What do you believe is the most compelling argument against religion?

That all gods bare human traits - they love, they hate, they are jealous, subjective, sexist and so on. All human traits so unfit for a "Divine entity". Of course, human's subjectivity doesn't allow the religious mind to realize this simple truth.

The truth that "Man created God in his image and likeness". This doesn't mean that the Universe is a dull, pointless, dark space. Not at all.It is just that things are not the way religion thinks they are.

Religion is a part of our cultural evolution. At some later stage, when we move on to a higher level of advancement, religion will become a thing of the past.

There are two arguments that I have always found offer the most proof to me personally. The first is how vast the universe is. There is a gif floating around online somewhere that shows the relative size of Earth compared to other bodies in the universe.By the end of the animation, Earth isn't even visible.

Considering how many stars and planets there are in the universe, it seems awfully arrogant of us to think that our religions got it right, especially when we have so many different religions on our one tiny planet. It would be like an ant trying to figure out the mysteries of the Earth; it's so small that it couldn't possible know the right answers with so little information. The second argument is a writing term called the unreliable narrator.

The only proof of god's existence is the accounts of humans. Someone says 'god spoke to me' and some other guy writes it down. Then, after centuries of transcribing, we have something that doesn't at all resemble what that first guy saw.

He could have been tripping on acid for all we know. Our memories are flawed, and the more time you put between the initial action and what we see today, the more distorted it's going to be.So, if one day you narrowly miss falling on a knife, twenty years later, you're talking about a miraculous event where you floated over the knife. That's just how we work; we have a tendency to make our memories more entertaining to those that we're telling them to.

For this reason, you can't really trust anything that's being told second hand.

An Argument, relates an Hypothesis ... not True Belief. Religion, in State of an Hypothesis ... is indeed impossible to be argued for sensibly ... or being defended, Logically ...Any Religion becomes an Hypothesis, when its Scribes, inscribe, with their hand, what they Understand, of The Revealed, By God, Upon Prophets ... not upon the Scribes ... For in the Scribes doings ... there are many a slip, betwixt the cup and the lips. For scribes are not Prophets ... Thus the Scribes stated, of The Word, in their own words ... Is, a defining within a Personal Understanding, of The Word, Revealed by God, Upon Prophets ... And thus, the Prophets, Stating, The Revealed!

Arguments ... about Hypotheses, can only lead to War ... My word, against your word, for we are not Prophets It leads to the Personal God ... to my God, being superior to your God ... In my Religion, being the Truth, and your Religion, Stories ... and to dissensions like that.

I cant really gove you an answer,but what I can give you is a way to a solution, that is you have to find the anglde that you relate to or peaks your interest. A good paper is one that people get drawn into because it reaches them ln some way.As for me WW11 to me, I think of the holocaust and the effect it had on the survivors, their families and those who stood by and did nothing until it was too late.