I have several friends who are religious. In fact, I grew up in a conservative and traditional community where there was even a strong sense of religion in public schools. I want to discuss what it means to be religious in contrast to merely living a faithful or spiritual lifestyle. Why become attached to a religion at all? What’s the point? I won’t bother discussing whether religions should be able to have their own schools, because that would deserve an article on its own.

You might have already guessed that I am not religious. And I never have been, actually. If I were to choose some label representing my religions beliefs, I suppose I’d say I’m agnostic. Thomas Huxley describes agnosticism as such:

Agnosticism is not a creed but a method, the essence of which lies in the vigorous application of a single principle… Positively the principle may be expressed as in matters of intellect, do not pretend conclusions are certain that are not demonstrated or demonstrable

In other words, it is pointless to argue whether a god exists, or whether there was an almighty Jesus Christ, for example, which is really the principle of agnosticism. You could give me countless reasons why your beliefs are factual; and in the perspective of an atheist, I could match them with the contrary. The point is: the truth doesn’t matter; because there will never be a situation where either of us would tell the other, “I told you so.” Until we perhaps die, at least. Or until Jesus returns, for instance; I’m not saying it won’t happen, but he has yet to emerge. And assuming he will someday, nobody knows when; thereby any proof or thesis you devise on the existence of a God is implausible and is therefore a waste of everybody’s time – including yours. It is not demonstrable, as Huxley would say. I’ve explained my reasoning behind labelling myself as agnostic; however, one could objectively broach the insouciant stance: why not be religious? What’s the big deal?

Like anything else, there are pros and cons. You are probably aware of many deeds deemed sinful by many religions. And if you are never absolved of your sins, there is usually some ultimate consequence – and it’s definitely not a lightening one, might I add. Failing premarital abstinence is an obvious sin. Or obtaining sexual gratification, individually. Some religions forbid the consumption of pork, as another example (I welcome you to research the reason why; it is a rule that is only relevant to an early time period.) Many religions are even inimical to same-sex intimate relationships. Abortion is definitely not a popular conduct among religions. Neither is astrology. That said, becoming reigned by a religion would not only insidiously compromise your freedoms, but stipulate some extra bonuses including routined prayers and fasting. Aside from the negative aspect of religions, let us focus on the bright side of them.

A particular characteristic all religions share is faith. As a member of any religion, you are in some way faithful. An advocate of some religion could argue that being faithful can lead you to a happier lifestyle, because it gives you hope. The act of believing in an almighty figure to help you in your most distressing phases perhaps unlocks you some sort of strength that you could not obtain otherwise. The problem with this argument is that being faithful and believing in some supreme being does not imply that you need to be associated with any religion. Besides, it is perhaps natural for humans to venerate some fatherly figure. But it’s not natural to be religious – you aren’t born religious; because, in fact, religion is man-made. Then why must one be religious in order to be faithful? You can pray, but it doesn’t have to be to a god from some religion.

The point of this article is not to condemn religion, but question it. And question its necessity in mankind’s most progressive, freethinking and liberated era in history. The problem doesn’t lie in practicing it, but imposing it; imposing it on children; imposing it on those who live lifestyles it contradicts. And thereby one must realize that the infliction of religion can be offensive and even lethal, more so than it ever has been. Religious or not, one cannot deny its diminishing relevance.

One should note that questioning the existence of a god does not concern one’s feelings about religion. They don’t always depend on each other. One may be Christian and thus believe in God, but one could believe an almighty figure exists but not be religious. So just because I am agnostic does not mean I cannot advise against religion. These are parallel ideas.

In summary, I don’t believe or disbelieve in the existence of a god, because such inferences cannot possibly be deduced. I do, however, fail to discern the need for anyone to be religious, particularly in a modern setting like the 21st century, as their conditions will continuously fail to correlate with our constantly reforming society and our constantly reforming lifestyles. We seize the day more than ever, without the help of the restrictions set by an outdated sect like a religion.

A hundred years ago, I may have been called a heretic. But I think a hundred years later, those who are still religious would be deemed heretic.