One way to approach this question is to look at what are some of the absolute worst places in the world to live, and then ask what religions predominate there.
Much of the middle east: Islam. Much of South America and Central Africa: Catholicism.
Taking it a bit further, look at the best places to live, and I think it likely you will find that NO religion holds all that much sway in the culture.
I will betcha that holds true for "the best places to live."
I think Islam is big in South Africa, but I never saw much anyone care about or show any interest in religion down there. I am certain the churches were all packed on Sundays, of course. Maybe that's a social thing.
So you are correct. It's not the PRESENCE of religion/religions, but the degree of SERIOUSNESS that they are taken. One of the more glaring examples of this is when the Muslim objects to being told he's in a violent belief set, he says "But your old Testament says kill, kill, kill" and we answer "Yeah, but we don't pay any attention to that, dude."
Some things like that are hard to comprehend. Why and how can something be believed, but not that seriously.
Yeah, that's a more comprehensive way to state it, and looking at my own life, I would have to agree. I was raised very Christian, and even though the religion overtly speaks of tolerance, they simultaneously taught us to be aloof, superior, distrustful of all people (especially successful people and other sects of christianity), and generally rotten 'values'. Yet the culture in the US is rather secular. There are no serious penalties, in the sense that there are in places ruled by religious law, to questioning the unquestionable answers presented by religion. Personal, yes. It's not easy to wake up from a dream that was forced upon you since birth. It's not easy to deal with the fallout when you do, up to and including family members who will no longer speak to you.
But the culture allows it to happen, and in places that are increasingly irreligious, the quality of life seems to be improving across the board. Sweden comes to mind. I can't speak to that one directly, having never been there, but I have lived in more secular AND more religious areas of the United States, and the places with a heavy religious influence, the quality of life is very good for the well connected, and not so great for anyone else. But again, the consequences are more personal than not, and can be overcome. When a religion actually rules a culture, all the bad parts of their scripture come quickly to the fore.
This seems to be a serious argument for never allowing religion to rule over culture, for more or less letting it be whatever it wants. But never allowing The Guys With The Guns (Lol, Law Enforcement) to be enforcers of a set of religious doctrines. Once you start thinking this way, though, there's no way you can let some bunch of religious zombies get away with killing anyone who makes a cartoon of their prophet. Neither can you have LEO enforce their little rule. Therefore, if the Muslim Zombies require these killings, they are incompatible with our Western thinking. Period. There is no compromise.
That does seem to be the case. And yet, I know a number of nominal Muslims who are very peaceful people. But they are NOT middle eastern. In most cases, not even indirectly, they've converted or were from someplace other than that area to begin with. The culture needs serious revision.
I'm an anarchist, so I'm a bit more radical in my thinking than most. I actually think that everyone should be the guys with the guns, and law, to the extent it's tolerated, should only deal with things done to someone. This would put most nations out of the business that they are best at: Powermongering. It also would be anathema to most religions. Maybe all of them. For reasons that even as a formerly religious man I cannot wrap my brain around, there's something in the religious mindset that requires that all must conform to your ideation.
Religious men have accused me of not having strong beliefs in the things I do believe in because I am not willing to kill over it. I find this curious as well as fallacious. It says more about them than me. No, I won't kill because you think something different than I do. I would kill without hesitation or remorse if my life or that of my family were threatened, but not because I disagree with you. And they see that as weak.
666
