One of the most common arguments for religion is that those with religion are happier but

CORRELATION =/= CAUSATION.

I know a million people have probably realized this before but I just thought of it okay and I'm on a roll.

Basically it means that religion doesn't necessarily make people happier. It could also mean that happy people tend to get religion easier.

It makes sense. I mean the cynical, depressed person isn't exactly open to the idea of some way to control her/his fate and bring herself/himself fulfillment and happiness. If that were true s/he wouldn't be depressed, duh.

So what does this mean?

It means we have one less possible benefit of religion. If it doesn't explicitly make us happier, what good is it?

I watched a news clip recently on ABC where a soldier said it gave her hope when she was captured. Opiate to the masses comes to mind. But hope. A nice, healthy drug. Is it really as bad as Marx or whoever makes it sound?

Maybe I'd become an advocate of self-delusion if the difference between deluded and clear-eyed is hope.

I mean, we all agree that sometimes a white lie is necessary.

Well no, we don't all agree on anything.

The truth doesn't necessarily set us free. And when we don't know for sure what the truth is, if we'll never be sure what the truth is in our lifetimes, what's wrong with picking the happier-sounding truth?

If some Christian will explain to me how a kind God can sentence Old Testament homosexuals to death, I might be able to answer,

"Nothing."

Though I'm sure there's more to it too.