If we fully accepted religious ideology we would still be buying and selling people as property and selling our daughters as slaves, and making our daughters mary their attackers after they get raped by them. A world with no religion would require you to think and figure out objective morality instead of believing in a subjective one. Every moral progress has been opposed by religion such as the diminution of war the mitigation of slavery and the better treatment of colored races, many improvements on criminal law, and many more. Anything that causes controversy and conflict is not good for society and thats all "gods" word does. We dont need it to come up with rules any more than we need it to come up with rules for a game. They should be based on fairness and the idea that our happiness is not more important or less important than anyone elses but preventing pain suffering and misery i think should be the number one priority and religion is all about suffering infinitely or serving god like a slave without any rights. Just because he is superior to us people think its ok for him to treat us however "he" wants and what we deserve is determined by what we choose to do and why we chose to do it. But not according to religion. What you get depends on someone elses actions and not yours which couldnt be more messed up and i think we all know better than that.
Listen, I am not going to come here act like Theists are the only people who engage in war and other things that are counterproductive to humanity's progress. But religion is the foundation for the tolerance of ignorance. Religion is the biggest promoter of faith and the biggest enemy of reason.
Humanity's biggest asset to progression is a culture of curiosity and skepticism. Religion tries to, and succeeds at, stifling these assets which causes humanity to get stuck in the past(and in tribes), and fear further knowledge of the world around us.
The picture posted above this opinion post brings up a good point. But religion is a philosophy itself. What makes religion unique is it's approach to all of the tough questions. Religion has an answer for every single deep, philosophical, question and it provides no evidence for its answers. Whether that is logical evidence, or empirical evidence. And that is comforting for people, because when we all really take the time to contemplate how little we know about the reality in which we live, it can be very frightening. Faith helps us avoid our ignorance.
Some people have a problem with science being unable to answer every single question humanity has. And I don't blame them. I want answers too. But I want the correct, undisputible answers, and religion does not offer that. And with the advancement of technology and science as a whole, we can see that knowledge helps everyone. So we have to eradicate religion, and put our energy into finding truth through a strict process of validity.
Will we find the answer to every single question? We don't know if we will or not. And really, this probably depends on how much effort we put into it. How bad do we want to know the answers to our deepest questions?
Embrace the madness, without it life would have no meaning for a lto of the human population and be no fun at all.
A depressed, angry and amoralistic world is not better than one where most are moralistic but a few are terrorists due to it.
Maybe I'm just crazy though, who knows?
It would be stupid to act as if this would be a helpful thing nowadays. If one of these were to be introduced, I'd choose Yes in a heartbeat, even as a Christian. Religion has been incredibly detrimental to human progress, at least it is now.
However, I choose the "No" side, simply because if this world had never had religion, we'd likely not be here (Religion being what started 70,000 years ago, immediately before we suddenly made it to the top of the food chain and became the dominant species on the planet.) The cognitive revolution. Perhaps it could have started without religion- but there's no evidence to support this. Religion's main purpose is to unify large numbers of people. Nothing else can do it as well, and without this basic step, homo sapiens would either be extinct like all the other members of the homo genus, or barely alive, with a tiny number of members. Either way, I'd prefer a world of very stupid people (which to be honest we have anyway) to a world of no people.