Question: Will Visceral Disapproval of Religion Generate Any 'Likes' When Forthrightly Spoken Out Loud?
Institutional religion, for all the good it does in reality; its 'intents and purposes' is supposedly to allay man's innate fears of the unknowable, unknown, while at the same time, its master stroke lies in the fact that it has been the most successful, yet harshest instrumental means of control of the subliminal heart and soul.
It has, at the same moment also, ipso facto, been highly divisive of the universality of being, itself.
It is at the root of biases and hatreds, amongst humanity. It created and infused imaginary divisions in the subconscious human mind; and separated, by severing the oneness of all, into chronic trepidation's about the 'Others'.
The differing symbols of religions are just that, simply expressed representations of the same comprehensive inner voice of the universal human soul and spirit.
There is one certainty about all aspects of individual life, and that is its finiteness. It will eventually end all ideations of particular exceptionalisms, for it will cease for all, in perfect harmony.
This fact is one of the intractable, unknowable, unknowns, for it is usually more towards the end of the journey, that it renders us, one and all, the same; too late to act less odiously towards each other.
The nature of the human animal is that it thinks. It has the capacity for expression of a subliminal conscious thought process, and with this apparently unique ability, is capable of self-reflection - if only disingenuously so; of regarding itself and its specific circumstances as markedly different from all else; as separate, unique individual entities, somewhat elevated, and therefore, not part and parcel of the same 'lowly' herd of animate life.
A herd, by definition, is a group of instinctive followers, and humans certainly are not apt to regard themselves simply as a blind herd of followers.
With this presumption: "I think, therefore, I am", 'I' thinks this entitles me to regard myself as special, separate from all 'Others', but at the same time leaves me incapable of recognizing that this is fallacious reasoning.
All individual human striving accomplishes is the attempt to separate the self from the herd; to stand out, in its own mind, as worthier of not having to -- abide by the overriding law of nature. And thereby, simply not having to perish!
The mistaken, blind faith belief is that the mere symbols accrued, the greater the protective power one has against physical demise.
This insecurity is especially apparent in Americans' constant need to express aggression.
For only a local passive expression of these delusions, and underlying aggressive tendencies: In the end, "the one, with the most toys, wins."
Institutional religions are a balm - a salve, a creative figment, a misapplication of the facility for critical thinking, when contemplating other realities - specifically for their adherent's exceptional and sole personal protection.
This consciousness of a separate self is both a great endowment, as well as in the same instant, a great shortcoming; the irreconcilable dichotomy.