Freedom to live, freedom to think for oneself, rather than being indoctrinated and mutilated from birth; the freedom not to be bound by archaic concepts that are proven false, the freedom to do anything regardless of some idiotic concept of "sin"...

Yes, I know full well what freedom actually means. A world poisoned by religion cannot have it.

Of course it's "radical" to say that religion is bad and antithetical to freedom in a world dominated by the religious. I have no qualms about that position.

Just because a large number of people choose to believe in something and may like to share it doesn't mean that everyone's being "indoctrinated". The sheer number of different religions, as well as the non-religious and anti-religious crowd, should be telling in that regard.

If we have the freedom to choose, what's wrong if you choose to believe in something that doesn't have basis in scientific fact? If it hasn't been proven, then it's wrong and no one's allowed to believe otherwise?

You wish to take away the freedom of choice. That's a much more damgerous stance IMO. Remove religion to promote choice? Isn't that the same as the "indoctrination" you so desperately wish to avoid?

I don't know what country you are living in, but here in North America we already have the freedom to live and think for ourselves. By taking away our right to believe, you are taking away the right to think for ourselves and are replacing it by letting you think for us. When people are free, they are free to disagree with you.

Please provide me with this proof. And for that matter, the scientific framework that allows you to prove that anything is "false".

You are free to commit all the sins you like. But I am free to restrain myself from committing them. That's what freedom is all about. One of the greatest philosophers, Immanuel Kant, argued that in order to truly be free, we must obey some sort of rules, even if we set them ourselves.

I don't think that you do, because it can, and it has it.
Radical is not all that your position is. It is also absurd. You propose eliminating one of the most fundamental freedoms we have, the freedom to believe, in the name of... freedom? Maybe you should run for President.

Bullshit.
Women in the Middle East are still forced to wear burqas.

Gay people in the US can't get married (or adopt in many states).

I could go on.

Religion is the number one thing in the world today denying people freedom. Take away religion and the whole driving force behind those who would deny freedom goes away.

All the big issues go away and we are left with the little ones: money, taxes, that sort of thing.

I don' think it is religion itself that is the problem, I think the interpretation of the religions itself is what the problem is. For example show me in the Bible where it says that gay people are sinners.

The Middle East is not considered to be free in any sense, not only the religious one. They have quite a lot more problems than just that. As usual, it's extremists that are to blame, not religion.

As for gay people... you know, they couldn't marry in the USSR and can't marry in China either, right? Those nations are not merely atheistic but antitheistic. Also, note that there are plenty of churches that are willing to marry homosexuals (at least, I see plenty here in Canada).

Leviticus, Romans, several other places.

Replacing "religion" with a cult of personality is hardly rationality.
Communism as practiced by Russia and China was exactly this.

Furthermore, the actions of a minority of churches hardly justifies the actions of the majority; nor the pressure of the majority on the government to ban something for irrational reasons.

<sarcasm>We don't like it when they impose thier views on us, so we're going to impose our views on them. Brilliant, why didn't we think of doing this earlier.</sarcasm>

Just one post ago you were saying that taking religion away will remove those problems. I give you examples of countries where religion was taken away and the problems remained, and your counter-argument is that... Communism is irrational?

I really love how you use the word 'rational'... You seem to define it as agreeing with you. A wonderful world view, really.

Not that the political system of communism is irrational, but the specific cult of personality that was implemented in both countries was irrational.
Replacing "god" with "glorious leader" is hardly an improvement. It doesn't matter if the dictator is real or fictional if he/she/it holds power.

Religion, today, is the single greatest oppressor of freedom. Yes, there are others- primarily economic (large corporations), but a sudden elimination of religion from the public consciousness would solve a huge portion of the problem. Even something as simple as an actual atheist majority in the US would go a long way.

I am an Atheist. I personally get offended by those who believe in God(s) when they try to tell me that I am wrong. I get very offended by it. It is as if they are saying that their beliefs are more valid than mine. Yet, beside those such people I am totally cool with believers and non-believers alike.

Can you show me exactly where it says that in Leviticus, Romans, I would like to analyze it myself.

I don't think anybodies beliefs are better than anybody elses. You can practice whatever you want just don't go around preaching about when people don't want to here about it. This is the way it should be, how would Christians feel if Musllims or Buddhists went to third world countries and started converting these people into Buddhist's or Muslims?

IMHO,
Religion itself is a unique concept. I do "subscribe" to religion base on the fact of my parents adopting it. It is one's right to choose what religion he or she wants, even if the government says yes or no. That should be the situation we be discussing. It's fine for people who believe in god or not to believe in whatever they want so as long it doesn't involve them turning violent IMHO.

Conversion....eh. It's up to people to decide. You can go about telling people that their religion is not the only one available. However don't cross borders. Cause some people might dislike their religion and want to convert to another due to personal preferences.

According to a cousin i have living in the west, some countries require it's citizens to pay taxes to the church even when you don't adopt Christianity...now that's the problem....i see with some government.

I started looking up verses, but it's probably better just to link to a whole list of them compiled by someone else.

Homosexuality in the Old Testament

Homosexuality in the New Testament

You do understand that the bible was written at a time when most nations would have killed you for being gay? You can't judge the morality of an ancient text based on 21st century values.

You're forgetting, the claim is that this book is the "word of god" and that you're supposed to live by the values of this book even today.

If it weren't for that nonsense claim then you're right, it wouldn't matter, but the fact that they want to impose the barbarism of the bible on modern society is a huge problem.

Actually you prove a very good point, if scientist proved tomorrow without a doubt that God did not exist, I think Christians would not believe it. Very few religions actually change throughout the course of time.

I don't know. God himself (should he/she/they exist) could descend from the heavens and tell the world that Jesus was a false prophet and Christians would shrug God off as Satan, and upon waking the next morning still pray to Christ for salvation.

Just as I suspected; you believe that all Abrahamic monotheists are fundamentalists. In fact, you are describing a fairly small but vocal minority, whereas the majority believe that while the book contains immense wisdom and prophecy, and philosophical truths about the world, and that it was given to the Jews from God... It's not a step-by-step textbook on how to live, literally. In fact, even the most religious Jews argue that only children should interpret the Bible literally, and that the hidden philosophical component of it is what's truly of value.

Have you ever even met religious people, or does all of your evidence come from YouTube clips, Richard Dawkins books and Atheist forums?