Religion: What it means to you

EDIT: Holy shit, this is long. Sorry, everyone, verbal inundation was not my intention.

I'm not sure that there's a term to accurately describe what I believe.

I'll defer to reason and state that it's not outside the realm of possibility for a g/God to exist. There are a ton of things in the universe we do not yet understand, and it is reasonable to assume, then, that some form of higher, if not supreme, being could be a part of that. I do not say that it definitely is or is not, but I will not rule out the possibility that someday someone can gather evidence to prove the existence of a deity.

Personally, though, until someone can provide me that proof, I will not believe in, worship, idolize, pray to, speak to, or otherwise even acknowledge any such invisible or imperceptible entity or force that religion would have me believe has some kind of control over my life. I do not conduct myself in any such way as would "make god happy," and I do not stop to consider any of my actions or words (let alone thoughts) to determine whether or not god would approve.

As far as go "miracles" or other explanations of the unexplained or inexplicable, my worldview is such that all things are divided into two categories: Things we understand, and things we do not understand yet. There is no third category of "things we don't understand and never will because it's god's will that we're not meant to." Science, as far as I'm concerned, is our best bet yet for understanding and interacting with the natural world, and we should all endeavour to better ourselves through observation and study of the things around us. This also goes hand-in-hand with how pissed-off I get when I hear about fundamentalist assholes railing against things like stem cell research or science education teaching evolution. For all the benefits science can offer, it angers me to see it hindered for fear of running afoul of the moral code prescribed by an entity whose existence we cannot even confirm. Stem cells can cure cancer? Oh, but we better not because we might anger a god that may or may not be real.

With regard to the dreaded and oft-recently-abused "M" word, morality, I strive to conduct myself in such a fashion as not to cause harm to anyone I care about. Furthermore, I try to avoid doing harm to anyone who hasn't gone out of their way to hurt me, insult me, slander me, or otherwise generally be a mean old poopyhead to me. I do not agree with the no-revenge principles taught by many religions, however, and have never been one to "turn the other cheek." If god does exist and this pisses him/her/it/them off, that's too bad, because it's not changing anytime soon. I live by a code of ethics, and that has been good enough for most people so far. I have no need for or interest in morality. My ethical standards seem to be sufficient for facilitating amicable interaction with others without causing anyone deliberate harm, and they provide me with channels for righting wrongs done to me without waiting for divine retribution to befall my wrongdoers. I think I'd be waiting for quite a while.

I'm sure I've come across as one of those angry, frothing-at-the-mouth atheists who wants to tear down nativity scenes and burn bibles in public. I'm not, and I don't. I don't get pissy when someone wishes me a Merry Christmas. I say it right back to them. Get wished a Happy Hanukkah? I say that one right back too. As far as I'm concerned, people have, and need to have, the right to believe whatever they damn well please. Personal, individual freedom--the freedom to do whatever you want as long as it doesn't affect anyone else--is one of the most important things in life. The problem is when religion tells people they're not allowed to do what they like because "God says no!" and then when fundie types start pushing their beliefs on others trying to "save" them. These people are no longer free to pursue happiness on their own terms, thus violating part A of personal freedom, and their beliefs lead them to adversely affect others, violating part B.

I'll happily discuss your beliefs and mine with you. You can tell me whatever you want as long as your intent is to inform and hold intelligent discussion. I will be perfectly friendly throughout the entire discourse. The very instant you start telling me I'm a horrible person because I don't think the way you do, however, you will see manifested in me the wrath of your angry god.

So anyway, I guess the term that would describe me is..."apathetic atheist?" I don't believe in any god; I'd be willing to acknowledge one's existence if given conclusive, objective, scientific proof; if such existence were proven I really wouldn't care and still would not adopt any reverence, adoration, or subservience to any deity outside the same level of respect I grant my fellow humans; and where religion is concerned I have no problem with anyone's as long as it allows them to do as they please and as long as I don't have it shoved in my face.

Here's one last point, only because I can't figure out a better place to shoehorn it into my post. A friend of mine, in discussions about various religions, is convinced that no matter what deities anyone worships, it doesn't matter because "it's all the same god anyway." Being an atheist I personally don't mind as I have no stake in the matter, but I used to consider myself a Wiccan for a number of years and remembering what I do from that belief system as well as others...does that assertion strike anyone else as potentially horribly offensive? There's some degree of truth to it if you stay inside Abrahamic religions, but I can see a Hindu, a Wiccan, a Buddhist, or a follower of one of many other faiths whose pantheons follow a different structure being quite insulted at the assertion that their gods are "all the same" as every other. I'm asking because I don't trust myself to make the most informed judgment call on that, and if it is as potentially offensive as I think it is, I'd like to clue her in that she could get herself into some serious hot water if she says that to the wrong person.

Jam it back in, in the dark.

Breeding licenses and mandatory reversible sterilization upon reaching puberty.

People could be free to be religious, but then they don't get the license to have kids. No kids = losing the most effective vector for spreading the religion.

Agnostics/atheists/apathetics (those who just don't give a damn about even wondering whether there's a god) apply for the breeding license, maybe take a "parental competency" test with some other criteria, and get desterilized and made able to propagate.

Converting/lying on the test/otherwise exposing children to religion in a proselytizing or other non-academic fashion (i.e. anything more than "The $RELIGION system of belief is A, B, C, with doctrines X, Y, Z") is grounds for removal of one's children from one's custody and placement into a foster home. Additionally, parents will be irreversibly resterilized and possibly serve prison sentences as well.

Draconian, but if you want to get rid of religion, it should solve the problem within a couple generations.

There's nowhere I can't reach.