It seems to me that, like many Westerners, your idea of "religion" is based on the Judeo-Christian model, and so your assumptions about religion revolve around it.
Can't be avoided really it's how I was programmed. That said I've never seen any mainstream religion that didn't seem to have devolved into the same "just drink the fucking koolaid and don't ask questions" mentality that I enjoy poking fun at.
I do have a personal vendetta against born-again flavoured christianity, resulting from the time some of the crazy fucks attempted to brainwash me when I was about 12 but for the rest of the religious establishment I simply deride them because I can and they're ridiculous. IMO cheap laughs aren't any less funny than expensive ones.
Sure, but your bias leads you to make statements like "even a tiny amount of religion is harmful", which may be true if your definition of religion requires it to be harmful, but you're still imposing your filters in areas where they may simply not apply. JUST NOW you added the qualifier "mainstream" to "religion", and that may make your filter fit better, but this isn't about "mainstream religion".
I'm just trying to clarify my position. The subject of "mainstream" religion came up and yeah, I'm against that. Adopting your own belief system on the basis that you are aware that that's all it is - that's what a smart person would do. Take a step back - I'm pretty sure me and you are in agreement on the religion issue.
I've heard actual, bona fide, dog-collared, pulpit owning clergy say they don't believe a single word of the bible is historical fact but as a personal code of behaviour they see it as being good enough to follow. If there were a few more like that my opinion would do a u-turn pretty fucking rapid.
But, when the fread led, as any with the word "religion" in the title is almost guaranteed to, to the more popular, abdication of thought, school, I chucked in my 2c. That's the problem with the word "religion" lot of negative connotations.