re: #1 calochortus

I don’t disagree vehemently, but I do disagree. Comforting the afflicted is a fine thing. Actually helping improve their lives is better.
Some religious organizations do practical work in that area, but a belief in God by itself does not. Takeesha may feel God went with her in the car the first time she was sold by her mother, but He seems not to have been with a lot of women who were abused or murdered under similar circumstances. It also seems odd that God was going to protect her from death, but not child prostitution.

I agree with you to a certain point, i.e. that Takeesha’s belief in God may contain all sorts of logical fallacies, but it’s not about logic or philosophy, it’s about what helps her get through the awful reality of her day. If that belief comforts her, then IMO it’s improving her life, though perhaps only in a small, non-material way.

I also am not sure that religion isn’t a crutch for the wealthy and powerful since it is obviously God’s will that they have what they have and that others are poor.

I can’t argue with that, heh.

In short, I have no particular interest in taking away people’s beliefs as long as they aren’t trying to impose them on others, but IMHO religion generally reinforces our own inclinations (for good or ill) rather than making the world as a whole better.

I agree with the first half of what you said, but I think the second half lacks evidence. I’m inclined to agree that religion generally reinforces (or even magnifies) inclinations that already exist, but is there any record of a time human history when there was a widespread absence of religious belief? I’m not aware of any, though there are admittedly many things I’m unaware of. Without such evidence I don’t think it’s possible to categorically assert that religion does or doesn’t make the world measurably better (or worse).