I don't think you can compare science and religion in this way - science is all about experimenting and proving things; be it medical research or looking at plants, or even how the World came to be. The one thing that scientists cannot prove conclusively is that the deities worshipped by religions actually exist. Religion on the other hand is about personal belief; if you believe in your God, even though nobody can give you scientific proof of his/her existence, you may decide to follow the doctrines of religion. Some people take the following of their religion to absolute extremes - suicide bombers who say they kill in the name of Islam; others who follow the same religion will tell you that nowhere in their religion would this kind of act be condoned. For some people religion is a great comfort and without it they would feel part of their life was missing, others simply don't need it. Conversely none of us can escape the effects of science!

it has managed to enslave minds, oppress peoples, cause wars and the deaths of countless humans. It perpetuates a mindset of denail and delusion, it teaches people to worship death and not life. IT is a tool for control, a crutch for the weak, an excuse to never question and breeds weak minds. It is a corporation unto itself that condones murder, slavery, genocide and degredation/mutilation of women. And finally science is surpassing the archaic dogmatic superstitions of religion. We can now regenerate a cut off finger..has god ever regenerated a limb? nope,,didn't matter how hard they prayed. I look forward to the days when man transcends his childlike mind and we come into an age of humanism instead of cultism

not really anything, more or less, a excuse for forcing of one's own set of morals on someone, or a group of people, simply because of a ancient, antiquated book.

it gives some people hope and happiness to believe in some thing

Modern science owes a great debt to religion. Christianity may be the antithesis of anything remotely progressive in many peoples' eyes, but the spread of Islam led to the Islamic Golden Age, which essentially set the foundation for modern science (not in the least due to the creation of the scientific method). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_Golden_Age

I was astonished to see at least 2 very ignorant statements go up straight away...and what is more, they only spoke from their own biased western viewpoint. The question speaks of religion generally, not Christianity. Even I, as a Christian, can see some good that has been done by people of other religious faiths! Yet it seems these two atheists cannot see any good done by anyone except scientists. You say that science has made our lives richer and easier with technology and discovery- yet why are there still so many suicides and horrific relationships perpetuated by people who live within this rich and easy society? It is precisely because people are without hope. They may have an electric light, but their lives are dark; they may have a computer, but are cut off from other human beings. I dispute that giving people technology necessarily makes their lives richer anyway. We can see by the Amish that their simpler way of life by no means makes them unhappier. Taking on the topic of "religion" as a whole and its benefits to mankind is a big ask, but, even as a Christian, I will tell you that both medieval Islam and medieval Buddhism had hospitals and advanced medical systems. It was religious men, both in Islam and in Europe who worked on mathematical theorems, physics, geography, anatomy and other sciences, long before there were scientists. Schools and universities were religious establishments, not secular ones. Libraries were kept by religious establishments, not by individuals. Thus they preserved history and literature for future generations. The great buildings of the world in days gone by were built by and for religious purposes. Architectural breakthroughs were made by those who built them. The great art of the world was mainly religious until very recently, whether it was Hindu, Buddhist, Islamic or Christian or any other religion for that matter. Modern science has built on the foundations of religion in these areas, but did not start the ball rolling. (In modern terms, if science was to claim copyright on many ideas, it would be sued for plagiarism and pilfering by religion in general) But, as I said, discussing religion in general and its achievements is a big ask, so I will turn to the religion I believe in: Christianity. What has it achieved? Let us look at Europe first. -Hospitals: the idea came out of the Christian value on caring for the sick, and these were all staffed by Christian men and women until very recent times, when some were taken over by the state. -Welfare: The Christian church had complelx systems of welfare in place by medieval times. A person was looked after by the parish they came from. If they went to another parish, that parish had the right to send them home. The parish also found jobs for the poor, looked after the orphaned children and made sure that single mothers were supoprted by the fathers of their children. This system broke down in England during the Industrial revolution, when many people went to the cities to work in the new factories and found themselves jobless and penniless. The state had no system to help such people and they simply starved to death, returned home to their parish, or else fell into crime. Even so, it was the "church" that picked up the slack here. Quakers and other evangelicals, such as Elizabeth Fry, went into the prisons, trained people in trades, acted as counsellors and arranged support for spouses/children left on the outside. Their actions led to prison reform. Child labour was horrific in the 18th/19th century. This was addressed, not by the secular state and scientists, but by evangelical Christians such as Lord Shaftesbury, who forced laws through parliament banning the use of children in mines and factories in England, and extablished school systems for the poor. he founded the RSPCC. The abuse of animals was also addressed, not by science, but by evangelical William Wilberforce, who established the RSPCA. Shaftesbury used the RSPCA law established by Wilberforce, to force through the rights of children. And while we are on Wilberforce: slavery. Scientists were silent on slavery, some even supported it. However, evangelicals in England were against it. It took 15 years for Wilberforce to win the campaign against slavery, and it ruined his health, but he did it, supported by the evangelicals of England, who spread the word throughout England. From England, the anti-slavery issue quickly spread to the rest of Europe, ending 2 centuries of a horror that Christians had already dismantled during the Roman Empire. (It is not a coincidence that slavery re-reared its head in Europe at the same time as industry was developing, my friends. Cheap labour was needed for the great leaps forward that science was providing for an elite group of humans at the top of the class system.) And in the USA, while Darwinianism was justifying the slave industry ("survival of the fittest"- whites were deemed the fittest and negroes lower down the evolutionary chain), the Underground Railroad to freedom was being run by Quakers, Presbyterians and other Christians, to take the slaves to freedom. And it continued to the present: who stood for equal rights for AFrican-AMericans? REVEREND Martin Luther King. Those at the front line were often committed Christians. As they were in Africa against apartheid- (Mandela was in prison...Archbishop Tutu did the work on the outside) and in Uganda (Bishop Festo Kivengere stood against Idi Amin). Who runs many of the hospitals in Africa? Not scientists! Most of them are church/missionary organisation run. Who runs many of the schools? Missionary organisations. Who runs the clinics? Missionaries (yes I know that Medicin sans Frontieres are there now, but they are new arrivals). Same in other parts of the world: you go anywhere where there are poor and you will find Christians who have given up profitable existences to work amongst the poorest of the poor (Mother Thesesa, Catherin Hamlin of the Fistula Clinic of Addis Abbaba-look her up: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catherine_Hamlin) Who founded the first micro-loan system to the poor and now helps over 1 million people a year out of poverty- David Bussau, a Christian who founded Opportunity International years before the Grameen Bank BTW) I do volunteer aid work in Indonesia. I know who works there. And I know what most of them are-Christians. I co ordinate Christian tourists who come each year bringing and buying supplies to help the poor, to sponsor children through school, to pay hospital bills, to purchase rice supplies and animals for families that have nothing. Who was first on the ground after the tsunami? The Christian NGOs. Days before governments got their teams into actions, the Christians were there. I know. I was on my way up to Aceh, when shooting round the airport stopped me getting there. I stayed in Bali and did work there, but was in touch with workers in Aceh and Nias. The work was not "proselytisation". The Christian NGOs knew that the people were Muslim. They just helped with food, clothing and medical supplies, not to mention the finding of bodies and their reverent burials. They also gathered together the children orphaned, and built homes for them. The orphanage system I work with sent workers to Nias to train their people- no cost. Don't tell me that "religion" does nothing, or has "done nothing". Ask the victims of the tsunami, who said "We thank the Christians. They came and helped and asked nothing in return." Ask the cancer victims in hospices, most of which are church funded and run. Did science help them? Maybe it provided some of the drugs to ease their pain, but it did not provide the nurses, the doctors and the chaplains to make their last days mentally and spiritually comfortable. Ask the poor on the streets outside our city church. Who feeds them? Not science: science has turned many of them out of their mental health facilities, saying they would be better off that way. It has failed them. Who clothes them? Gives them blankets? Gives them counselling? Finds them accommodation? Retrains those who can be retrained? Offers to help rehabilitate those addicts who want to be free? Not science. It gives them shooting galleries. Pity help this world if "religion" in general is ever absent, even for a moment.

Religion has mercy. Science does not. Religions recognizes us as humans. Science only sees us as an electrochemical reaction. If you don't have religion then chances are you have the default religion of our times: Economics, with money as it's God. The only way a preacher can hurt me is by disobeying his own words. I hardly call that a 'fault' of the religion.

a play by play rebuttal on singwells post Singwell mentions a a western viewpoint exclusivity on my behalf. Well not at all, I have lived all over the world as well and experienced the atrocities religions have pushed upon other cultures of the world. I have seen Catholics in korea attempt to eradicate a culture that is older than christianity itself. no they didn't go there and try to kill anyone these simply attempted to erase their cultures and identity. You say religions do good, well tell me how this is good and how you would feel; You are a poor starving man in a poor country. One day some people come to you and they offer you food and clothing and as you eat they tell you about their god. Then they tell you that if you knew their god you would not starve or go without, you would have clothes and your land would not know drought or strife. You see them and all that they have and wonder how bad could a people be that have so much. indeed their god must be strong and powerful. So you go along with the people learning of their god and enjoying the food and clothes and things they do for you, surely they are generous people. Then one day they tell you that your way of life is contradictory to their gods ways and they tell you that you cannot practice your customs, they tell you that they are going to give you a new name, a name under their religion, slowly, little by little they erase your customs and way of life until one day you and your people are no more. Then one day they build a church/temple in your town and they systematically erase your language and introduce education so as to educate you in their religion. Sure there are beenfits to converting but the bad far outweighs the good. Who could argue that religions have not wiped out entire cultures and peoples ways of life? You say science has not done anything to stop suicides and horrific crimes when those are a paltry figures compared to the amount of people that die in the name of their gods. What about slavery and female mutilation and genocide, those are all bi-products of religion. you say science would not have progressed without religion? Have you ever considered that maybe these brilliant people were artists and scientists and inventors first and religious second. Sure they would not have been as successful if not for the money and resources amassed by the conquests of religion. But what other choice did they have but to live under a religion, it encompassed everything and ruled with an iron fist. To practice science without the help of the church was sure to get you a one way ticket to death by being called a witch or heretic. These people would have still been brilliant with or without religion, they just happened to live under it's flag. That's like saying Elvis was the king because he was American?! He was talented no matter what religion or nationality he was, but by being american he was in a place where resources allowed him to make the most of his talents. You speak of hope as if it can only come from religion, like it comes packaged as a companion to whatever holy book you choose to follow. Athiests have hope, we have more hope than the the religious because we have hope in mankind, we do not use god as a crutch to get us out of problems, we use our own minds, we have hope in a future that is productive and meaningful and all the things religious people have hope for, and it means more to us because we are in the now, we are not preparing for some after life, we are not out there trying to convert and manipulate or war with opposing religions. We are uplifting man himself and making him accountable for his own actions and helping him reach his true potential on his own without delusions of divine intervention or miracles. And while I am on the subject of science, how many MORE great works could we have had if it were not for religious oppression of women? How many intelligent female minds might have cured sickness and solved mysteries of the universe if they had not been silenced by scriptural law? You paint a picture of Athiests as if we are all lonely depressed lost people who have no relationships or do not know love or hope. I liked your description of my kind sitting in a dark room my only outlet to the world a computer when indeed I have family and loved ones and a healthy relationship with many people and might I remind you that it was you who first spent 45 minutes writing the long letter to which I am replying....now who is the lonely lost alone person? I do not need imaginary gods or a holy book to have hope and love and happiness, I find it every day in my life, in my relationships and within myself. Again you go back to Religions had hospitals and libraries and all of this great stuff, but that's no different than a giant corporation. Sure the corporation gets to take credit for everything it produces but the CEO doesn't create the products, the scientists and workers do but the company owns them. And so with religion and the churches. The same is with religion, because they occupied that place and laid claim over the people and the works created by those people doesn't mean the people were all religious. The works they made were religious in nature because they surely couldn't choose other topics because who was paying them? THE CHURCH!!! You act as if all humanitarians and those that have contributed to society are only those who were religious, I too could go pull up 20 people or inventions that were not of religious affiliation. The point is moot, I don't need to because for all of the things the religions of the world have fixed they only fixed the damage they themselves have done. You talk about war and death and slavery and all are perpetrated by religion. You talk about women being oppressed or mutilated, you talk about mass suicides and mass genocide and eradication of cultures, the tyranny of oppression and control of mankind alone was a tool of religion. Religion could be a good thing if it wasn't steeped in dogma and tradition and superstition all wrapped up in delusion and lack of logic or basic reasoning. But of course this is not debateable with you for you will not hear me and that is no problem to me because I am not trying to make you change your thought process (like religions do) I am merely asking you see apoint of view from someone who cannot possibly believe in such unbelievable archaic child like myths taken from a book that was written by men 2000 years ago! you'll excuse me if I bow out now I could go on forever but we both know this is falling on deaf ears. I just wanted you to know I heard what you said, I read every last word and mulled it over and the bottom line is no matter how much good your kind do, no matter how many people you help you are still part of a cult(s) that throws logic and reason out the window and chooses to cling to untruths that are totally ridiculous and totally insane.

although relegion has not had any physical input it has brought people together based purely on the fact that they are within the same relegion. Also many great figures are brought forward through relegion, which inspire people to perform good deeds.