"Religion" is too general.
I see harmful control with belief or non-belief as law of the land. Religion
or state atheism as law of the land, institutionalized 'centric intolerance, has
caused harm even creating entries on lists of major abominations, but there are
believers and non-believers who'd never want to be on such a list.
http://necrometrics.com/pre1700a.htm
Those believers understand faith as such, a hope in a possible God beyond the
known things, so wouldn't want the ethical/theological dilemma of harm or kill-
ing for an arbitrary unproven reason--sadism or murder.
Conservative Abrahamic religions may not keep up to speed about the known
things God is possible beyond and even have harmful ideas about women or homo-
sexuals or religion as law of the land, but some are more liberal or even pro-
gressive/reform and don't.
Some do or don't believe in God that follow religions such as Buddhism and
Taoism.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion
The analogy of followers of the MATRIX with followers of the GB works, but
for the GB you want creators of the MATRIX, not followers of it.
http://glenster1.webs.com/gtjbrooklynindex.htm
From Russell to the "GB," the leaders of the Bible Students/JWs have been far
from being under a strong but misguided understanding of faith (like a JW swin-
dled into letting their kid die at a hospital). They're like Popoff or Farra-
khan or Uri Geller--cynical businessmen who cook up exclusiveness to sell liter-
ature. If you want to shake them up, you'll have to show them that if they con-
tinue they'll lose money--Randi's exposes of Popoff or Geller or The First Wives
Club would be better comparisons.