I am reading the posts by the two of you,cy and 4runner.
I get the feeling that you aren’t really adressing cyphires points, 4 runner but adding your own take on a few things related.
In any case I like those points. I think you are saying that the rules of religion are based on economic effeciency and the dogma is designed to enforce that. I have always believed this to be true. Also I would imagine that health practices were a big part or it. When there is no medicine for venereal diseases or other reasonable controls agains epidemics, very strict sexual codes would be a must. The shame of having a child out of wedlock another preemptive tax relief for the society where resources per capita and per bread winner would be sparse.
I think the orgiginal churches as a form of goverment did the best they could with what they had,although one might justifiable opine that they could have left well enough alone. I personally believe european power decided it needed to move large masses of people in response to the fact that conflict was rising with regions that had already put organization and control of the masses in place. Maybe that is why to this day presidents always invoke GOD to be on our side when they go to War of any kind. This real practice of moving ignorant armies and the public opinion to unjust wars to me is the worst evil of all related to religion and probably the main reason that political seperation of church and state do not exist as it should. It is the tendency to allow organizations that are still clinging to these archaic societal measures and the myths behind them that seem to be bane of modern society in CY’s eyes . I am not as vigilant and have solved the religious problem for myself decades ago. But on the societal level maybe we should all be more concerned. I think human nature is the real culprit myself but religion doesn’t seem to be helping address that as well in the new world as it might have in the old.There I am giving religion credit for being at least as good as a half way decent government, at some point historically. Why do we need Religion to bind society or interfere in any way with its rules when the founders of this country laid out a good new plan which has been to a large degree ignored? I am not talking about abolishing freedom of religion I am talking about illegalizing any religion as a quazi branch of government. If any other group intervened politically or socially, or attempted to, to the degree that religious groups do in our system, they would be labeled seditious and put down is a second.Look what we did to black people who wanted civil rights, Think about the Kent State for instance. Or the “red scare” attack propaganda against the media. Just because the religious cult is large and has roots in the old world doesn’t justify the meddling allowed to it IMO.