Opium of the Masses, Product of the Oppressed; Karl Marx on Religion

Karl Marx, a 19th century German philosopher, stated that  “religion is the opium of the people,” as meaning that religion is an escape mechanism; a buffer against reality allowing people to escape into a world of illusion. Perhaps even Marx would have agreed with the concept behind this interpretation, however, this does not capture what Marx was conveying when he initially wrote the quote, during his exploration of the role and effect of religion on society. Greater insight into the original intent can be understood when reading the quote in its larger context. “Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world….. And the soul of soulless conditions it is the opium of the people…. The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is the demand for their real happiness.” Marx did not claim religion to be a pain-killer, rather, he is calling religion the product of the oppressed people, where people project their needs and desires onto an idealized existence.
Factory workers in Europe in the 19th  century couldn't achieve happiness in their ordinary real life. Therefore, for Marx religion has a social function distracting people away from their appreciation into thinking that their state is somehow the natural order of things. Instead of what it really was the status qual being maintained by elite powerful man.
Instead of asking if “religion is not the opium of the people” it can be asked as is religion oppressive something that conservatively holds back social change and maintains the state's que or is religion a liberating force something that subvert the status quo and encourages social change.
Does religion uphold and maintain the status quo? Yes. Some aspects of religion are inherently conservative and resistant to social change; religious adherents have a vested interest in the continuity of tradition and are therefore committed to the mission of passing along their beliefs and rituals to the next generation. This tendency towards conformity has oftentimes caused allowed religion to be abused and used as a tool to justify illegitimate political power; for example, when a king proclaimed his rule to be divinely mandated, or when a ruler leads his country to battle claiming that he is engaging in a holy war that was inspired by God. With both of the examples above we can recognize that religion has legitimating  power, a power which is seen around the world, across a wide variety of cultures .
Religion can also be used as a means for social control. Public shaming, shaming individuals from deviating from social rules, or discouraging people from acting out of line, can inhibit social change. Marx claimed that religion can discourage social change, and therefore the upper classes of society have often used religion as the means with which to retain power and maintain control over society. However, religion and society are very complex, therefore, religion is not the only force holding back societal change. In fact, there are many times in history where religion was the catalyst for social change and the driving force that was able to subvert the status quo.
In an ostensibly contradictory manner, the author writes that “capitalist society, as a two-class system of an exploiting and an oppressed class, has social alienation in its very heart”. Evidently, the source of tension exists at the very core of society. So close is it to the core, that one can consider it to be at the heart. Marx conceives of the heart of a heartless society as religion, rendering it incompatible with reality as it is. Encouraging the oppressed to recognize their circumstances, Marx believed that religion must be acknowledged as a root of alienation, rather than one of hope.