@sabre. I am happy for you, I really am. My reservations against religion is not against religion or its ideas by themselves. Rather I abhor organised religion because it tends to suck every grain of spirituality the religions primary teachers talked about out of their respective religions. I can think of no exceptions to this rule. Islam. Fantastic religion when you read about it in the Quran. but then you look at Mecca and the behaviour of the salafi/wahabi preachers that represent and teach Islam it comes of as barbaric and backwards. etc..
Daniel Vitalis, if he continues his path and the succes he has, could potentially end up a spiritual teacher. A good one too probably. The problem starts once the teacher is no more and the students rave and argue about what the guy had said. This is where religion is born. Someone sells spirituality, but the dumb fucks he talks to turn it into a religion full of rigid rules and overinterpreting the spirit of the message.
Again, I have studied Islam intensely so I can draw some good paralels to this mechanism from Islam. Punishment for theft in Islam. Most think it is dismembering. Its not. According to the Quran in the original arabic, the thief is to have "taken from his hands (the arabi word actually means 3 or more hands, if we are going by cutting as the correct translation, which creates a curious problem since only mutants can recieve the punishment apparently). It is not to be taken litterally. If someone steals, takes an equal amounts of resource from him or force him to work untill the dept is paid. "take from his hands", right? Not 'take his hands!'.
The teachers idea was obvious. Justice. The thief is punished and publicly humiliated and the victim get compensated. Thats justice. Cutting of a thiefs hands are a great injustice because it may have been poverty that made him steal to begin with (society failed him) and he may be a main provider. By taking his hand, you unjustly punish his wife and children. But thats how "religion" works. Great and just spiritual ideas are turned into rigid rules that nobody can question and if they do, they are considered kaffir (hostile unbeliver) and become a persona non grata in their community.
Another example is the islamic 'poor tax' (sadaqat). The Quran tells people that their sadaqat should be "the excess" meaning, give from what you dont need yourself. Scholars pulled a 2.5% tax out of their ass which is now the rule. But that defies the logic of the Quran. Muslims are told that this will expose people who are stingy. A 2.5% tax exposes nothing. But if people are free to give as they please, it soon becomes obvious who gives willingly and who doesnt give at all. Again, religion kills the spiritual ideas.
I could go on and on, but will spare you now. In the honest individual religion is a wonderfull thing. to the large mass, it is a disaster.
edit: Ok, one more thing. To me the litmus test is humility. All religion teaches people to approach the world humble. Thats the one thing people high on organised religion rarely are.
