Aidonian's blog

Religion has rightfully so described as an opium for the masses and its definitly true. Religion has been used and abused to justify horrible crimes against humanity. We definitly see that in the crusades, how Christians dealt with pagans and later Muslims as well. In Christianity there is Catholicism that is a organised religion within the umbrella of Christianity. The Vatican certainly has blood on their hands. When ofshoots of Christianity started gaining momentum in Europe under reformation, the vatican started to prosecute them. This was long after the crusades. Islam also has blood on their hands, but they don’t have any organised institution like Christianity has. Instead leaders used Islam to justify their rule and use it against their enemies. 

You can definitly state that religion is an opium for the masses. It does a good job to divide the people. While there is truth to it, its not the whole truth. Instead i want to say that this only happened under monotheistic religions that people are divided by religion and put against each other. Polytheistic societies were more open to other religions, even incorperated other deities from other pantheons in theirs. People weren’t divided by religion. They didn’t hate people who worshipped different gods than theirs. For them it was normal. They only knew a polytheistic worldview where many gods existed. 

The function of religion in society

the function of religion in society is to bond people together of something otherworldly. It helps them to provide answers in a difficult world they live in, to deal with situations where religion helps them provide closure and solace. In polytheistic societies religion was also used to justify the rule of a king or even link a king to a certain hero or deity. Pharao’s were god kings. The clergy had tremendous power and influence in court. The same can be said in Mesopotamian cultures. There the function was not only bond people together, but also bind them to a ruler and even defend the system from criticism. The same happens with Christianity and Islam where clergy speak out for the defense of the elite. They function there as to nullify any criticism of the elite and help the elite to strengthen their power of the masses. This is true for all institutionalized clergy that are connected to the state. The last five decades this has changed alot in the west, with notable exceptions, but mostly the clergy are there to help guide people. Sometimes they defend the elite and the system, but it isn’t as before. The power of the clergy has greatly diminished over the last five decades. 

Which is a good thing. The clergy should be there to help people guide them in their religion, help them grieve, find solace, help them understand how it works. They should not keep themselves busy with defending the elite or the system. 

Marxism has thought us that religion is opium of the masses, because they realised that people were controled through the clergy. If people want to be free, the institutionalised clergy must also disappear. I don’t see it serve any function that is of use for the people. They help the elite to strengthen their dominion over them. While clergy should be allies, they act as collaborators. Religion should act independently of the state, not as part of it or as its defender. If religion acts as an defender of the state, it will come into conflict with the public when the interests of the people are on the opposite side of the state. In the US there are ministers who enrich themselves on the back of people who put their faith in them. One minister in Florida even prayed for the victory of Donald Trump during the elections. On the other side we have Saudia Arabia activly spreading their extremist take on Islam around the world, a extremist take of Islam that also produces terrorists and hatred. Saudia-Arabia activly used religion to divide people and spread fear and hatred. Monotheitic religions has been used and abused to cover up crimes and heinous acts , all in the name of their God. If religion is used to justify hatred of other people because they don’t look like you, or worship in the same way as you, than the problem lies with the people advocating their propaganda.I used to think that the problem lies with the religion, but that is not the case. If you make an analysis of it, you see that the problem clearly are the ones who advocate it.

What should the role of religion in society be?

In my opinion religion should be there to guide people, help them, not put them down. Its not in the interests of anyone when a religion is dependent of the state. It should be completly independent of the state, so it can’t act as a defender of it or be used in any other way. Church and state should be seperated, not be mixed. In the west we have seen what can happen if that is allowed again. Today we see what happens in Iran or Saudia-Arabia what it can lead to. Rules made up to control and dominate the people. In other words, politics and religion don’t mix. Its fine if a politician is religious, but he shouldn’t force his religious view on the world. We see that with conservative politicians who use religion as a tool to control and dominate the people and in most cases act against the interests of the people. I’m also for the stance that in school a religion class should be not about one religion, but all religions that are out there. There are many religions out there and kids should learn about all of them instead of focusing on just one. That way they can chose for themselves which religion is best for them later on. Right now, this isn’t done anywhere i think. Which is a shame really. Religion should bond people together, not divide them over who worships the correct way or worships the one true god. These are petty things that only divide us. No one is helped by a religious war, instead the one who sells the weapons for it. 

What we need is more tolerance of religions, more religious freedom. This is what polytheistic religions did do, provide religious freedom. During Roman imperial times all religions were welcome so long as they didn’t question the status quo or challenged the Emperor and even saw the Emperor as a living god. Which in itself a serious abuse of power by religious leaders.