The problem about this is it fuels a narrative - a narrative that given our current level of technological progress, has very negative outcomes.
The narrative is simple. Speaking as a feminist, it's feminism 101. Control your females, have children, rise as a civilization. Loose control of your females, fall. It's patriarchy 101.
It's exactly this kind of narrative that gets used repeatedly to demonize and oppress muslims and Islam. Look, they are coming to get you, ect. It's this kind of narrative that keep people like Donald Trump in power - see, only we the strong, the mighty can protect you, ect.
I'm a wiccan feminist who strongly admires aetheism as a "neutrality code" for co-operating with your neighbours. I lament the loss of the reverence of the divine female, which has been a feature of human civilization ever since food surplusses and improved weaponry allowed for serious organized warfare - ie the late bronze or early iron age. I've been critical of Islam in the past, but I'm re-examining that evaluation. You are a major world religion, and honestly, I think you're being demonized by a large number of other power groups, who are exploiting this in a negative manner. It's not just the west. China does this all the time, ditto Russia. It's a standard feature. My beliefs about the negative nature of patriarchy remain but I've returned here to try and have a civil conversation.
The crisis is quite simple, and it's emerged before in human civilization, but never on this scale - essentially, resource overuse, more specifically Global Warming. For sure, it will hit the global equator/south first, though the west certainly won't emerge unscathed (I wouldn't buy property in Florida). Right now we're doing ok, but if we continue on our current trajectory of carbon overuse and over emission, we'll be in real trouble. Mass drought, large parts of the earth becoming uninhabitable, people forced to migrate north (or anywhere they can) to continue to survive. Some really bad "Mad Max" level apocalyptic stuff. And no, it's not the implacable will of a sky daddy - it's just our own bad choices as a species, and the forces of a logical cosmos.
It's not this crisis that dooms human civilization. We've probably got the capacity to technologically evolve and engineer past it. The crisis that dooms human civilization is the ensuing warfare and disruption caused by failing to work together and manage this properly. That, given nuclear weapons, could be the end of us. And no, I don't have a particular belief that one faction is overly fated to survive that and be able to careen and cavort around in flag of choice festooned dune buggies. Extinction level events have happened before in Earth's history and they tend to be final.
And so we get to rational aetheism.
Humans will never agree on one code to unite us, or one universal set of morality or ultimate answers to live by. In some ways our so called "higher morality" has been used as an excuse to adopt standard survival strategies, including warfare against competitors. In SOME ways, it is not, and reveals genuine deeper truths that lift us up, teach us how to behave and deepen our spiritual understanding of the universe. Law is an attempt to create a reasonable common set of rules to live by that most people agree are morally correct and necessary for the functioning of a peaceful civilization (ie don't kill, don't steal, ect). I could write a lot more about this but I'll skip to the important/new ideas.
Aetheism and our current secular and international law represent a mechanism by which our entire species can co-operate, work together, and avoid conflict. This is becoming increasingly important as we technologically evolve. The consequences of warfare are becoming a LOT higher, the "prize" for victors a lot lower, and the chance of some kind of system wide absolute failure caused by our failure to find peace and co-operate are becoming a lot higher.
We are never going to all "convert" to one religion or ethical code - and trying to make people do so may trigger that "end war", or simply backfire on the instigators in the form of reprisals by all other groups. So, essentially, we need a set of rules by which we can co-operate internationally and societally and work together while believing disparate and different things.
We are left with the Geneva Convention. International Law. The UN. Carbon reduction accords. Trade agreements. In my opinion these are the only and best tools for achieving peace before it's too late. To be honest, it's inevitable that western military intervention will decline in future decades, though I suspect the west's will to defend it's own culture and territory will remain strong. Others will step in - ie China.
I think our best chance is to forge some kind of universal consensus now on global cooperation. It doesn't need to mean global government, - in fact "live and let live" should probably be the greatest byword. Let your neighbours do their thing, and do yours. The greatest challenge is really carbon reduction, and avoiding the usual wars over culture and belief.
So , i'm back here to try and find a way to cooperate, even though I don't agree with you.
