And what purpose does that serve? Why would you want to willingly delude yourself because as you say (paraphrased) it "makes you feel better"? And furthermore, why would you assert that your delusion is correct. Religion is no different than having an imaginary friend who you talk to all the time.
What purpose does it serve? My God! We're thrown into an existence full of suffering that we only partially comprehend. Are you suggesting that folks should not believe in something supported by their imagination and emotion even if it allows them some support in life? Just because you define it as delusion?
Humans have been utilizing these mental tools in order to "feel better" about their consciousness of their own (and others) mortality and suffering for at least as long as they've been able to artistically express their inner world.
But that's all fine and dandy, until that imaginary friend tells you crap like "Homosexuality is wrong because I say so", "Contraception is bad because I say so", etc. And then they hold these asinine views and expect the rest of the rational world to conform.
Those are negative viewpoints that exist outside of religion as well. There are plenty of homophobic atheists and non-religious politicians who support these ideals.
Sorry, extreme religion is not the only thing we should be watching out for. Even moderate religion is dangerous. A Catholic who has gone to Church every Sunday since he was a kid may not go and blow himself up for his beliefs, but deep inside, that Catholic boy has a very real fear of Hell, laden with guilt for sins that he did not necessarily commit, or "sins" that did not cause harm to anyone (like, for example, masturbation). I should know. I suffered immense psychological damage after I left religion because of this fear of Hell. It's tantamount to child abuse.
And then after that nice Catholic family volunteered at the soup kitchen, they go listen to their priests rant about how gays are ruining our society (whoops, was I supposed to let out that filthy secret, Catholics? Or do you want to keep the subject of your priests' homilies under wraps? The priest at my Church had the cojones to go on an anti-gay rant at Christmas, of all days!). Then when gays want - oh I don't know - the right to be married...these Catholics vote against these propositions in droves, thinking they are doing something moral because their priest told them to. In reality, they only contribute to the misery of the world, thinking they are doing a good deed.
And what, may you ask, is an Atheist/Humanist doing at a Catholic Church on Christmas? Because if he doesn't go, he'll be kicked out of his house, shunned by his family, and treated like an outcast, less than a dog turd. Oh, but I thought moderate religion was okay? Sure it's okay...as long as you are "in the group".
Sorry about your experience. Unfortunately, these things happen outside of Church as well. There have been plenty of scientifically-minded people raising their children in scientifically-minded households who have developed psychological disorders because of the abuse.
And plenty of children who have been raised in religious households who lead happy lives.
We should seek to remove such abuse, though. I don't deny it. But not all of religion is like this. Had you been raised in a UU household, for instance, or a Wiccan household, or just a less-vicious Catholic household.
I unfortunately knew a man who was extremely humanistic and non-religious and still managed to abuse his kids and pets.
If I may ask, what if your child wanted to become religious? Would you suppress that even if it meant psychological harm?
But you can turn back to me and say "Look at all the good religions have done in the world! All these charities!". The bad has far, far outweighed the good. And simply because it may - at times - impact positively in the correct environment, that does not make it any more true. People do good because they are good people and people do bad because they are bad people. The difference is theists have a God to hide behind if they decide to commit atrocities and atheists don't. An atheist only has reason, evidence, and logic to stand behind. And if you can't defend those, you are outcast. You are condemned most importantly...by other atheists!!!
Please, what's next on your defence of religion? Stalin was an atheist? A list of Christian charities?
I think perhaps the best defense of religion is that it has existed for at least as long as modern humans have and that it continues to influence a secular world. Are not festivities--even secular, non-religious ones--the modern expression of the
same things that the ancient, spiritual ones were? Are our own every day rituals--the sporting event, graduation ceremonies, shaving--not from the same symbolism and source as the religious ones?
We dance, create art, and express ourselves because we are not completely controlled by logic and rationality. We are emotional and imaginative as well.
The problem with religion isn't that its inherently harmful, but that it is a human thing just as corruptible as other human things like politics and science. Humans need to control, and that goes to extremes like the Inquisition and the development of atom bombs.
The trick is understanding that we exist first as individuals that must come to terms with our own existence. And spirituality is one way of doing so. It fulfills our existential needs rather than our logical.
