Thank you all for your insights... Would've weighed in before but the weather is so beautiful here in Quebec... finally... summer had been crappy so far...
Because of the fact that religion is so widespread and that it played such a significant role in the evolution of humanity as a whole, it is tempting to consider religion as a perfectly natural stage of collective psychological evolution. Whatever evils and atrocities were done under its name, religion nonetheless creates a cohesive framework under which groups tend to organize themselves.
Of course, the problem arises when groups clash with one another. I think one aspect of religion is very much related to the ''tribal'' mindset which lies in every single one of us, whether we like it or not. By ''tribal'' I mean the need to identify to a larger group, to find satisfaction and security in belonging to a social ''clan'' or institution. In other words, to feel you are part of a gang.
It is in this sense that religion is a social framework. But as we all know, the results of ''tribes'' clashing with each other over religious issues usually aren't pretty. The tribes must find what they have in common in order to live together and as they do, more ''inclusive'' religions arise, which create larger and larger social frameworks.
In what is often called the Axial Age (about 800BC to 200 BC), most tribal religions of the world tended to constellate around a few major religions that were the building ground of all current major religions. But of course, the ''tribal'' clashes just got bigger and bigger as major religions clashed with other major religions.
Eventually, I believe something more inclusive than religion as we commonly understand it needs to come into play in order for more efficient and solid social frameworks to arise. And this is where science comes into the picture. Or perhaps I should say, this is where philosophy and analytical thought comes into the picture. Because in the end, science really is an offspring of philosophy.
Logical and analytical thought is, I think, a higher form of human psychological manifestation than religion. To a certain extent, it is more inclusive than anything else. We don't all agree on why our planet exists in the first place. But we pretty much all agree that it is round because that is what analytical thought gives us as a conclusion. Analytical thought is something that all humans have in common, at least in potentiality.
I could go on and on, but what I am trying to say is that science is ''superior'' to religion in the same way an adult is superior to a child. This analogy is very important in my opinion concerning the OP... because adults don't wage war to children.
All societies are at different stages of evolution and this must be understood and respected. You can't expect a society mainly driven by religion to suddenly accept logic and analytical thought as its new ''dogma''. This is like asking a 7 year old to act like an adult. But when a child loses control, we teach that child a lesson and put it back in its place. This is how I view religion. As long as it doesn't over-react and have a tantrum, it needs to be fully tolerated, accepted and even embraced as it expresses itself in its shiniest and most beautiful way (religion can be expressed positively.)
Some may think it is condescending to compare religion to a child and science to an adult. To this I would answer that some children are much more wise and mature than adults. Analytical thought can be used for shallow purposes as much as any religion...
