuted if those statements were part of the motivation of a person committing a crime against a homosexual or cross-dresser. … Pastors’ sermons can be considered hate speech under this bill.”

The bill’s supporters say this is nonsense, and that a sermon could never be considered an inducement to violence unless it explicitly advocated it.

“The only people who ought to fear this bill are people who would say to another human being, `You ought to do violence against someone else,’.” said Rep. Artur Davis (D-Ala.), who earlier added an amendment to the bill reaffirming the principles of the 1st Amendment. “I don’t know of any man of God who would take to any pulpit and advocate that.”"

From the Chicago Tribune >

The idea that opponents to this bill put forward as their reason for not wanting it to pass is ludicrous. The rights of a group of people to be protected from violence and hate speech should never kowtow to religious doctrine. To say that this bill might somehow lead to injustice is just about as backward as it gets.

“A Myrtle Beach man and admitted atheist was attacked and robbed on Thursday night by a group of men who took offense to an anti-Christian phrase on his windshield.

The victim told police he was getting out of his car in the parking lot of the Crabtree Gym in Myrtle Beach about 8 p.m. when the men pulled up beside him and inquired about a derogatory statement on the back windshield of his car, according to an incident report.”

News story here >

For an interesting discussion on this incident, check out this site:

My own opinion on the subject is that while the man was asking for it (by having such a sticker on his car in a predominately Christian country), the Christians certainly didn’t have to give it to him.

“Five people, including two Muslim children, have been killed by suspected Islamic rebels in separate attacks in Thailand’s violence-torn south, police have said.

A group of militants ambushed a motorcycle late on Friday (local time) and shot dead a 45-year-old Muslim man and his two children, an 11-year-old girl and a seven-year-old boy, in Yala, one of three Muslim-majority provinces.

Also in Yala, a 37-year-old Muslim man was hacked to death by militants in public view at a market late Friday, police said.

They also found the body of a man in a river in the province.”

“Police said several hundred Muslim women and children also blocked a highway in Yala on Saturday as they continued their sit-in for the third consecutive day to demand authorities release suspected militants.

About 20 kilometres away from the sit-in, hundreds of Buddhists also took to the streets, demanding the Muslims end the road blockade.”

“More than 2,100 people have been killed in the ongoing insurgency in the three south provinces of Yala, Narathiwat and Pattani.

The Muslim-majority provinces were once an autonomous sultanate, until the region was annexed by mainly Buddhist Thailand a century ago.

Separatist unrest has erupted periodically ever since.”

From ABC News Online >

What strikes me about this article - besides the death and suffering of presumably innocent people - is the distinctions made between groups of people on the basis of their religious beliefs (Buddhists vs. Muslims). The article gives very little information about the motives behind these deaths but repeatedly labels the victims and the perpetrators by their religious affiliation. Would these people be fighting and killing each other if religion didn’t exist?

Dawkins would be happy to know that the phrase “Muslim children” in the first sentence did actually make me cringe this time…

“Secondary school pupils in north-eastern Nigeria have killed a teacher after apparently accusing her of desecrating the Koran, police say.

The teacher, a Christian, was attacked after supervising an exam in Gombe city. It is not clear what she had done to anger the students.

The authorities, concerned that communal unrest could break out, have ordered all the city’s schools to shut.

Similar accusations sparked riots in neighbouring Bauchi State last year.

At least 15,000 people have been killed in religious, communal or political violence since the country returned to civilian rule in 1999.”

From BBC >

“Jakarta, 4 May (AKI) - A top official from Indonesia’s highest Muslim authority, the Majelis Ulama Indonesia (MUI), says he hopes that some 60 Christians being sought in connection with the production of a video allegedly containing anti-Islamic sentiments should be brought to justice. “We don’t want revenge but only justice,” [said] Muhammad Nidzom Hidayatullah[.]”

“41 people have already been arrested over the video which was reportedly shot last December at a religious gathering held by members of a Christian students organisation, the Lembaga Pelayanan Mahasiswa Indonesia (LPMI).

Those arrested face blasphemy charges and if convicted they could be imprisoned for up to five years. ”

More info here http://www.adnki.com/index_2Level.php?cat=Religion&loid=8.0.411019766&par=0 >

If these Christians were caught and jailed for producing an anti-Islam video (or vice versa)… would it really be appropriate to call it “justice?”

“Does believing that “God is on our side” make it easier for us to inflict pain and suffering on those perceived to be our enemies? If we think God sanctions violence, are we more likely to engage in violent acts?

The answer to both those questions, according to new research, is a resounding “yes,” even among those who do not consider themselves believers.”

“”I think many people use God as their justification for violent and aggressive actions,” Bushman said. “Take the current conflict in Iraq as an example. Bush claims that God is on his side. Osama bin Laden claims that God, or Allah, is on his side.”

History is replete with other examples of wars fought in the name of God, involving nearly every religion on the planet.”

From ABC News >

Absolutely fascinating, *scientific* research supporting what, by now, should be obvious to any person with even the most basic, elementary knowledge of history.

“Faith is powerful enough to immunize people against all appeals to pity, to forgiveness, to decent human feelings. It even immunizes them against fear, if they honestly believe that a martyr’s death will send them straight to heaven. What a weapon! Religious faith deserves a chapter to itself in the annals of war technology, on an even footing with the longbow, the warhorse, the tank, and the hydrogen bomb.” - Richard Dawkins, 1976

“Two Christians in Pakistan have been taken into protective custody yesterday to protect them from militants who believe they are guilty of blasphemy and want to kill them, Release International has said.

Five Christians have been charged with blasphemy and others are linked with a case that has already led to a mob attack on a Christian colony in Punjab.

There are growing concerns that Christians in Toba Tak Singh could face further attacks from Islamist hardliners.”

“According to Muslims, Christians snatched a religious sticker bearing the name Mohammed from a Muslim boy and began beating it with their shoes. They claim angry Christians then went round to the Muslim’s home armed with a pistol and sticks and made insulting remarks against Mohammed.”

“The five Christians were charged with blasphemy after a squabble between children escalated into a mob attack on a Christian colony in the Punjab, causing Christians to flee their homes.

It is an illustration of how quickly tensions can spring up and get out of hand in a nation where blasphemy can be punished by the death penalty, RI has said.”

From Christianity Today >

I’ve often heard religious apologists say that if people weren’t fighting over religion they would find something else to fight over… as if it’s human nature to fight and religion is just an excuse that pops up frequently. Pray tell, what other than religion could motivate this specific chain of events?

Religion is a problem.