This doesn’t refute my point, as I never made the case that religion “contributes to the power of the State”, at least not “in the same sense” as something like technological advancement would. So it’s quite ironic that you would actually say that that very thing works “in the same sense”.
Again, I’ve heard of a lot more wars fought on religions grounds (figuratively and literally, I suppose) than on the basis of one side uses forks and the other side uses chopsticks. Again, throughout history religion is often the mcguffin in the war narrative. People are motivated to go to war, feel justified in conducting war, and are willing to do things they would never do otherwise without the belief of God on their side…due to religious beliefs, more than any other source. I would even venture to say more than all other possible sources combined.
This is a total straw man, as I never even implied there was a connection…or that belief in God even automatically qualified as “religion”, for that matter.
Besides, I could easily ask you the opposite.
Again, I never denied religion as an enemy of the governmental State. In fact I indirectly agreed with you in your statement that it is a “royal pain in the backside of the State”…but this does not automatically mean it’s because religion is anti-Statism or pro-liberty. In my view it only reflects the obvious and predictable consequence of two institutions, both whose entire existence is to monopolize and dominate and control your life…and of course by definition, a monopolist doesn’t like competition.
So just because Stalin is an enemy of Hitler, it doesn’t automatically mean one of them is a / “the” good guy. And it certainly doesn’t mean that either offers an inherent path to freedom.
Once again I’m really surprised by your position here.