What happened to this post - which was originally No. 51 at the top of this page?

=====================
From: Steve Shaw - PM
Date: 18 Mar 11 - 08:51 AM

Excellent post from Will, above (the one before last). One path of less resistance would be for no-one ever to discuss religion. That would leave everyone in their little comfort zone and would be a complete copout. It might work a little better in a world in which religion was not in any way organised, and in which worship, or not, was a completely free and private matter. But it isn't. As Will points out, that accident of birth thing determines what religion most religious people "belong to" and therein lies the seeds of much trouble on this planet, and it's absurd when you really think about it.

Religious extremism - which is more usually the topic which sets Mudcat on fire - is the ultimate expression of the desire to control and impose conformity. I abhor it.

That is a statement few people, bar the nutters, would ever disagree with. But where does moderation end and extremism begin? If you define it as above, then you are including all religious instruction in schools and you are including christenings and other induction ceremonies. My view is that these things are utterly wrong, but they are endemic and I'm not going to get anywhere by calling millions of parents "extremists" for sending their kids to Catholic schools or whatever. The argument has to be put, but it's next to impossible to put it without ruffling feathers. Believers see all the indoctrination as part of the religious community thing whereas atheists may see it as an instrument of control and a ploy to get people in young to keep up the numbers. If you can see a way of discussing that without it getting all inflamed you're a better man than I am, but that is no reason for the argument to be not put.
==================