Well I'm a determinist, so every naturally occurring thing is necessary. And religion seems to be a naturally occurring phenomena, from ignorance trying to cope with a world not understood. Of course we are all ignorant, just on different subjects. So it is possible that I have some funny ideas about things I don't know much about, but I will endeavor to root them out as I learn.

No. The world would be better without it

Obviously, most people do but if they really believed why wouldn't they commit suicide to be in a better place or all strap bombs to themselves and kill the infidels for the same reason?

Religion is not necessary by any means. There have been cultures that had no concept of God's or spirits, not even words to express the idea. Morals are internal and ethics are external. If one lacks morals, ethics due to social pressures tend to "keep" people in line. This is however not always the case. Theist do in fact harm others despite their religion that may teach otherwise. If religion is in fact the source of their morals and ethics but does not work then it is useless.

No, it is not necessary. No one needs religion to do what is right and beneficial to family, community, and society.

My theory is that it was the result of early humans trying to make sense of natural phenomena like the sun, stars, volcanic eruptions, earthquakes, drought etc. then evolved to explain the purpose of existence and death. With stories handed down through the generations and accepted as truth then god/s were created to appease and religions were born.

It is part of human evolution but should have died out with scientific explanations but where there are opportunities there are opportunists and the temptation to control, use, dominate for power. It then gave religious leader great influence and wealth.

Religion help keep the working class and the poor dependent and co-operative. The good it does is minimal to the harm it creates.

NO.

And NO again!

Religion was the first tool of government. So, in a pre-science civilization, yes, it was a necessary tool. It was not a GOOD tool, but I believe it was necessary. I wish we had left it with the flint axes, though

Religion is not necessary, we would be so much better off without it. Case study, current US politics.

According to Wikipedia there are approximately 4200 currently known religions and spiritual traditions. Like other comments to this post I believe religions or spiritual beliefs were created in attempt to address fear of the unknown by ancestors with limited faculties, and resources. Fast forward to the present and what we see are the products of our ancestor's erroneous thought evolution. Given time I'm fairly certain that events driven by science will force a thought correction across the planet. The result will be near homogeneous thinking. The timeline for this transformation is unknowable.

Some futurists like Ray Kurzweil (see second link) predict that 2040 will be the time of events with enough scale and transformative power to begin the correction process. For example Kurzweil hopes to attain immortality by installing his consciousness into a clone host as well as by uploading a digital avatar of his consciousness onto the internet. If he is successful it will start the conversion of religious hearts and minds exponentially.

[en.wikipedia.org]

[en.wikipedia.org]

This has me interested in looking up how charitable each religious group is.

Nope. It's not about necessary. It's about expedient.

Religion is an excuse to not have to confront uncomfortable ideas, or think about them at all. If we didn't have religion, something else would rise up to take its place.

Maybe it already has. Maybe it's malignant SJW-ism. (says the weepiest liberal snowflake of them all)

Maybe there's a secular alternative in every age.

Unless we undergo some radical shift in evolution, humanity is always going to have significant toothless segments that prefer to have their thoughts pre-chewed for them. Religion is a holdover from the primeval days when we thought everything was magic.

Maybe we'll get all the way over it, eventually. But I don't think that means there's going to be a higher proportion of freethinkers, then.

Any good that may be derived from religion can easily be derived by more rational means. The world would be better off without religion and all the baggage that comes with it. The world would still would be fraught with all sorts of problems, but it would be one less thing causing harm in the world.

Conflict will always exist, but no more religious bigotry, ignorance, child abuse (of the religious kind), ect... A world without religion is not a world devoid of purpose like some theists would believe.

Where? The question implies that the situation is the same for everyone the world over. In a wealthy, liberal democracy probably not. In a place where just eating and drinking is a constant struggle, belief may well carry you into the next day.

No not necessary.

Probably not any more necessary than an appendix, or any easier to rid from our species.

At one time religion may have been necessary to shape morals. Now we as humans are showing we can instill morals without the fear of eternally pissing off deities.

No, religion is not necessary. It depends entirely on he effects of the religious doctrine as to whether or not it is evil. There is no doubt that it is limiting.

It sure would be different.. less dogma, less power and control that started some of the wars we are in today.. there is a whole host of things we could debate on if religion was absent from this planet.

Religion is as necessary as one of it's favorite past times, the genital mutilation of infants.

No.

I think so, at some level, we seem to have to have answers about some of the things in our lives. Doesn't have to be true, just has to be possible.