Listening to the news today, which largely seems to consist of the newreader tiredly reciting the roll call of the newly dead in Iraq.

Are some countries only able to be peaceful when ruled by a horrible dictator? Yugoaslavia was a growing tourist destination and one of those places that seemed pleasantly un-interesting until its President, Tito, died - his iron rule had apparently been keeping this heretofore placid corner of Europe from mayhem and with him gone -boom - civil war, attempted genocide and various degrees of inhumanity to mankind that staggered the imagination.

Did Iraq need Saddam to keep the various murdering and violent groups apart - was he necessary to maintain a precarious quiet? You would like to think, whatever your views on the gestation of the war, that once Saddam was deposed that some sort of democracy and peace would be found - today as on every day since the begining of the war more children were orphaned, more wives widowed, more blood spilt. And for what exactly?

The idea that a human life is somehow less valuable than a religious viewpoint, or indeed some other belief, seems to be a commonplace these days. I would convert to any religion or any political stance to save my life - while alive there is always the possibiley of a change in circumstances that will make it possible to convert back to the faith of your choice or the dogma that you support. Once dead, that I'm afraid is that. OK, I appreciate that many of those sacrificing their lives ( or killing others) believe in an afterlife of unparalelled bliss which will make the suffering worthwhile. However I am a coward and would want some more evidence of a heaven or nirvana before I put my head on the chopping block. A load of people assuring me that God exists and so does heaven is not proof, its simply faith. Faith is not a bad thing as such but its only a belief with a moral highground really isn't it?

Apparently there has been a growth in the support for creationism and so-called intelligent design even amongst science students. Evolution they say, is not proved. Hmm, I think there is a quite large body of evidence in the fossil record that suggests evolutionary change over millions of years, as well as mechanisms for that change gained from investigation into DNA and genetics. No serious scientist would say that evolution is only a unproven hypothesis, no more than they would deny gravity or any of Einsteins theories. And on the side of creationsim? A whole bunch of people and a big old book - the bible says God made the world, so it must be so, let's leave aside that the bible was written by people not so long ago and not by a godly scribe. Faith isn't an alternative to evolution, its a belief just like the easter bunny and a flat earth. It isn't another theory its a denial of science.

Intelligent design seems a bit like science - but the proposition that the world works so well that a god must be involved somewhere doesn't take in the fact that the world doesn't always function so well (global warming, hurricanes, volcanoes, desertification drought, starvation, disease) where's the god when it all goes wrong?

In short, religion largely sucks.