I don't think people need a god. What we need, however, is answers.
And I agree. We are a naturally curious species.
If there is something we don't understand, we usually want to figure it out, it's the way most of us work. To me, religion is basically either one or both of two things: One of them is an easy answer.
I don't understand this. People have this idea that religion, the idea of a god, is an easy answer.
This can't be further from the truth. Any critical thought applied to the ideas of a god immediately creates even MORE questions, ones about which hundreds of books have been written, and yet if a child asks his pastor "Who made God" the pastor's response, be it "He always was" or be it "He made himself", more questions arise about not only the integrity of the applied logic, but also to the idea of God itself.
If the idea of God was an easy one, I think we would have made at least a LITTLE progress with it.
We don't get something, so we simply say it is beyond our comprehension, and leave it at that. As we figure more and more shit out, the need for 'the easy answer' diminishes. We no longer have to say something is beyond our comprehension, and therefore divine, because it is no longer beyond our comprehension.
The other thing religion is is a way to cope with death. I would assume that most people get scared when they realize they might be nothing next week, and therefore resort to faith in something beyond our world. To me, the first one is the bad one. If we simply accept that we cannot understand something, and therefore stop trying, we will never progress. We don't need that type of thinking, in fact we should refrain from it. (A third thing it could be is a way to control people, but that is irrelevant in this context.)
As people, as a race, we do not need religion. We are perfectly capable of helping old women across the street without an overhanging threat of damnation. If we are taught to do good, we will generally do good. And even if we're not, we'd still generally be nice, because we have this awesome thing called empathy.
For some individuals, however, belief is absolutely a necessity. It doesn't matter that it's a necessity they wouldn't have if religion never existed in the first place, simply because it did exist in the first place, and thus they need it. They need to believe that there is something great and benevolent, and that everything will work out in the end. As individuals, we need whatever, be it chocolate, religion, music or basketball. As a race, we need shelter, food, water, sex, etc.
I will agree that religion might help a few people. However, I feel that it does far more harm in general than good.
I'll use Christianity as my example, since I know it best.
I think everyone will agree that the Old Testament is filled with inaccuracies.
"But wait, we don't believe in a LITERAL interpretation of Genesis, it's more of a poem about Creation."
Okay, you may think that, and I won't deny that you do. But not everyone has the same view. Some people think that it SHOULD be taken literally, and why shouldn't they? After all, it tells them it's the inspired word of God. Just as well, imagine a priest explaining to his congregation that Genesis is just a "poem about creation."
One might "know" that it's not meant to be taken literally, but someone else will also "know" that it IS meant to be taken literally.
This is all relevant to the discussion because people are supposed to get their morals from the Bible, but by what criteria does one pick and choose those morals?
BTW, this isn't directed at you, Alive, these are just questions that your post gave rise to.