I must say, I am having a tough time digesting what you are saying here. It appears that you are grateful for the wholesale eradication of indigenous populations by <s>slaughter</s> war and disease, but I cannot believe that you would believe, let alone say, such a thing.

Being facetious perhaps?

__________________
So when the body dies, and consciousness departs, where do "we" go? ... Off to define another "reality" perhaps?

I assumed you were not, because such a joke would have been in opposition to your point. That, and the fact that such a joke about de facto genocide would be incredibly tasteless.

Those lives could have been saved most quickly (and other lives eventually were) by the advance of science, not religion. It was religion which justified the slaughter of indigenous peoples (read "Guns, Germs, & Steel" for an eye-opening account) by active means, to accompany the disease.

Science has made mistakes, certainly--or rather, science has been used to make mistakes (since science is a method, not a movement)--but also to catch those mistakes, and to remedy them (or sometimes to try to remedy, all too late). Religion not only fails to keep up with science, but has actively opposed progress (no, not all religion, but many branches in many situations).

So, maybe you could explain your "facetious" comment. Were you making a point?