I am linking to this, but not endorsing it. In fact, I haven’t even read the entire thing yet!
What I am about to write is not necessarily about the linked article, but about the article’s topic. My hunch (or bias?) is that the question posed in the title of the article is an extremely complex topic. Rather than trying to “boil the ocean,” all sides would be better served by “decomposing” the question into multiple questions with a much smaller scope. For example:
- Would women be better off without religion?
- Would science have made more progress, less progress, or about the same amount of progress without religion?
- Would children be better off without religion?
- Would people living in poverty be better off without religion?
Out of all the books I can think of, probably the best treatment of the title question, from a critical perspective, is found in the anthology, Christianity Is Not Great, edited by John Loftus, because that book follows the approach described above. There may be a parallel book, from a supportive (i.e., pro-religion) perspective, but if so, I’m not aware of it.