s/o Do people attend religious services for the religious aspects, or for community?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I already did earlier this morning.

You insulted Pew and displayed your ignorance about polling. That's not an answer. Pew has good numbers.

Address the content: most people, whether they go to church or not, actually believe. Only 4% of the US population are actually atheists. So it follows that the vast majority of your "cultural Christians," the ones raised Christian but who who don't go to church, actually still believe.

Any response to that? Or we'll just have to conclude that, poor you, you got beaten down on that other thread with your weird, highly personal vendetta against that OP, so now you're carrying on a different weird, highly personal vendetta against this OP. Maybe seek help?

Polling numbers vary significantly. They depend on who actually responded. How the questions are phrased. What data is included/excluded.

Here’s another poll:


We’ve all seen how religious people twist the truth. I wouldn’t expect them to answer a poll sincerely.

You understand that some religions don't involve a supernatural god or gods, right? And polls do vary, although it's weird 99% of DCUM's atheists love Pew and you're the sole exception.

Anyway, thanks for the gratuitous ad hominems, they add a lot to your argument. /s

No. I don't understand that at all. Which ones?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I already did earlier this morning.

You insulted Pew and displayed your ignorance about polling. That's not an answer. Pew has good numbers.

Address the content: most people, whether they go to church or not, actually believe. Only 4% of the US population are actually atheists. So it follows that the vast majority of your "cultural Christians," the ones raised Christian but who who don't go to church, actually still believe.

Any response to that? Or we'll just have to conclude that, poor you, you got beaten down on that other thread with your weird, highly personal vendetta against that OP, so now you're carrying on a different weird, highly personal vendetta against this OP. Maybe seek help?

Polling numbers vary significantly. They depend on who actually responded. How the questions are phrased. What data is included/excluded.

Here’s another poll:


We’ve all seen how religious people twist the truth. I wouldn’t expect them to answer a poll sincerely.

You understand that some religions don't involve a supernatural god or gods, right? And polls do vary, although it's weird 99% of DCUM's atheists love Pew and you're the sole exception.

Anyway, thanks for the gratuitous ad hominems, they add a lot to your argument. /s

No. I don't understand that at all. Which ones?

Buddhism. Honestly you really know so little about religion, it's a shame you're here so constantly, wasting everybody's time including your own.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People should stick to the topic of the thread. Every thread that is driven purposefully off topic becomes a quagmire. Intellectual discourse is great; whatever happens when threads devolve into a verbal food fights is not. People can disagree thoughtfully. That doesn’t seem to happen here often.

It’s impossible to have any sort of intellectual discussion when people like OP misconstrue and twist what was said.

OP's thread title and first post are very clear that she's talking about multiple threads. Not about that particular thread you're so obsessed about.

Move on. It's impossible to have an intellectual discussion when you're either (a) deliberately misconstruing OP's thread header, (b) not capable of understanding OP's thread header, (c) one of those unwell posters who develops an obsessive vendetta against another poster and pursues it for pages, or (d) intent on derailing.

It says spin off right in the title and he pushed people to move over to this thread multiple times. Each time deliberately misconstruing what was said. Don’t gaslight - it’s all there for everyone to see.

Move on, you're just wrong.

Answer the question about 20:49 and you'll have the "intellectual discussion" you claim to want. For someone who pretends to want "intellectual discussion," you sure are stuck on your OT personal vendetta against OP and resistant to responding to actual arguments like 20:49.

What can I say? I hate liars/people who twist the truth.

We see you on this forum constantly. You're the king/queen of twisting others' arguments and derailments. For you to feign outrage about someone else is pretty rich.

Why do you think there is only one atheist posting?

And we can all clearly see who twists arguments. And gaslights. I’ll call it out every time I see it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I already did earlier this morning.

You insulted Pew and displayed your ignorance about polling. That's not an answer. Pew has good numbers.

Address the content: most people, whether they go to church or not, actually believe. Only 4% of the US population are actually atheists. So it follows that the vast majority of your "cultural Christians," the ones raised Christian but who who don't go to church, actually still believe.

Any response to that? Or we'll just have to conclude that, poor you, you got beaten down on that other thread with your weird, highly personal vendetta against that OP, so now you're carrying on a different weird, highly personal vendetta against this OP. Maybe seek help?

Polling numbers vary significantly. They depend on who actually responded. How the questions are phrased. What data is included/excluded.

Here’s another poll:


We’ve all seen how religious people twist the truth. I wouldn’t expect them to answer a poll sincerely.

You understand that some religions don't involve a supernatural god or gods, right? And polls do vary, although it's weird 99% of DCUM's atheists love Pew and you're the sole exception.

Anyway, thanks for the gratuitous ad hominems, they add a lot to your argument. /s

No. I don't understand that at all. Which ones?

Buddhism. Honestly you really know so little about religion, it's a shame you're here so constantly, wasting everybody's time including your own.

https://nepalstatues.com/buddhist-gods-guide-buddhist-pantheon/
Who are the Real Buddhist Gods?
“Devas and Brahmas – heavenly beings that exist in five main heavens that are structured in layers above the human realm. They can exist in material or immaterial form.
Nagas – are semi-divine beings who exist in the form of snakes and they can take human form. Nagas are associated with bodies of water such as lakes and rivers.
Kinnaras – mythical half human, half bird creatures that come from the Himalayas and assist humans in times of trouble. They are in a perpetual state of bliss and are always dancing and singing.
Garudas – the garudas are giant birds who are enemies of the nagas and are often depicted grasping a snake in their claws. They have limited divine characteristics and some can take human form if necessary.
Dharmapala – this is a Sanskrit word that translates literally as “Protector of the Dharma”. Dharmapala are actually Buddhas or Bodhisattvas that have taken the form of fierce protectors of the faith e.g. Yamantaka.”

Atheists are not a monolith. The only thing we have in common is that we don’t believe in supernatural forces. Some may trust polls, I don’t. They depend on who actually responded. How the questions are phrased. What data is included/excluded. Etc.

There isn’t just one atheist posting BTW.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People should stick to the topic of the thread. Every thread that is driven purposefully off topic becomes a quagmire. Intellectual discourse is great; whatever happens when threads devolve into a verbal food fights is not. People can disagree thoughtfully. That doesn’t seem to happen here often.

It’s impossible to have any sort of intellectual discussion when people like OP misconstrue and twist what was said.

OP's thread title and first post are very clear that she's talking about multiple threads. Not about that particular thread you're so obsessed about.

Move on. It's impossible to have an intellectual discussion when you're either (a) deliberately misconstruing OP's thread header, (b) not capable of understanding OP's thread header, (c) one of those unwell posters who develops an obsessive vendetta against another poster and pursues it for pages, or (d) intent on derailing.

It says spin off right in the title and he pushed people to move over to this thread multiple times. Each time deliberately misconstruing what was said. Don’t gaslight - it’s all there for everyone to see.

Move on, you're just wrong.

Answer the question about 20:49 and you'll have the "intellectual discussion" you claim to want. For someone who pretends to want "intellectual discussion," you sure are stuck on your OT personal vendetta against OP and resistant to responding to actual arguments like 20:49.

What can I say? I hate liars/people who twist the truth.

We see you on this forum constantly. You're the king/queen of twisting others' arguments and derailments. For you to feign outrage about someone else is pretty rich.

Why do you think there is only one atheist posting?

And we can all clearly see who twists arguments. And gaslights. I’ll call it out every time I see it.

You've spent pages insulting other posters and obsessing about where people get their Dawkins news. You were asked to provide stats to confirm your own assertions, and you utterly failed at that.

You need to find a new hobby.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People should stick to the topic of the thread. Every thread that is driven purposefully off topic becomes a quagmire. Intellectual discourse is great; whatever happens when threads devolve into a verbal food fights is not. People can disagree thoughtfully. That doesn’t seem to happen here often.

It’s impossible to have any sort of intellectual discussion when people like OP misconstrue and twist what was said.

OP's thread title and first post are very clear that she's talking about multiple threads. Not about that particular thread you're so obsessed about.

Move on. It's impossible to have an intellectual discussion when you're either (a) deliberately misconstruing OP's thread header, (b) not capable of understanding OP's thread header, (c) one of those unwell posters who develops an obsessive vendetta against another poster and pursues it for pages, or (d) intent on derailing.

It says spin off right in the title and he pushed people to move over to this thread multiple times. Each time deliberately misconstruing what was said. Don’t gaslight - it’s all there for everyone to see.

Move on, you're just wrong.

Answer the question about 20:49 and you'll have the "intellectual discussion" you claim to want. For someone who pretends to want "intellectual discussion," you sure are stuck on your OT personal vendetta against OP and resistant to responding to actual arguments like 20:49.

What can I say? I hate liars/people who twist the truth.

We see you on this forum constantly. You're the king/queen of twisting others' arguments and derailments. For you to feign outrage about someone else is pretty rich.

Why do you think there is only one atheist posting?

And we can all clearly see who twists arguments. And gaslights. I’ll call it out every time I see it.

You've spent pages insulting other posters and obsessing about where people get their Dawkins news. You were asked to provide stats to confirm your own assertions, and you utterly failed at that.

You need to find a new hobby.

But but but they are free from religion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I already did earlier this morning.

You insulted Pew and displayed your ignorance about polling. That's not an answer. Pew has good numbers.

Address the content: most people, whether they go to church or not, actually believe. Only 4% of the US population are actually atheists. So it follows that the vast majority of your "cultural Christians," the ones raised Christian but who who don't go to church, actually still believe.

Any response to that? Or we'll just have to conclude that, poor you, you got beaten down on that other thread with your weird, highly personal vendetta against that OP, so now you're carrying on a different weird, highly personal vendetta against this OP. Maybe seek help?

Polling numbers vary significantly. They depend on who actually responded. How the questions are phrased. What data is included/excluded.

Here’s another poll:


We’ve all seen how religious people twist the truth. I wouldn’t expect them to answer a poll sincerely.

You understand that some religions don't involve a supernatural god or gods, right? And polls do vary, although it's weird 99% of DCUM's atheists love Pew and you're the sole exception.

Anyway, thanks for the gratuitous ad hominems, they add a lot to your argument. /s

No. I don't understand that at all. Which ones?

Buddhism. Honestly you really know so little about religion, it's a shame you're here so constantly, wasting everybody's time including your own.

While technically correct, this is a bit disingenuous because Most Buddhists also believe in reincarnation and/or animism.

So that’s one religion. What are the others?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People should stick to the topic of the thread. Every thread that is driven purposefully off topic becomes a quagmire. Intellectual discourse is great; whatever happens when threads devolve into a verbal food fights is not. People can disagree thoughtfully. That doesn’t seem to happen here often.

It’s impossible to have any sort of intellectual discussion when people like OP misconstrue and twist what was said.

OP's thread title and first post are very clear that she's talking about multiple threads. Not about that particular thread you're so obsessed about.

Move on. It's impossible to have an intellectual discussion when you're either (a) deliberately misconstruing OP's thread header, (b) not capable of understanding OP's thread header, (c) one of those unwell posters who develops an obsessive vendetta against another poster and pursues it for pages, or (d) intent on derailing.

It says spin off right in the title and he pushed people to move over to this thread multiple times. Each time deliberately misconstruing what was said. Don’t gaslight - it’s all there for everyone to see.

Move on, you're just wrong.

Answer the question about 20:49 and you'll have the "intellectual discussion" you claim to want. For someone who pretends to want "intellectual discussion," you sure are stuck on your OT personal vendetta against OP and resistant to responding to actual arguments like 20:49.

What can I say? I hate liars/people who twist the truth.

We see you on this forum constantly. You're the king/queen of twisting others' arguments and derailments. For you to feign outrage about someone else is pretty rich.

Why do you think there is only one atheist posting?

And we can all clearly see who twists arguments. And gaslights. I’ll call it out every time I see it.

You've spent pages insulting other posters and obsessing about where people get their Dawkins news. You were asked to provide stats to confirm your own assertions, and you utterly failed at that.

You need to find a new hobby.

I guess some people don’t like being held accountable for lying.

And I didn’t make any assertions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People should stick to the topic of the thread. Every thread that is driven purposefully off topic becomes a quagmire. Intellectual discourse is great; whatever happens when threads devolve into a verbal food fights is not. People can disagree thoughtfully. That doesn’t seem to happen here often.

It’s impossible to have any sort of intellectual discussion when people like OP misconstrue and twist what was said.

OP's thread title and first post are very clear that she's talking about multiple threads. Not about that particular thread you're so obsessed about.

Move on. It's impossible to have an intellectual discussion when you're either (a) deliberately misconstruing OP's thread header, (b) not capable of understanding OP's thread header, (c) one of those unwell posters who develops an obsessive vendetta against another poster and pursues it for pages, or (d) intent on derailing.

It says spin off right in the title and he pushed people to move over to this thread multiple times. Each time deliberately misconstruing what was said. Don’t gaslight - it’s all there for everyone to see.

Move on, you're just wrong.

Answer the question about 20:49 and you'll have the "intellectual discussion" you claim to want. For someone who pretends to want "intellectual discussion," you sure are stuck on your OT personal vendetta against OP and resistant to responding to actual arguments like 20:49.

What can I say? I hate liars/people who twist the truth.

We see you on this forum constantly. You're the king/queen of twisting others' arguments and derailments. For you to feign outrage about someone else is pretty rich.

Why do you think there is only one atheist posting?

And we can all clearly see who twists arguments. And gaslights. I’ll call it out every time I see it.

You've spent pages insulting other posters and obsessing about where people get their Dawkins news. You were asked to provide stats to confirm your own assertions, and you utterly failed at that.

You need to find a new hobby.

But but but they are free from religion.

Many still participate in the religious communities.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People should stick to the topic of the thread. Every thread that is driven purposefully off topic becomes a quagmire. Intellectual discourse is great; whatever happens when threads devolve into a verbal food fights is not. People can disagree thoughtfully. That doesn’t seem to happen here often.

It’s impossible to have any sort of intellectual discussion when people like OP misconstrue and twist what was said.

OP's thread title and first post are very clear that she's talking about multiple threads. Not about that particular thread you're so obsessed about.

Move on. It's impossible to have an intellectual discussion when you're either (a) deliberately misconstruing OP's thread header, (b) not capable of understanding OP's thread header, (c) one of those unwell posters who develops an obsessive vendetta against another poster and pursues it for pages, or (d) intent on derailing.

It says spin off right in the title and he pushed people to move over to this thread multiple times. Each time deliberately misconstruing what was said. Don’t gaslight - it’s all there for everyone to see.

Move on, you're just wrong.

Answer the question about 20:49 and you'll have the "intellectual discussion" you claim to want. For someone who pretends to want "intellectual discussion," you sure are stuck on your OT personal vendetta against OP and resistant to responding to actual arguments like 20:49.

What can I say? I hate liars/people who twist the truth.

We see you on this forum constantly. You're the king/queen of twisting others' arguments and derailments. For you to feign outrage about someone else is pretty rich.

Why do you think there is only one atheist posting?

And we can all clearly see who twists arguments. And gaslights. I’ll call it out every time I see it.

You've spent pages insulting other posters and obsessing about where people get their Dawkins news. You were asked to provide stats to confirm your own assertions, and you utterly failed at that.

You need to find a new hobby.

I guess some people don’t like being held accountable for lying.

And I didn’t make any assertions.

Bye now

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People should stick to the topic of the thread. Every thread that is driven purposefully off topic becomes a quagmire. Intellectual discourse is great; whatever happens when threads devolve into a verbal food fights is not. People can disagree thoughtfully. That doesn’t seem to happen here often.

It’s impossible to have any sort of intellectual discussion when people like OP misconstrue and twist what was said.

OP's thread title and first post are very clear that she's talking about multiple threads. Not about that particular thread you're so obsessed about.

Move on. It's impossible to have an intellectual discussion when you're either (a) deliberately misconstruing OP's thread header, (b) not capable of understanding OP's thread header, (c) one of those unwell posters who develops an obsessive vendetta against another poster and pursues it for pages, or (d) intent on derailing.

It says spin off right in the title and he pushed people to move over to this thread multiple times. Each time deliberately misconstruing what was said. Don’t gaslight - it’s all there for everyone to see.

Move on, you're just wrong.

Answer the question about 20:49 and you'll have the "intellectual discussion" you claim to want. For someone who pretends to want "intellectual discussion," you sure are stuck on your OT personal vendetta against OP and resistant to responding to actual arguments like 20:49.

What can I say? I hate liars/people who twist the truth.

We see you on this forum constantly. You're the king/queen of twisting others' arguments and derailments. For you to feign outrage about someone else is pretty rich.

Why do you think there is only one atheist posting?

And we can all clearly see who twists arguments. And gaslights. I’ll call it out every time I see it.

You've spent pages insulting other posters and obsessing about where people get their Dawkins news. You were asked to provide stats to confirm your own assertions, and you utterly failed at that.

You need to find a new hobby.

I guess some people don’t like being held accountable for lying.

And I didn’t make any assertions.

It seems you lost the argument, so now you’ve spent pages insulting everybody else. You’re even lying about OP lying, which is quite rich. Are you trolling?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I already did earlier this morning.

You insulted Pew and displayed your ignorance about polling. That's not an answer. Pew has good numbers.

Address the content: most people, whether they go to church or not, actually believe. Only 4% of the US population are actually atheists. So it follows that the vast majority of your "cultural Christians," the ones raised Christian but who who don't go to church, actually still believe.

Any response to that? Or we'll just have to conclude that, poor you, you got beaten down on that other thread with your weird, highly personal vendetta against that OP, so now you're carrying on a different weird, highly personal vendetta against this OP. Maybe seek help?

Polling numbers vary significantly. They depend on who actually responded. How the questions are phrased. What data is included/excluded.

Here’s another poll:


We’ve all seen how religious people twist the truth. I wouldn’t expect them to answer a poll sincerely.

You understand that some religions don't involve a supernatural god or gods, right? And polls do vary, although it's weird 99% of DCUM's atheists love Pew and you're the sole exception.

Anyway, thanks for the gratuitous ad hominems, they add a lot to your argument. /s

No. I don't understand that at all. Which ones?

Buddhism. Honestly you really know so little about religion, it's a shame you're here so constantly, wasting everybody's time including your own.

That's really not true, either of your comments. While believers in Buddhism have elevated him to Lord Buddha, Buddhism is a non-religious belief system. Buddha himself was atheist. While Buddhism has some trappings of religion, there's no worship of a deity, and although opinions on this are mixed, I think the better view of it is that it's not a religion.

So do you have any other "religions" that don't involve a supernatural god (BTW, is there any other kind?).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I already did earlier this morning.

You insulted Pew and displayed your ignorance about polling. That's not an answer. Pew has good numbers.

Address the content: most people, whether they go to church or not, actually believe. Only 4% of the US population are actually atheists. So it follows that the vast majority of your "cultural Christians," the ones raised Christian but who who don't go to church, actually still believe.

Any response to that? Or we'll just have to conclude that, poor you, you got beaten down on that other thread with your weird, highly personal vendetta against that OP, so now you're carrying on a different weird, highly personal vendetta against this OP. Maybe seek help?

Polling numbers vary significantly. They depend on who actually responded. How the questions are phrased. What data is included/excluded.

Here’s another poll:


We’ve all seen how religious people twist the truth. I wouldn’t expect them to answer a poll sincerely.

You understand that some religions don't involve a supernatural god or gods, right? And polls do vary, although it's weird 99% of DCUM's atheists love Pew and you're the sole exception.

Anyway, thanks for the gratuitous ad hominems, they add a lot to your argument. /s

No. I don't understand that at all. Which ones?

Buddhism. Honestly you really know so little about religion, it's a shame you're here so constantly, wasting everybody's time including your own.

??? I don't know who you're addressing this to, but I've talked to countless Buddhists, and went on a ten day meditation retreat at a Buddhist wat in Thailand - and I'll tell you the believers don't regard Buddhism as a "religion." Some in fact get offended if you say that. So try again.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I already did earlier this morning.

You insulted Pew and displayed your ignorance about polling. That's not an answer. Pew has good numbers.

Address the content: most people, whether they go to church or not, actually believe. Only 4% of the US population are actually atheists. So it follows that the vast majority of your "cultural Christians," the ones raised Christian but who who don't go to church, actually still believe.

Any response to that? Or we'll just have to conclude that, poor you, you got beaten down on that other thread with your weird, highly personal vendetta against that OP, so now you're carrying on a different weird, highly personal vendetta against this OP. Maybe seek help?

Polling numbers vary significantly. They depend on who actually responded. How the questions are phrased. What data is included/excluded.

Here’s another poll:


We’ve all seen how religious people twist the truth. I wouldn’t expect them to answer a poll sincerely.

You understand that some religions don't involve a supernatural god or gods, right? And polls do vary, although it's weird 99% of DCUM's atheists love Pew and you're the sole exception.

Anyway, thanks for the gratuitous ad hominems, they add a lot to your argument. /s

No. I don't understand that at all. Which ones?

Buddhism. Honestly you really know so little about religion, it's a shame you're here so constantly, wasting everybody's time including your own.

Buddhism originated from Hinduism. All the central ideas of Buddhism is that of Hinduism. Gautam Buddha was a Hindu prince. Buddhism core beliefs of doing the right Karma, trying to attain Nirvana and Moksha and reincarnation is Hindu. And there are many Gods and Goddesses and supernatural beings in Buddhism - majority from Hinduism. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhist_deities

The enlightened religion of Hinduism is at its core a religion of individual enquiry and personal growth. That is the reason that off-shoot religions and philosophies like that of Buddhism, Jainism, Sikhism do not present a contradiction because different interpretations and POV can co-exist. All these religions are religions of peace.

The western world and the Abhramic religions are basically dealing with perverted thinking that is self-propagating. As a result, you have a completely barbaric, immoral and perverted religion like that of Islam. Also, these were not literate and educated people to begin with and so the quality of inquiry within these religions was devoid of enlightened morality, ethics and common sense.

All fine and good. But it's more of a philosophical system, as you say, for self improvement. There's no heaven. No God to be worshipped. Maybe we need a definition of "religion"

[Anonymous]

I remember my Buddhist instructor saying 'no one has ever come back from heaven to tell about it, so why worry about it?' And if your belief system makes no room for the supernatural, you've knocked out the underpinnings of all the religions - i.e., a belief in of supernatural forces or powers. I think, definitionally, any belief system that doesn't believe in gods isn't really a religion.