Does an 'offer of reasoned debate' start out by accusing an overwhelming majority of the world's "good" (whatever that means) folk, past and present, of doing "bad things" only because of, and in the name of, their religion?

Whether it does or whether it doesn't - the result is a thread containing much reasoned argument. Which should be food for thought for all of us. It certainly is for me.

But on this subject - there would appear to be a point where certain people seem to abdicate reason. Perhaps it should not be a surprise that those who have already abdicated reason in favour of accepting the tenets of an organised religion should do this?

However, it is frustrating that some do come so close to a reasoned and fair approach on this subject before jumping back on what appears to be the comfort of a conditioned response. Like the frustration of someone who would now be able to walk perfectly well without the aid of a crutch but just refuses to take that step.

There was a time when it could be argued that organised religion provided us all with a useful crutch. But there are many reasons why this crutch is not required and now actually threatens to impede the act of walking forward.