The great thing about being a freethinker is that I just follow the facts, regardless of to which direction they point.
Seems to me that some prominent antitheists are guilty of a logical fallacy (e.g. here), and it goes like this:
Religion causes people to do bad things they otherwise would not have done – e.g. suicide bombings, oppressing homosexuals, promoting anti-scientific teaching in the classroom, teaching kids they aren’t allowed to choose how to live their own lives because they’ll go to hell if they do, etc.
Religion, however, does not cause people to do good things they would not have otherwise done – e.g. Catholic Charities, church-run homeless shelters, people who rid themselves of addictions or illegal behavior when they “find God,” welcoming guests for Shabbos or Yom Tov, giving a tenth to charity, etc. Good people will do good things with or without religion.
But then why didn’t you say the same thing before – “Bad people will do bad things with or without religion?”
Seems like a double standard to me. If we’re being intellectually honest, either claim that:
a) religion causes people to do good AND bad things they wouldn’t have otherwise done, or
b) religion causes people to do NEITHER good NOR bad things they wouldn’t have otherwise done.
My sense is the facts clearly support a) more than b), but either way, it seems to be a logical fallacy to have it both ways and give religion credit for the bad it causes and not the good.
Of course if a) is true, that means we have to find ways to gain the benefits of religion, or find sound replacements, without teaching our kids things that aren’t true about invisible beings appearing on tops of mountains or men walking on water or flying to heaven on a donkey, etc.
But I’ll get to that in another post. 🙂