I'm not only referring to Muslim garb, as I've seen Orthodox Jews and various Christians similarly swathed in the bedsheets.

I hate that stuff. I hate religion, so naturally I hate the uniforms. I particularly despise the self-deception practiced by those who do indeed choose to wear this stuff entirely of their own free will.

Do they really think that women wearing anything else are all sluts? I've read interviews that suggest this.

Do they really think that they're not being judged on their appearances? When someone's dressed like that, it says this to the world: "I am superior. My life is devoted to pleasing god, unlike yours, which is pecuniary and perverse and meaningless." I judge someone like that to be a delusional fool, living in the Dark Ages, or perhaps the Bronze Age.

There is no god, anymore than there are fairies in the garden. Life should be enjoyed. Why not?

Besides, hair is often very pretty.

Why must they hold? Are those even necessarily the trends?

Also, not everybody born in the "1st World" (a leftover Cold War term, by the way) is wealthy. And as for the utilitarian argument about not doing anything until you've done all you can to help others anywhere in the world, that's spurious also.

I don't respect anyone's piety. We shouldn't respect superstitious, illogical drivel. Since many people willingly choose to submit to this nonsense, the key is to find out why, and then find out what we can do to combat it. Remember, it's incorrect to claim that all of this religious business is just a personal matter, or ex-Muslims wouldn't lose their lives for their choice.

Does anybody here happen to know more about the psychology involved?

I'm an anarcho-syndicalist in principle, but under the circumstances I sometimes think I agree with the governments of Tunisia, France, and (for now) Turkey, who've all done much to discourage religious uniforms.

The general trend seems to be that a certain amount of education and prosperity and such tend to largely eliminate religious fanaticism first, followed by religion in general. With that said, it's not foolproof. It also seems possible for a fiercely secular state to largely stamp out religion, though I naturally would prefer not to open the door.

I guess the best plan is a multi-pronged approach: official secularism matched with lives publically devoted to logic, reason, and rational, modern thinking. I'm doing my best.

Trudyb, you've just demonstrated yourself to be a historical naif. Hitler was not an atheist.

Now, the rest of your list is composed of atheists, but it's a false comparison. Have you ever noticed that they're all from the 20th century? They're the exceptions that prove the rule.

Besides, you're also committing a logical fallacy. If I'm going to blame religion for some atrocity, and I do, then religion would have to be the motivation for said atrocity. It was indeed the motivation for the Spanish Inquisition and the Crusaders and Al-Qaeda and the Zionists and so on. Stalin was motivated by his political goals, not atheism. Mao targeted the Buddhists as a sideshow to the rest of his agenda.

Richard Dawkins devotes a chapter of The God Delusion to this exact fallacy.

Also, ThoughtsofSusan, your comparison is also spurious. Thanks to Kasimira (I think) for noticing that.

And yes, I know I made a spelling error in the last message.

I'm not being antagonistic, but I'm very curious. I can't imagine I would have been able to even comprehend that subject matter at age seven.

... then The Netherlands would be a cinder by now, along with Sweden and Switzerland and Canada and so on. Our government could easily neutralize the threat of such terrorism, by ending support of the apartheid state of Israel and ending support for regimes like the House of Saud.

How many times do I have to repeat this?

Religion, all things considered, has a malign power that dwarfs anything else. If you believe that your belief system is automatically the most important thing in the enter eternity of the universe, what won't you do for it?

You don't know the significance of the phrase "Bad Religion," do you?

www.wikipedia.org/Bad_Religion

I like the band, and I found the name particularly appropriate here.

If it's legal to "prove" your identity without a photo ID, then I guess it's legal for them to vote. But all this would go away if they would just leave the Dark Ages. It's unfathomable.

I'm 25. I like The Big Chill, but I can't stand Kevin Kline's jerk of a character. Remember that the journalist played by Jeff Goldblum actually cares about music other than the pop dreck that dominates the movie, and Kline's character can't fathom it.

I don't like the pop dreck of any era. Most people know me as a huge music fan, and it really bothers me to have to apologize for my taste to people who have none. When I first heard "True Faith," by New Order, it communicated with me instantly. It wasn't the first song that made me a music fan, but it was one of those moments where I listened to the complete song- music, lyrics, and the delivery of those lyrics- and realized that this didn't sound like a dopey love song or macho strutting. I could relate to it.

I love Joy Division. I found out about New Order first, bought (The Best of) New Order, and then learned about JD via Paul Morley's essay in the booklet. In the boxed set Heart and Soul (and elsewhere,) Bernard Sumner drops some hints about how JD became NO, though they do often sound drastically different. With that said, towards the end of New Order's career they could play several Joy Division songs in their set. They integrated nicely. I wish I could have seen New Order, now I don't think I'll have the chance.