Bob,

I think it is a nice thought that we all know what we believe and that religion gives us a vehicle for that - but history proves that this is just not true. Rome - advanced technology, a dynasty of law and order - and Aristotle wrote a treatise on why infanticide was necessary. He knew this, he was not hateful - he logically deduced that women, or sick babies had to be supported - and it was just not reasonable to do so. Religion is not a tool for a person to use it is what defines our moralities and our perspectives.

...than a tool. Yet there are many religions with many quasi-followers. There's no premarital sex in Catholicism or Judaism (I think) and still the vast majority of people that claim a moral code that's defined by their religion, are having sex and getting divorced and bending rules left and right.

Religion is meant to offer guidance, support, and structure. It shouldn't define our perspectives (i.e. I shouldn't have to read the bible/go to church to know that it's wrong to take a life.)

Rather, I agree with Bob that the institution of religion is meant to help people live their fundamental beliefs to the best of their abilities. The institution should uphold any cultural or familial ties that the individual values. Moreover, as people and their notions evolve and progress with time, the religion should compliment that growing awareness.

But yet its not true Amanda. You say that you don't have to read the bible to know that it is wrong to take a life - yet until very recently in human history - taking a life was a part of society. Morality did not come from people, morality comes from G-d/the Bible. I have lots of proofs, BUT the one I will continue to use is Aristotle - the GREAT thinker of his day, supported the killing of female babies because they were not boys. No other reason and he was not an apologist, he was a leader. So one of the great thinkers of this Earth - came to the intellectual conclusion that murder of innocent babies is GOOD.

Additonally, you are going on the basic premise that religion was instituted - rather then given. Which if that is the case, I would agree with your concepts. However if it is divine - which I can begin to prove - then it is not about how religion supports the individual, but rather how the individual supports the religion.