To think religion will play less of a role in 21st century?

[sockatoe]

AIBU to think as society and the human race evolves, there is less need for organised religion? Are we moving towards a less religious society?
We can explain the world around us with science
We have laws to outline acceptable and unacceptable behaviour without the threat of eternal damnation as a consequence of not conforming
We have access to healthcare without going through a religious organisation
People are able to be "spiritual" and self aware without a God figure
People socialise and support one another and charity through means other than religion.

Obviously, many horrific and inhuman acts have and continue to be made in the name of religion. Also, many amazing, heroic and kind acts take place in the name of religion too.
AIBU to think that the majority of people are good, kind and helpful and they outnumber the rest? And that as time goes on, the human race will simply cooperate with one another because that's what you do, without outpouring love and obedience to a God figure who may or may not cast you into eternal damnation if you don't serve them well enough?

I don't see religion going away, much as I personally find it hard to understand religious faith. I'd like to see humanism grow. That's what I feel most aligned to if I had to define it.

Tbh almosthuman evidence is all around. The world isn’t becoming less religious.

If this evidence is all around, give me some. Don’t expect me to take your collective word for it.

Alsohuman I have provided data in graphical form. See my previous post.

Pew Research Centre? Wtf is that when it’s at home? Real evidence from an accredited source would be good.

@Alsohuman The Pew Research Center is one of the most respected organisations doing specialist research in this field. If you haven't heard of it, maybe that's because you've never done any research into religious affiliation. I can assure you, as someone who does, my academic supervisors would be more than happy with PRC data.

The point is that in autism, the normal pruning that occurs in the brain does not occur. It is theorized that this pruning is the reason that most people do not have memories prior to age 3. Consequently, in my husband, the connections holding his memories of being in utero may never have been pruned away and he still has those memories.

My husband has never shown any indication of being actively psychotic. I'm a nurse. I have education in mental health issues. I am familiar with the DSM critiera for a diagnosis of schizophrenia and related disorders. He does not meet those criteria.

Wow, thank you for the interesting debate. I've recently come to the conclusion that prayer is very helpful to the people praying, because they feel like they are helping in a helpless situation. The benefit is for them, an affirmation if you like. I don't think you need to place your faith in a higher being for that though. There are plenty of methods to self regulate in a crisis.
My background is Christian, so for me, praying to God for an outcome I want, despite knowing that He has the future for everyone mapped out is silly. Then accepting the prayer not being answered as "God's Will" or being full of "praise the Lord" if it is, is simply accepting what the outcome is and feeling you played a part. And that bad things are part of a good plan, just one you're not privy to but have to accept.
Don't get me bloody started on praying for God to find you a parking space though - that gives me rage!! I'd imagine if there is a God, maybe they get pissed off with this too, in amongst answering prayers healing the sick and whatnot, getting interrupted to find a pissing parking space for Tracey doing the shopping.
I will not disagree with the amount of good, hope and comfort provided by organised religion though. Although as I said, we don't need religion to be kind.

"I'm a nurse."

Unfortunately.

What about all the autistic people who can't remember being babies? Are the not autistic? Do you have any actual evidence to back up your claim or just your husband alleged recollection, which may well be faulty?

I used to hope that humanity would move on from religion in the 21st century and that superstition & ignorance would be superseded by an evidence-based, scientific, rationalist worldview, but I now realise that I was naive.

Most people are not interested in evaluating evidence and are incapable of analysing and interpreting data sets.

Religion will persist because people find comfort in believing in fairy tales, and because the powerful find it a useful and effective method of influencing, controlling and exploiting the uneducated, as has always been the case.

sockatoe But God wouldn't be 'occupied' in finding someone a parking space so that he (/she) couldn't concentrate on healing the sick etc. That would make God out to be basically human, albeit an extra powerful and long- living human. There's no extant religion that believes in a god like that. What you've written is more similar to ancient Greek and Roman belief, although still not entirely compatible with them.

Also the view you've given of Christian prayer is inaccurate. Christian doctrine about human nature is the opposite of deterministic. (Mainstream) Christians believe fundamentally in free will, i.e. the idea that the future is already mapped out and people just pray to go along with it is completely wrong.

The things you've attacked in your post are straw man arguments, they're not accurate portrayals of religious faith.

You said that 'we' don't need religious faith to be kind. Which is true, humans are capable of kindness to each other with or without faith in God. But it is tangential to the point that faith is not about fulfilling a need to be kind. Nor is it about comfort through prayer (your first point). As I said in my first post, and other pp have said, if someone has faith it is because they believe the object of that faith (God or anything else) to be inherently true and therefore worthwhile, not because they perceive a need that would be fulfilled through that faith.

In short, in both your posts, you have given a list of benefits which a sociologist might note as being fulfilled by religious belief. But they are not foundational to the belief itself and you haven't addressed anything to do with the reasons for faith.

I don't think it will play less of a role, but the role may be different. More via faith supported agencies and groups than before, perhaps less from ministers of religion directly.