Here’s a quote from a recent Andrew Sullivan blog entry: “To dismiss all religion as mere anachronistic bunk is a closure of the mind, not an opening.”
Here’s my problem with Sullivan’s statement. Do non-religionists really “dismiss all religion,” or do they (we?) merely question certain questionable, i.e., against nature, holdings by several major religions?
I would hold there is at least one element in religious history which should be embraced by all humanity—the idea of congregating.
Beyond that, there are practices which should be abandoned. Belief in ascensions, virgin births, raising from the dead, a “jealous” God (how is that not a reflection of human psychology?), having human beings become the earthly “voice” of God, and killing in the name of God (another human trait imposed on the concept of a deity) for starters.
We are a social animal; we benefit from associations with persons of a like mind. Working within our own associations and with other associations we can all benefit.
That’s a “religious” concept which we should keep and cherish.