I`m not going to start a religious debate here, but it`s not true that religious people are free as birds to live their faith as they want. You will probably find countries where that happens.

Please, don`t take religious views as they are after you or anyone else. It`s not like that. Try to understand that it`s not personnal, it`s a result of a religious mindset and the defense of values in such mindset.
You spoke of homosexuals and stem cells.
About stem cells, i`ll admit i don`t enough about them to make a statemente, but according to this article (http://catholicism.about.com/od/thechurchintheworld/p/Stem_Cells.htm) the Catholic Church, for example, is not against all stem cell research.
About homosexuality, please, let me make it clear, the Church is NOT against homosexuals. It`s against what it calls a sin - an action or acceptance of a life perpretated by someone. Therefore, as Church defines matrimony or the sacrament of matrimon, as between only man and woman, it natural opposes unions of the same sex.

All of what you wrote above about judging and insulting, you know that that does not speak for religions themselves and should only speak for those who, wrongly, do those actions.

In Islam, seeking scientific knowledge is an important aspect of it. So that is completely wrong.

It's stuff like this why I try not to bother with religion vs. irreligion threads. The whole argument that "it's either religion or science" is one of the most fallacious things I've ever heard in my entire life.

Wonderfully written post. Well done.

I see I let my environment get in the way. I'm American. Over here, as I can probably safely assume, a very vocal group of the religious persecute the nonreligious, while siultaneously claiming to be persecuted.

I don't blame religions in general, I have only really been commenting on my own environment. I'm sorry if there was some confusion.

And you're right. Out of all the Abrahamic religions, Catholicism is probably the most understanding and modern.

To address your point on matrimony, the current state laws provide for benefits to marriages. However, the the vocal religious have taken up ownership of the word marriage. Gay peoples don't want to impose on the sacrament of marriage. They only want to be defined as the secular version of the word marriage, as legally married. The state doesn't actually recognize the sacrament, afterall. People who get married in a church still need to file a marriage certificate at a court, otherwise the state won't recognize it. Hell, they don't even care if your priest is a horse with wooden legs. I don't know if you udnerstand my point or not, so allow me to reiterate. Religious marriage is simply not the same word as state marriage, yet the religious claim that gay marriage (state) intrudes upon religious marriage.

And when we look at it, hey, cmon, we know the religious aren't stupid. They can understand that it's a word with multiple meanings... so instead, we regard it as hate.

Well it's about finding answers and truth.  With Religion, it's easy to assume you know everything because a book tells you so, a book that doesn't cite its sources and has been proven wrong time and time again.  Hey, if science proves us wrong, we'll twist logic so say "God works in mysterious ways" or "The Devil is testing our faith" or something to that effect.  By having an omnipotent being to place all the blame, it makes arguing convenient because you're not obligated to prove anything, or even to give evidence.  Winning a debate about the origins of the world is as simple as saying "That's how god works, we can't understand it." and leaving it at that.  We've had people living for thousands of years under this faulty, faulty logic (even going so far as to control nations, start wars, enact genocides, and just be general bigoted fools).  To make matters worse for the nonbelievers, it's a cultural taboo to criticise this faulty belief system due to their impenetrable defense of "we have our right to believe" mantra.  

Science and atheism, on the other hand, for some reason require a LOAD of evidence or proper proof to support their claims, and the church has been making it hell for the scientists for centuries, millenia even. I've not seen a single scientific discovery or theory that didn't prompt the waves of the religious forth to spew their "This discovery is the devil" rants.  We have people actively disputing PROVEN scientific fact (evolution) and well supported theories (global warming) who all seem to come from a creationist standpoint.  

Being religious is easy when it basically boils down to "Don't dare question us and our faith, but we can harass and criticise you all we want because we've got that universal faith defense."  

and that's my main problem with religion, and why it should be abolished or at least relegated to a simple matter of personal choice, not something that's so powerful.  There's no need for religion in modern times when it has done so much to halt or delay scientific progress.  

dude, it all depends on how the individual interprets it.  Hell, Christianity alone has been interpreted thousands of different ways. Two people can read the same bible, one can see that man needs to be judged, whereas another choses to focus on acceptance.  Some believe in creation, others evolution, and yet others can see and understand the possiblity of both existing. 

Basically, people are gonna be good or bad regardless of their religion, any interpretation is brought forth by one's own inner desires. I'm all for getting rid of religion to put an end to all the stupid people using it as a sheild to push their own ignorant agendas.  

I`m not from the states so i don´t know the reality of that part of the world. But i believe you and understand you.

I do understand the difference between state marriage and religious marriage. I too believe that in their essence they are different. Speaking for myself, i would skip the civil marriage as i see no "real" value of it.
The reason why religion have taken ownership of the word marriage is because how they see what that word stands for, or in other words what`s a good marriage and a bad (sin) marriage.
The church knows that marriage exists for a long time, even before Christianism. The thing is, the Church has a view on what conditions should marriage, unions, relationships, should exist: between man and a woman.
In other words, whatever the love relationship is, or what form it should take, for the Church and other religions, it will only, in a not sinful way, apply to man-woman.

I know that this isn`t what many gay people want to hear, but, at least know that it`s nothing personnal.

All so very true except the last part. What you're describing is human nature. Any form of thinking created by mankind can be corrupted. I can assure you that even if we get rid of religion, people will still find things to quarrel about.

Personally, I was a former agnostic (from 12 to 17). But then I personally witnessed an exorcism done to my Aunt in the Islamic way, and what I saw has literally no scientific or logical explanation. And believe me when I say this, I searched for the answers for a very long time. I came across various psychological explanations for exorcisms in general, but none of them are valid since what I saw contradicts the things they mention. And same thing with the scientific community, with some even having the nerve to say it's just superstition. I know what I saw...and it was freaky, given how unnatural it was. I have yet to see anyone give a logical explanation for this.

I've also always heard about the quarrels between secular atheists and religious people about science and religion. And the more I read about science, history, and the sort, and comparing to my religion, the less reason I see why I shouldn't believe. But that's the conclusion I came to.

And trust me(in regards to your response to Rol), I don't try to force religion down other people's throats, nor do I shy away when people question my religion (hell, my closest friend in real life is an atheist).

Society in general has just degraded...for many reasons besides the polarization of religion.

Finally...Padib and the other X1something guy, take notes. THIS is how you disagree while being respectful. see?  I knew it was possible. 

While I admit what I've put forward SEEMS like I'm bunching all Christians together, but I'm really not.  I know a lot of christians and muslims and islam and buddhists (you get the point) are just as good as anyone else in this world, and those are the people I don't mind.  Like I said earlier in this very thread, a lot of my best friends ARE christian, or are spiritual in some other way, and they don't push it on me or say stupid things like "God Hates Fags", so they let me be all atheist and I let them be all spiritual.  my philosophy is pretty simple: do your own thing, aslong as you're not harming or forcing yourself on others, be it through violence, idealism, or judgement. However, when people break this very simple moral guide, I get a little pissed off.  it's the atheists boming churches I have a problem with.  It's the christians staging protests against science I have a problem with.  Fox news, religious extremists, and any poliitical party that uses religion as a platform that I have a problem with.  when people like Padib are pushing ignorant ideals and judgement on others, I push back equally as hard.  

I'm not pissed that science has to work for its answers, I'm pissed that we have those vocal minority of Religious extremists pushing to basically discredit science.  It's the people who try to get intelligent design taught in schools as well as or in lieu of evolution that get me rialed up.  It's the ones protesting Gay rights in the name of god that make me want to punch someone (since for the longest time I thought I may have been gay.) It's the ones who are trying to influence political decisions by banning abortion/stem cell research that pisses me off. You get where I'm going here?  My whole argument in this thread is that the world WOULD be better off if religious people kept it to themselves or only amongst other religious people.  If they stopped sticking their noses in the science labs, schools, and political offices (as well as stopped protesting soldier funerals and advocating "traditional" marriage), not to mention stop with all the jihadist, terrorism and other violence, I'd gladly drop it and have a rational discussion/debate/argument.  Until then I'm stuck with a slew of judgemental, arrogant, ignorant morons who are using god as an excuse.  Once you cut God out, you eliminate their faith defense, and leave them responsible for their own actions.  

I think we can all agree THAT would be better: if everyone was responsible for their own actions. 

Not really sure how to explain it.  basically, if someone says they hear God, they're encouraged and given support by the church. If an Antheist claims to hear voices, he's put in a mental asylum or has to take pills.  Religion, in the wrong hand, justifies bigotry, sexism, racism, and other forms of unacceptable behaviour, but if you're Atheist, any hate or ignorance you have is seen as you just being delusional or hateful.  If you're religious, you can simply say that you were following your faith, and for SOME crazy reason, people are more accepting of people doing it 'for the right reasons.' 

Basically, Religion allows people to do irrational things without being deemed irrational people. it's kinda bullshit. 

Also, I grew up in a very strict christian community, half of the people there are highly religious (some are Amish, some are Mennonites, some are dutch reformed, others are just good old christians), so I dealt with a lot of "You're not following the bible, you're a heathen/antichrist" in school and growing up.  Hell, if you were selling anything in our town on a Sunday, the entire religious community stopped giving you business.  We have this one Pizza joint that opens on a sunday, and because of that the religious citizens stopped going.  their profit suffered greatly because they dared go against god's plan, or whatever. 

Totally true on both accounts...but I say it's worth a test. See if taking religion and 'God' out of the equation DOES alter behaviour in the ways I theorize.  again, I'm not as anti-religion as I seem, I just find it a remarkably irrational thing to believe in, and I see it used as a tool to force ideals and opinions entirely too often, sometimes violently.