Fred,

"Not caused by religion per se ..."

I don't remember whether Brown made this point or not, but I've made it and continue to make it: I don't think it is religion per se that causes the problems that Dawkins attributes to religion. I think it is an aspect of human nature that hooks powerful motivation to abstract ideals, and is then leveraged by social and political institutions to sweeping effect. I agree with you that this doesn't have to be the ideals of religion, it can be the ideals of communism, nationalism, ethnic or race groupism, or other things.

Where I part with Dawkins and agree with Brown is that I don't see the things that are unique to religion as being uniquely bad.

I guess one of the arguments is that supernaturalism more quickly slides into justification of more horrible things than do naturalist abstract ideals, because it requires more of an initial leap of faith. For example, we may more naturally form small spontaneous groups through religious and spiritual ideals than through naturalist ones. But when you look at the formation of communist groups at the grassroots level in China, you see some terrible things perpetuated there in the name of abstract ideals as well.

I tend to agree with you, empirically, it doesn't seem that religion carries any special intrinsic negative social process with it. The powerful social nature of our species does not seem as closely tied to supernatural belief and religious faith per se, at least with regard to *bad* things, as Dawkins assumes. It is just one of the paths expressing human "groupism."

kind regards,

Todd