Canada

Speaking as a staunch atheist, I'd say you don't get to dictate other peoples' beliefs or practices.

Public schools don't teach religion, except from a social and historical context. Our laws are not based on any particular religion.

You do not have to follow a religion. You do not have to attend church. You do not have to "live with god" in any sense.

The only thing you have to deal with is living in a pluralistic society.

If everything you seem to want was put into practice, then if proof of god was revealed you would not have the "right" to opt out, by your own logic.

Just let people live their lives.

I may not agree with the guys who dress in leviticus quotes and declare me a harlot at transit stations, but I'll defend to the death their right to do it.

• That’s unethical, but even it it wasn’t…
• There’s no way to satsifactorily define religion in the way I think you’re going for, but even if you could…
• People would worship their gods anyway, but even if they didn’t…
• They would worship something else instead (see the ongoing AI cult for live evidence!), but even if they didn’t…
• It wouldn’t suddenly make everyone empathetic, non-tribal, morally consistent, rational physicalists, but even if it did…
• Physicalism is for edgy teenagers who haven’t taken the p-zombie question seriously (source: was edgy teenage physicalist)

There are far dumber things that are higher on the list of shit to ban

While I personally don't believe in the existence of gods or any supernatural beings, if others want to believe in it I think it's fine.

If people encroach on other's choices that's where I'll personally draw the line.

• aka don't force others to make the same choices as yourself. Don't become Microslop.

Some people seem to need the psychological crutch religion provides them with in order to function, and I'd no more take it away from them than I'd take a physical crutch away from someone in a leg cast. I have no issue with people who want to pray or carry out ceremonies in private or in a public building clearly marked out for the purpose. If you voluntarily enter a church, synagogue, mosque, temple, etc. then you should expect religion.

The problem is forcing religion on people who don't need or want it, including children. In other words, the real issue is proselytization (trying to either encourage people to join your religion, or shame them into it) aimed at random members of the public. It shouldn't be illegal, but it should be treated as much more impolite than it currently is.

I don't think it should be illegal to have bad opinons. Everybody has been there at some point (except me)

It’s Canada, religion only exists in private (home/place of worship). As soon as it enters public life you’re infringing on other people’s freedom of religion.

How Ford hasn’t been forced to step down over his public displays of religion is beyond me but he seems to get away with illegal shit all the time.

Are you talking about Catholic schools? I don't remember being taught religion (except about religion) going to regular 'ol public schools.

The separation of Church and State is a given, though of course some people will still attempt to shoehorn their religious beliefs into law under any pretext they think is feasible much like what is happening with our friends to the south and in many other places with religiously fascist governments (Iran, Afghanistan, Sudan, etc.); however, that doesn't mean people should be criminalized for their beliefs. Think of what you're proposing; someone attends church on Sunday, after it has been criminalized. They are arrested and thrown into prison... why? What harm did they bring to their community? It is somewhat of a fascist thing to do, no?

I have met many religious people in my life, and the majority of them are amazing people that truly believe in serving humanity in the name of their god. I personally think it's silly that they need that justification to do what they do, but it's an effective emotional driver. That being said, there are certainly people that have very extreme views based entirely on their religious beliefs. Christo-fascist movements in the US, like the well-funded group of "Christians" that successfully lobbied the government to repeal laws that protected the right to abortions, are prime examples.

I do agree that religion has had a negative effect on society as a whole, especially when considering recent and not so recent atrocities committed in the name of their God; like the millions of missing and murdered Indigenous children that were attending residential schools, the women currently being treated like property in Afghanistan, and more women in America that have lost access to safe abortions. Not to mention the crusades...

All in all, it's pretty horrendous what religion has done, but outright banning it won't solve the problem. Any form of prohibition doesn't really work that well, and only forces people to go outside of the law potentially putting them in precarious situations. Heck, the people that use religion as justification for being horrible human beings might simply find a different justification and then only innocent people will become criminals for their beliefs.

New law: Religion is banned because there is no evidence for it. Except for the state’s beliefs, which are obviously true and transcend other religious beliefs. If you claim the state’s beliefs are false or posit any doubts of its doctrine, that is illegal and you will be jailed for promoting religious views that are not true according to the state.

Organizations seem to always have a love affair with religion because it's such an easy tool to control the masses with. Might hafta target oppressive control structures and hierarchies first, or simultaneously, for people to be free from the blight of organized religion.

Superstitions may always exist. I think it's a by product of face and pattern recognition. They have to be guided to not be harmful.

Hw are you going to do that idiot