From the article entitled: "Religion”
“Each religion asserts that it is a means by which its adherents may come into closer contact with God, Truth, and Spiritual Power. They all promise to free adherents from spiritual bondage, and bring them into spiritual freedom. It naturally follows that a religion which frees its adherents from deception, sin, and spiritual death will have significant mental health benefits. Abraham Maslow's research after World War II showed that Holocaust survivors tended to be those who held strong religious beliefs (not necessarily temple attendance, etc), suggesting it helped people cope in extreme circumstances.”
Even the anonymous Wikipedia author noted that all religions assert that they bring their adherents to the Truth. The "naturally follows" is a completely unsupported assertion, which is completely nullified when it brings up religious mumbo-jumbo like "sin" and "spiritual death."
I could probably find a Wiki article on voo-doo which claims that voodoo helps its adherents by giving them a method to cure themselves from curses, hexes, and demons.
As an atheist, I'm not so bothered by spiritual death, sin, curses, or demons. Is that because I'm in complete ignorance of the negative effect they could possibly be having on my life if only I believed in them? From my perspective, I'm much more mentally healthy than anybody who feels guilty over committing non-existent sins. Just like I'm mentally healthier than somebody who walks carefully to avoid stepping on a crack and breaking his mother's back.
Also it is logical to conclude that the closer you are to universal truth the happier or more fulfilled you will be over the long term. This is not to say there aren’t some happy (or at least temporarily happy) atheists out there, but it is possible that they could be even happier if they were closer to the truth (if atheism was not in reality true).
This may be a common sense conclusion, but can you show your workings on why it's logical? While you're at it, please demonstrate which religious people are closer to the universal truth. As the Wiki article states, this is an assertion of all religions. Are the Buddhists closer to the universal truth, or perhaps it's the Hindus, the Moslems, or the Sikhs?
All I know is that most of the atheists I know seem to be fairly happy. As I said, it's easier to be happy when you don't have to worry about breaking imaginary rules and upsetting a jealous petty god.
For instance, do you think Christians feel safer and happier when they believe that their jealous and petty god is punishing the world through a series of random natural disasters?
This could also apply to societies, if a society is in touch with universal laws and truth it would be logical to assume that that society as a whole will be better functioning and its citizens as a whole will have better mental health. If secularism is the closest to truth of all belief systems it would seem Europe should have a lower mental health problem.
Oh yes, I suppose it
could apply to socieities. I suppose one could assert anything one wants to, when one isn't bothered with supporting those assertions. It's just like your god's messages via natural disaster: a lot of perhaps, maybes, and could bes. You would think the truth would be a little more certain.