Hello, this sentence was pronounced by Napoleon. The man was a wancker, but a brillant one. Despite I'm athee, I think he is right. Atheism is for me a paradox. Atheism is one of the ultimate freedom of thinking, however, and enable great scientific improvement however I'm not sure a country could survive without a religion. What do you think about that ?
The fact he was megalomaniac lost him, and only some fools regret him . But to start as a corporal and become emperor, you must be smart. Anyway, it's not the subject of this topic.
China is not religious, and they're doing OK. Europe is increasingly secular too: in France you have the laicity (sp), hence banning that muslim stuff. Did you know that Napoleon was credited with this palindrome: 'Able was I ere I saw Elba'
I didn't new about Napoleon. Thank's. I don't admire him that much, apart he is smart, he didn't served France that well in the long term. Anyway, french revolution was more a tragedy than something else. I think a country at least a strong set of belief. I maybe act as a french stereotype, but I'm rather pessimistic about the futur. A country without a strong morality is for me doomed to fall into chaos. Morality is order. I'm not sure China are doing so good.
A country can have morality just as easily with or without religion. Morality is not dependent upon religion for it's existence or it's content. Look at countries that exhibit a strong religious morality such as those in the middle east. They are the very definition of chaos.
I think a large percentage of people are not capable of being self sufficient and need someone to lead them. Religion is a perfect tool designed by man to discipline and control the flock that otherwise can't take care of themselves.
I would say globally yes. But religion is too a social phenomenon, it's peole gathering weekly, people who are aware to belong to a same community. Humans are social animals. Most of our life is about social interaction. Furthermore, it's often a common law. A religio for me appear only to a swer to some political, social problems i a specific political and technological background. This is why I thin some religions appear and disappear, when they're not adapted anymore. You're often rigbt about that. I'm athee. I'm already convi ced, but religion is not only about believes, it's tol a social thing. Common rules, hierarchy, interactions, ritual.
I wasn't trying to convince you, I was making a point. The inhabitants of a country (not the country itself as the OP says) already bow down to one fictional authority (government) so now the question is do they need another fictional authority (religion) to bow down to? In some cases government and religion are blended, "God bless America", the "divine right of kings", etc. Either way they're both similar, each is a fiction designed for the few to control the many. Unfortunately government is a necessary evil whose purpose is to maintain some form of order. Without it there would likely be chaos. Religion however is totally unnecessary for that purpose but it is necessary for some as a security blanket.
