[gobots]

I think there is a misconception in this thread that I am arguing against the study of religion, but I'm not. I understand the value in comparative religion classes in terms of enriching one's understanding of history and human culture.

I personally have no use for this in my current course. I am interested in the harmful aspects of religion.

[JonnieCache]

Yeah I kinda thought that after I wrote my reply. I'm sure you're quite familiar enough with the sociocultural aspects of religion at this point.

[DanBC]

You said that you are learning about religion.

People thought you were learning about religion.

Those people would have understood your point if you had said that you are learning about atheism.

[gobots]

Once again, I have to point out I am an atheist, I'm not learning about atheism. Science != atheism. Reading about the evils of religion != learning atheism.

[gress]

You are more than an atheist. You are an anti-religionist, regardless of the content of the religion.

[gobots]

What is your point?

[gress]

Atheists do not believe in god.

Anti-religionists do not believe in god, and wish to attack ideas connected with religion whether they have anything to do with believing in god or not. Anti-religionists are therefore willing to dismiss ideas simply because of who presents them rather than on their merits, and are thus subject to a pervasive ad-hominem bias.

[DanBC]

That if you had said that you are learning about "atheism" at the start of this subthread you could have avoided a lot of confusion and suggestions from people offering advice about books to read about religion.