Right on the mark, GUEST. :-)

Fibula, Peter K., milk monitor, etc...the fact is that you and I actually agree on the essential philosophical points in this discussion. I would indeed compare much conventional religion to "a comfort blanket". I would likewise compare people's naive reliance on things like official political party lines in the same light. Those are secular religions, in my opinion, because I do not think that being "religious" necessarily requires belief in a "god" or some sort of omnipotent, unseen deity or spiritual being. It merely requires belief in a powerful idea, that's all.

The Nazis were religious, for example. Their religion was a weird pastiche of Christianity, racial theories of a master race, idolatry of a messianic individual (Hitler), nationalism, militarism, anti-communism, and arch-morality (in their terms). That was a powerful religion if ever I've seen one!

The present-day USA is mired in its own weird religion, which is a pastiche of bizarre political mythology, notions of a messianic mission to "save the World" (meaning to convert others by persuasion or force and make them be like "us"), notions of cultural superiority, extreme materialism and devotion to monetary gain, militarism gone wild, idolatry of political leaders, arch-morality (yet again!) espoused most loudly through the fundamentalist Christian outlook, an anti-Islamic crusade, the worshipping of youth, beauty, and fame...and on and on....

I call that a cult. An extreme cult. It's a cult that sometimes claims to serve God, but it actually serves money and naked power (as did the medieval Church of Rome).

Now, anyone who willingly serves that $y$tem and supports its propaganda and aggression is indicating to me that he believes in something greater (meaning larger and more important) than himself. He can be a 100% atheist (by the usual definition) and still do that.

I'm not insulting anyone, Wolfgang, because we all actually agree on this matter...we are just arguing over semantics, because what I said has not been understood. I said that someone would have to be insane (or unconscious) not to believe in something larger than themselves, and that is the case. I did NOT say they would have to be insane not to believe in God. I know lots of sane people who don't believe in God. But first, you must determine what the heck it is they are talking about when they SAY the word "God"!

It could be any one of a great many different things, after all. There are as many versions of God out there as there are blades of grass.

If you didn't believe in something larger than yourself, Wolfgang, you would never have been drawn toward a career in science in my opinion. Science immediately posits a view of life that is considerably larger than the little self.