Ok, I’ll bite.
None. And given my close to 15 years of, for example, dealing with creationist mischief and lies in particular, this isn’t going to change.
Seeing the manner in which Christian creationists in particular regard the Ninth Commandment as discardable whenever it suits their duplicitous apologetic convenience, has ensured that I will never want anything to do with the religion motivating said conduct.
No. A proper science education led me to regard cartoon magic men from pre-scientific mythologies as an irrelevance from an early age.
I cite as an example of relevant influences, The Children’s Encyclopaedia, edited by Arthur Mee. Said editor was interested in compiling an educational work, with the aim of instilling the “God, King and Country” ethos in English schoolchildren, and both its Edwardian history and tone are painfully apparent to even an elementary reader today.
However, Mee did take one step that was admirable - he deliberately set out to find the finest educational writers of the age to contribute to his work, and moreover, paid them frequently out of his own pocket. Which made the enterprise an expensive one to launch.
But, it paid dividends come sales time, to the point where Mee was able to build his own palatial house on the proceeds, even after paying his expensive contributors.
But here’s the rub. As a child, the science sections, though today woefully outdated, were fascinating to read. Not only were they beautifully written, but they passed on a compelling message that I found riveting to behold. The science sections basically said, “you don’t have to take what we say on faith blindly, instead, you can find out for yourself. Go forth and experiment!”
Even at the age of six, this was music to my ears, and later, I was fortunate enough to enjoy the benefit of a stellar collection of science teachers who acted vigorously upon that message, frequently in compelling manner.
By contrast, the sections of Mee’s work devoted to religion were boring in the extreme. Their essential message was, as one might expect from text devoted to peddling the last gasps of Victorian Christianity, “treat these assertions uncritically as fact, and don’t ask questions”.
Just what do you think I was going to pay more attention to?
Mee, in my case, subverted his intent hilariously through this juxtaposition of polar opposites. In a contest between “Go forth and discover!” and “Shut up and don’t ask questions”, what do you think is going to grab a child’s attention?
Which is why, of course, religious fundamentalists of all stripes seek to kill any opposition to their indoctrination.
The previous paragraphs answering the previous question should already answer this question amply as well. But of course, there’s more.
Apart from the fact that science has provided me with real answers to major questions, instead of vacuous and frequently absurd platitudes, religion has several major problems.
First, it relies upon treating unsupported blind assertions uncritically as fact. A process that is utterly useless as a means of obtaining genuine substantive knowledge.
Second, the assertions presented by religions, without exception, are known not merely to be wrong, but fatuous and absurd, especially to people who paid attention in science classes. The resulting “holy books” are nothing more than low grade mythologies as a corollary.
Worse still, mythology fanboys are unable to agree among themselves on a global scale, which of the numerous mythologies humans have invented is purportedly the “right” mythology, and adherents of a particular mythology cannot agree among themselves, what said mythology is purportedly telling us.
Yet against this backdrop of rampant and hilariously absurd anti-consilience, mythology fanboys posture as being in a position to tell me that the science I spent decades learning, is purportedly “wrong” when it disagrees with their favourite choice of mythology.
Worse still, many mythology fanboys regard themselves as entitled to coerce me into adopting this ridiculous view. You have three guesses what I think of this, in the light of my previous paragraphs.
Indeed, the entire basis of religion has, over time, exposed itself to me as consisting of utterly farcical and hubristic pretension, summarised best as “if reality and my mythology disagree, reality is wrong and my mythology is right”.
You should now be well placed to understand how darkly I view that arrogance.
The answer, in the light of my foregoing comments, should be obvious.
Indeed, one of the aspects of mythology fanboy hubris I encounter time and again, is that none of them are ever willing to countenance answers to questions that don’t involve their choice of mythology, or their choice of cartoon magic man. The possibility that they could all be completely wrong, never enters their heads.
But, with entirely typical hypocrisy, they loudly berate me with the “what if you’re wrong” question, for accepting scientific postulates that have passed ruthless experimental tests aimed at destroying them.
Frankly, I ceased caring some time ago, not least because of the vast disconnection between posturing and practice. American evangelical Christians are among the most obnoxious in this regard, as well as annoyingly vocal on topics they manifestly know nothing about.
Creationists are the worst of the lot - a more duplicitous gang of wilfully mendacious ideological stormtroopers for a worthless doctrine you will be hard pressed to find.
Oh, and the supposed message of “peace and love” is counterbalanced by any number of exhortations in the same mythology, to kill all who do not conform, a message gleefully adopted by murderous mythology fanboys in Europe over a 1,500 year period, and which many of today’s Christian Nationalists cannot wait to put into practice again.
If you’re unable to discern the answer after reading this far into my reply, then nothing I can do will remedy the deficit.
Not going to happen plain and simple. See all of the above.