Mamdouh Bitar, Ruba Mansour:
Did religion consecrate human nature, or did it distort it? We fear the answer will be embarrassing for religious people. Religious affiliation has distorted human nature, by attaching labels to this nature that distinguish one person from another.
The catastrophe of these labels is that they are involuntary and do not reflect human desire or will in all cases. These labels ignore will and choice. One of the most horrific crimes of religion is transforming religious affiliation into an eternal inheritance. Thus, a girl or boy is born Muslim, will remain so. That is, religion is inherited, and religious affiliation is eternal.
Consequently, depending on the circumstances, religion may become a congenital curse, and in most cases, a curse, i.e., a congenital disability. The children of these societies are congenitally disabled, and it seems that congenital disability is okay, as its result has always been an increase in the number of believers. Thus, the value and importance of the new human being is transformed into a “numerical number” that determines the framework and outcomes of religious democracy, such as the principle of numerical superiority! In addition, the reproduction rate, which has reached 3.2%, is considered an even greater disaster, as these societies do not experience economic growth rates that can cover the costs of this reproduction. Here, poverty and its consequences, such as the decline in the level of education and health care, and the rise of crime and other social ills,
increase. A person is born and is practically born with his religious affiliation, that is, his sect in this region. Sect is the source of sectarianism. For many reasons, the meanings of words have evolved to make the word “sectarian” one of the most offensive words, while social conditions have evolved to make sectarianism one of the most widespread and harmful practices in the societies of this region. In other words, the religiosity of a born person has led to another birth, that is, the birth of sectarianism, which is rightly said to be a harmful evil.
To exercise the right to vote, i.e. to choose one’s representative in a trade union, municipal council, parliament, etc., the voter must be 18 years of age. This is in contrast to choosing a specific religion or no religion. Here, the person does not need to be an adult. In practice, it can be said that a person born with a head, a torso, and limbs is also born with a religion. For many reasons, it can be said that he is born with a “problem” or with a condition that could, indeed is likely to turn into a problem for him and others. It is the problem of awareness and perception, the problem of difference and differential differentiation from others. I am from the best nation or from God’s chosen people, i.e. I am better than you because of my religious birth association. Is it possible to imagine a peaceful, understanding, and productive relationship between individuals, each of whom considers himself better than the other? This was the main cause of the known historical disputes and even the holy religious wars, which history does not know of anything more ferocious and brutal than them.
if someone did not consider his religion better than the religion of another, it would not have been possible for him to justify the campaign to spread religion. The Hanif war between peoples belonging to a different religion, perhaps when the Muhammadans conquered Spain, Syria, or other countries.
In reality, the primary objectives of the occupations were economic, and the spread of religion was a false or secondary objective. The natal religion requires those who are born into the natal religion to adhere to several principles, including loyalty and disavowal, and to defend the concept of truth with a religious source, such as Sharia. Furthermore, the adherent of a particular religion must be distinguished by superiority over the adherent of another religion. Are believers equal to unbelievers? Can a newborn, endowed with these principles, live among others without problems?
In other words, providing a newborn with religion is a translation of providing them with the causes of problems, which would not have occurred without such provision. We believe that personal religious choices should be postponed until adulthood, as is the case in European countries. However, we recognize that implementing this is difficult in this era and in the environment in which the societies of this region live. The most practical requirement is to confront the crimes committed against those who refuse to adhere to religion, i.e., the death penalty for apostasy, and to allow individuals to change their religious affiliation. Until now, the general public considers abandoning a particular religious belief tantamount to declaring one’s departure from the group, i.e., the sect, which obligates the sectarian to submit, forcibly adhere to it, and adhere to its rules.
Legally, there are no laws currently in place in Syria prohibiting atheism, as was the case in the 1950 Constitution. Declaring one’s atheism does not entail any legal responsibility, but conversely, it carries no legal value. For example, the removal of the religion column from civil status records, and the requirement that an atheist marry must be religious, meaning that we are effectively living in a religious state!
Syria has made reservations on the Convention on the Rights of the Child regarding the child’s subsequent choice of religion, and it has also made reservations on several articles of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, because these articles contradict Islamic law. If Syria and others are not now completely religious countries, then they and others are partially religious countries. Even the religious aspect of the country is a disaster, so what will be the situation with the entirety of religion in the country