At least once each week WhereIStanders engage in dialog and debate that inevitably launches them into a diatribe on religion and the alleged harm that it can do to a society. And in each of these debacles I find myself reading atheistic writings that all seem to tout (some more openly than others) a common inaccuracy: religion causes people to act out in horrific ways.
On the surface, this may seem valid, but nothing in life proves itself so simple once examined. One cannot conclude that a world without religion would be a better one. In order to do this, one would have to study each religion, look at the donations made from Christian, Jewish, Islamic, etc. religious groups, examine (both quantitatively and qualitatively) the results of such monetary giving, examine the impact of past religious programs (Feed the Children, etc.), explore religion and its role in education (where would this nation be without the plethora of institutions and educational facilities founded on religion)…you get the idea – each component would have to be analyzed.
In the end, if such a study were to be conducted, it would be overwhelmingly evident that religion has done more good for this world than bad. Also, in reference to incessant attacks on Christianity, one should truly explore the Bible and Christianity’s central tenants. It is wrong-headed to blame religion for bad behavior, especially when Christianity (in particular) encourages love and respect.
Wouldn’t it serve atheists better to expose individuals who are cloaking their evil with faith – individuals who aren’t following the faith system (hypocrites), instead of improperly and blindly attacking the faith system itself? The fact of the matter is that gay-bashers, hate-mongers and others are simply cloaking themselves with Christianity. “Yes, we’re Christians!" But, if their actions are not in accordance with the beliefs embraced within, then how can we fault the system? In the end, people are at fault – not the religion.
That said, I find it, once again, necessary to explain the “sum of all evil” theory. If you are going to make sweeping generalities, you had better have convincing evidence to corroborate your theses. For instance, I would never say: Liberals are unintelligent (or that every terrorist is a Muslim – although it is important to note that a great majority of today’s terrorists happen to be Muslims, but these are two entirely different statements). I have many liberal friends who I am close with and whom I trust wholeheartedly. Many of them have earned an education far beyond my own, while others have not.
While I disagree with a great many central tenants embraced by the liberal heart, I could and would never attempt to make such a sweeping statement. Another commonly held conservative statement insists that liberals hate America. This is yet another idea that cannot be proven in sum. I’m sure that there are liberals who does hate America (and there surely are conservatives who do as well), but a well-rounded individual quickly recognizes that liberals love America too – they just have different methodologies than conservatives do.
The point I am getting at is this: Not every conservative (or liberal, for that matter) is cut from the same mold. This is to say that we all possess differences that should be examined before tossing the whole package out the window.
For instance, my friend Nina is a lesbian, but she’s also against abortion; in many ways, Nina embraces liberalism, but still exposes her conservative side. The unfortunate fact, however, is that one might meet Nina and think that she subscribes to certain ideologies based on only one learned attribute. Following this impression, Nina is labeled and pushed away. This is only an example, of course (See, The slayer of conservative stupidity).
Not only is this a horrible way to go through life, but it also creates a situation in which we shelter ourselves. How boring it would be to surround ourselves with others just like us. Some of the most interesting conversations I’ve had in my life have been with liberal celebrities and peers who are (sometimes radically) opposed to my own views. Diversity is the spice of life, right?
So, in sum – before making sweeping generalities, look at the sum and try your best to derive realistic ideals. And before blaming religion, look at the social context that surrounds the culture your criticizing. It’s easy to blame it all on religion. Truth be told, the majority of horrific events in this world have actually been caused when God is absent from the governing ideologies.
whereIstand Tags
I will respond in full when I have more time, but this is simply incorrect. Christians wouldn’t frown on the friendship. Sure, some might…but frowning on this sort of friendship would be propostorous and against the tenants of Christianity. Evangelizing? I’ve never tried to "convert" Nina. We’ve talked about God — and our differences. Christians aren’t supposed to disassociate due to differences in opinion. That’s simply not right.
A pattern? I work full time, run a company and attend graduate school…I’m not avoiding topics…I simply don’t have the time. Once again, proof texting your way to the top, Carol! Classy.
Good post. Religion, I like the word Christianity better, has been attacked a long, long time. It seems Jesus had that problem too. But we trust by faith that God will truly stand above all.
I agree that we need to look at faith and not necessarily those engaged in faith. We are all sinners are still very human. It bothers me with people base Christianity on what one person or persons have done in a improper bad way.
Dialogue is good. It certainly gets lively on here. I agree that we need to have respect for other people’s opinions.
Excellent post. Its easy to blame the label someone uses than to look at the person and their own personal motives. Generalizing about others who are not like you is the first level of bigotry.
Why do we have to also apologize for religious beliefs to others who don’t believe? You flesh out some points I have made previously about why atheists feel the need to attack, mock and vilify religion. I think they are afraid of what they do not understand. Wow, what if there is a God? That has to be an occasional fearful thought late at night to an atheist.
Billy, …
This is true in the same way that one cannot conclude anything about the roads not taken….
This part is pretty obvious. What is a frequent fallacy is that people tend to conclude that the road taken is better. Of course, this is at the heart of what "conservatism" really means – that which already exists is presumed to be right and should be conserved.
Your conclusion that religion has done more good than bad seems to precede the study you identified as a prerequisite.
You have some interesting contradictions that will one day run you into a shitload of trouble with the people with whom you identify.
Isn’t that just exactly what "family values" means to most Americans? I have an Indian friend that was taken aside by a priest in the midwest and told outright not to set foot in his church again. Whenever I’ve gone to church with my religious relatives, somebody next to me always asks me the name of my local church in New York. This is straight out of Catcher in the Rye. As soon as they know you don’t go to church they are in a hurry to end the conversation or evangelize you. How accepting of others not like them….
You may be swimming in De Nile here… the overwhelming majority of Christians would frown significantly on your friendship with Nina… unless of course, you are marketing your wares to her (i.e., evangelizing).
When you say things like
I think it’s obvious that you are guilty of what you are accusing atheists of. This is a sweeping generality, no? I don’t really know which horrific events you are talking about – throw something my way from recent times along the lines of the World Trade Center.
All that atrocities committed have in common is that they are founded on (1) unjustified beliefs, or (2) power. Atheists, you may note, wield neither of these. A religion, you may note, is basically a group that claims and/or adheres to unjustified beliefs (i.e., faith) and which frequently enjoys a powerful role in the societies it contaminates (sorry… can’t help myself… I’ve read too much and seen too much to fall for the "religion is generally good" canard).
But you get the point, no? Of course not. You don’t actually address points that are made against you. You pretend to listen, then you make sweeping attacks or proclamations.
Give me a list of atrocities just in modern times and tell me which have been caused by the absence of God. The only people that kill religious people are other religious people or power-hungry dictators that scapegoat them for reasons of power and not of a-theism.
Never mind.. just write another entry explaining to atheists that what they really need to do is read your brochures, or why religious people have no need to read the very excellent, Origin of Species….
Amusingly, Billy once again uses the old “I’ll respond in full when I have more time,” statement, which seems to be a pattern. But I digress and really wasn’t going to comment on his “sweeping generalities” as Nick so aptly puts it because there’s nothing concrete in what he attempts to spout; yet, he does use such generalities when he responds by saying,
I’m guessing Billy doesn’t know the Bible’s teachings to any great degree, but Paul in writing to the Corinthians, instructs them thusly:
Now there will be those who try to explain that this verse is referring to marriage, but if one reads the entire chapter, Paul does not mention marriage. What is curious is that Paul contradicts the teachings of Jesus, who went among the sinners. (Of course, everyone was a sinner compared to Jesus, if one takes Scripture as gospel.) Nevertheless, if Christians are given the power of the Holy Spirit, shouldn’t they be able to go among the sinners as well?
In addition, if Billy were to follow the Bible’s instruction, he must witness to Nina and anyone else who crosses his path:
To deny that this is what the fundamentalists use to justify their cause is like denying Christ before the cock crows thrice.
To respond to Nick:
Just off the top of my head:
Stalin: Tens of thousands of priests and nuns killed in persecuting the Russian Orthodox church. Other religions persecuted as well.
Also, since you seem to dismiss any atheist atrocities as mere power struggles, while religious ones point to the evilness of religions, consider the following. There’s not that much difference between a fanatical atheist and a fanatical Christian.
Eric Hoffer:
Addressing Nick: don’t be too hard on Billy. People who don’t embrace faith seem to want proof/answers and once again Christianity is based upon faith. You might think it is blind faith, whereas I think people who don’t exercise Biblical faith really have blind faith.
Billy has created his own argument that he doesn’t approve of. This is cherry picking faith, deciding what you think is true and what isn’t based upon what you REALLY want to believe. You if you want to believe that women who act independently and make decisions for themselves are bad, then you’ll find reasons to validity that using the bible or whatever. In a sense, Billy is right, religion doesn’t make people do anything except wander aimlessly and question nothing. It is when people use the bible as ‘evidence’ for ridiculous mystical claims such as; God created human life, homosexuality is wrong, abortion is wrong but the death penalty is great, and such that causes our problems.
When people are brought up religious they are brought up being brainwashed, convinced to believe in something that can’t be seen, measured, heard, touched, felt, explained, or independently studied. This lack of proper critical ability is what causes the problems, and the main culprit is religion.
If were were all brought up to think critically and logically there might be no ban on abortion, ban on gay marriage, extermination of Jews, invasions in Iraq for oil, controversy over sex, problems with stem cells, and other ridiculous dents in progress. Of course, there is no way to know that because most people are not brought up to think critically and logically, most people are raised religiously, so the world may never know, as Nick says, what would have happened if we had taken the left instead of the right at the fork in the road.
But one thing is clear, history has shown us that organized religion and untestable ideologies has caused a lot of harm and reversed a lot of progress when it mixes with politics. So maybe religion should be a personal thing, with a sphere of influence of one person.
Now, I must say that I was very surprised by the response I received after penning, “The Politics of Religion.” First and foremost:
Amusingly, Billy once again uses the old “I’ll respond in full when I have more time,”….