You asked what I meant by my sentence and I clarified it.
For example, I personally find the idea of transubstantiation weird. To my mind, that does not provide evidence that all religion is wrong, just that maybe strict Catholicism maybe isn’t for me.
“there’s certainly enough ammunition in religion as a whole for anyone who hates religion to think that they’re right.”
Is a crazy way to phrase “there is evidence that supports their views”
Not really. It’s an observation that most religions have some dogmatic and scriptural aspects that can be seen as either absurd or abhorrent.
Most large religions have been co-opted at some point in history by powerful people to do some terrible things.
If you were anti-religion, there’s a lot of things to take shots at.
Explain how what i said was wrong? I understand you disagree, but none of the rest of your comment explains why.
You asked what I meant by my sentence and I clarified it.
For example, I personally find the idea of transubstantiation weird. To my mind, that does not provide evidence that all religion is wrong, just that maybe strict Catholicism maybe isn’t for me.
I did not ask what you meant in your sentence.