[Still_Waters]

Originally Posted by ketzer

A rather impressively reasoned look at religion, that brought to mind a few things as I read it.

"a bloke like me, who never said I am this or I am that, I didn't position anyone as 'not what I am' use them as a contrast against which I orient myself,"

And yet, you often end up positioning yourself nonetheless. If you are not with us, then you are not one of us, regardless of what you may be, you are other. There are spikes atop some walls to prevent one from sitting there. Those spikes may have been placed by those who erected it, but nevertheless, you can only be in or out.

Whether or not the formation of a religion is an "act of violence", it certainly often leads to it. Which can lead one to ask where that violence comes from to begin with. Lions and wolves will resort to violence to protect their territory to ensure their survival. Within that territory, they are dominant and claim the resources of survival for themselves. Humans live in large societies. Those societies produce the means of our survival. Those with power and influence over that society have greater security in acquiring those means.

Do humans carve out territories within the common mind of those societies in which the alpha dictates what thought and belief will be? Do we fight like stags in rut do to determine who will dominate the herd within those territories? Is the inherent "act of violence" in creating any ideology really just an inherent act of the inherited drive to ensure survival of the human organism itself.

Although your post was not directed towards me, I LOVE the point that you are making.