>>11459557>>11459545There's a leap of stupidity here and it's worth pointing out. The religious often like to claim that religion is some vital component of life and that while it's very unfortunate that religions aren't true, they're still a necessity, so you need to pick one and just pretend. There's a couple counterpoints. The first is just that arguments from utility are non-sequitors: an ideology being useful doesn't make it true. The things we actually believe are the things we think are true, whether they're "useful" or not. Second, the utility of Paganism/Christianity/etc is highly questionable. If you wanted to design a /pol/ religion to defend /pol/ values, you could do a lot better than either of those options. If you believe the argument from utility on Christianity how can you deny it for an even more useful /pol/ religion that has only "based" text, but is blatantly manufactured? But the most important is that there's no necessary connection between the human need for community and shared values, and belief systems based on the alleged existence of supernatural entities. You don't need to believe in the supernatural to have an orientation in life, you just need to believe in something and share that belief with some other people.
