I've been considering throwing this one up for a while really, since I first showed up on  , but wanted to make sure I phrased it right. The timing is probably non optimal, but I finally decided to go ahead and do it. Here goes. Limitations I'll start with this because it's particularly important. I'm specifying human inventions innovations. This means that things like religion and capitalism would qualify, but things like tribalism or selfishness or personal property would not. Don't bother with the latter unless you also present a clear argument for why they should be considered an invention or innovation rather than a simple trait or behavior. From my perspective, the former are uniquely human and uniquely inventions, while the latter are more innate and observed in non human animals. Basically, there has to be some level of abstract thought involved, but I'm flexible on the exact definition. Something like war also wouldn't qualify though some ideas regarding war are uniquely human there are similar analogues and behaviors in the animal kingdom. If you feel uncomfortable with the line I'm drawing here feel free to challenge it directly, just don't do it implicitly. View I'm approaching religion as an agnostic atheist. I don't fundamentally rule out the possibility of a God, god or gods, but I feel no significant evidence has ever been presented to support their existence let alone existence in a particular form. In other words, I don't see any reasonable suggestion of the supernatural, let alone something that validates one religion over another, but I do not argue that the converse has been proven . If Jesus and a host of angels descended from the heavens tomorrow I'd be open to questioning my stance. Religion has not only created damage in the form of dead bodies countless religious wars over countless okay, not countless, I can count back to pre humanity but you get the idea centuries, plus religious conflicts that exist right through to today but also in the stifling of human progress. Religion has often designated things as unquestionable or sacred , things that have later been explored by science to the benefit of humanity. Thus, due to the delay in the advent of things like vaccines and other innovations in medicine, any resultant deaths can also be laid at the feet of religion. Separately, I consider knowledge to be not only a commodity but something of intrinsic value. I know this might be contentious. Basically, I would consider a lack of knowledge about the world where knowledge could exist to be an example of harm someone who was prevented from learning due to religion I would deem injured by it. I understand that this significantly widens the scope of possible damages by including the retardation of scientific progress entirely separate from the retardation of medicine and the resulting injuries. I'm not double counting, though the issue is subjective enough that it's hard to clearly measure. As an atheist I consider the acquiring of knowledge to be one of the highest pursuits, hopefully this explains my valuation. I'm open to someone addressing this directly, but like the above please don't do so implicitly. From a wider perspective, I would consider tertiary harm the religious perspective and its wider implications in most countries has harmed a wide variety of people. Religious perspectives on abortion in the West have harmed many, both people forced to be parents and children damaged as a result of parents who weren't ready. Similarly, they have harmed both GSM people and people involved in non traditional relationships. In other countries, religious perspectives have restricted both men and women WRT gender roles, stifling women and killing men. Religious prescriptions on homosexuality still kill people today in a number of countries, and imprison others. Religious disputes cause wars and territorial disputes see Israel et al in addition to enabling most forms of modern terrorism. Yes, radical Islam and such should receive emphasis on the radical and not the Islam, I know plenty of great Muslims, but without the Islam part the radical portions would have a much harder time of it. Notes Please don't bother arguing the validity of religion. It's not worth it, unless you can genuinely bring up an argument I haven't seen in a decade of debating religion. I understand religion can do a great deal of good, but that's not the topic this is about the bad separate from the good. Again, if you genuinely have an argument I haven't seen I'll look at it, but think seriously about whether it's something that someone who's debated religion for a decade will have seen already. I am drunk. Please forgive any misspellings or poor phrasing. I will address as many direct responses and indirect responses to this as I can, but I may end up doing so tomorrow. These things take time. I do not particularly expect to change my view on this I've spend a long time debating to get to where I am but that doesn't mean I'm not open to it if someone can come up with something new. Trust, but verify, so to speak. If anyone can provide a contrary perspective worth listening to it's the people who frequent . Edit Somewhat surprisingly, the front runner so far seems to be agriculture rather than capitalism. No delta yet, but I'm wading through the comments.
I believe that religion is the single most destructive invention in the history of humanity.