I don't know of anyone who touts missiles and armies as evidence of human progress - an unwanted but entirely foreseeable result of improvements in our technical capability, perhaps.
I was actually thinking of cultural and technological changes being touted as progress. But in terms of missiles - I don't think military advancements are unwanted - they are very much wanted by many people, hence weapons manufacturing and sales sustains our economy and way of life. We want the money from arms sales but also want the people dying from our country's arms sales to be in another country where our taxes or health service doesn't need to deal with the fall-out from all the people our weapons have hurt. Money itself is a cultural tool - it used to be linked to actual valuable commodities but now governments just print it whenever they need more money to fund wars and they manufacture make-believe value through the use of interest rates, and everyone goes along with these cultural beliefs so they can buy and sell things using money.
As to religion being a bulwark against cultural threats... when? When has organised religion been at the forefront of cultural progress? The great victory that was the abolition of slavery that people call out as being the result of the religiously motivated abolitionists was, of course, a disagreement with the equally religiously motivated supporters. Women's rights? Gay rights? Children's rights? Free speech? When religion does unite groups, it's intrinsically tribal and, by definition, just as clearly excluding groups.
Firstly, there is no uniting groups. Humans by their nature are diverse, divided and tribal and they will always be so.
Secondly, there is no perfect outcome in cultural changes - it's an ongoing imperfect process where humans make both gains and losses. So as cultures become more individualistic or more commercialised they gain something and they lose something. Religions can be a tool to counter individualism and commercialism and to shape values. They mould culture and are moulded by culture in each area or community. That you don't see any benefit to religion does not mean there are no benefits. .
Yes. And where there are benefits from the others, we should be careful not to throw out the baby with the bathwater, but with religion there is so little the constitutes any real benefit, and what there is can be so easily sourced from elsewhere.
Disagree with your opinion.
It's a net drain on humanity, and it's had its day. The world would be so much better a place if humanity grew up, threw off the fairy store, and moved forward without it.
Not surprisingly I disagree that fairy stories is all religion has to offer. Also, stories are a great communication tool hence they are so popular, so I am all for stories and what they represent and lessons that can be learned from stories, and don't see it as a sign of growing up or moving forward to reject religion. It depends on how people are using religion.
If people are using organised religion to fight - then it can be a good thing, depending on how they do it, because religion can be a very powerful tool.
I look to the middle-East, and see religion not being used to fight oppression, but to fuel it - on all sides.
The oppression was already there. I'm not saying religion can't overthrow one form of oppression only to replace it with its own different form of oppression.
Indian Hindu nationalism isn't fighting oppression, it's the tool of it. Christian Nationalism in the US. The anti-Muslim rhetoric around much of the 'small boats' argument in the UK. It's mixed in with racism, often, and sometimes other class or cultural divides, but I don't see anyone using to unite these factions. It's tribalism, and it always has been.
I think people being united is just a pipe dream because humans are tribal. So I don't see the point of blaming religion for tribalism - it's just another way for humans to put their innate tribalism into practice.
