Hitchens is wrong about one thing …
Filed under: Books/Current Events
I just finished God is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything by Christopher Hitchens.
Relax. This is not another diatribe from a morally outraged zealot who wants to stomp all over Hitchens without ever having read his book. In fact, I agree with a great many of his observations and think he’s written an important work. Like The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins, the Hitchens book is a long-overdue reaction to the blatant hostility toward reason that is becoming ever-stronger in the United States and elsewhere. Basically, these guys are pissed and they’re fighting back. I root them on.
But I take issue with Hitchens on his subtitle. I can’t agree that religion poisons everything.
Here are my reasons:
- I know good faithful people who are equally horrified at the historical atrocities performed in the name of religion as cited by Hitchens. I know people of faith who are equally horrified at the turns our U.S. government is taking, and at the religious zealotry that permeates the whole of Middle East relations.
- I know good faithful people who are capable of fully understanding the scientific method and accepting its implications — and yet their faith is not shattered in the least. These people do not pretend that science never happened; instead, they embrace learning and seem to find it adds to their faith rather than detract from it. And they don’t view the scientific community as a gigantic anti-God conspiracy. They know how science works, and realize that truth will win out.
- I know good faithful people who do not cover their eyes and plug their ears when presented with evidence contrary to the teachings of their religion. They do not sing “La-dee-da-dee-da — I can’t hear you!” They listen, consider, then think for themselves to figure out what they believe.
- I know good faithful people who are not sheep, blindly accepting whatever the clergy says and voting however the clergy insists they should vote. These people of faith insist on stubbornly thinking for themselves — and they still come out on the side of God.
- I know good faithful people who do not wield their religion like some sort of weapon against the rest of the world, smiling happily at the thought that they will attain salvation whilst all the poor stupid heathens burn.
- I know good faithful people who seem to have no trouble at all realizing that other people might feel differently, and that it’s OK. They do not look for ways to squeeze their religious views into our laws and into our schools, and they look upon such attempts with dread.
- I know people of good faith who do not cherry-pick history to try to prove that our Founding Fathers wanted to set up a theocracy. I know people of good faith who do not insist that we had a perfectly good Christian nation with Christian laws and Christian morality until those damned liberal heathens came along and wrested it away.
- I know good faithful people who do not seem to regard people of other faiths — or of no faith — as some sort of not-quite-human. They do not work to deny other Americans — for instance, homosexuals — their basic rights on the grounds of religion, nor do they just sit back and watch it happen.
- I know people of faith who lean toward believing in the Intelligent Design theory, or even embrace it whole-heartedly, yet realize that so far there is no science backing it up. These people would rather see scientific work done to prove or disprove the theory and are willing to allow time for that, rather than skip the scientific work altogether and go straight into using our schools to indoctrinate kids into Christianity.
- I know people of faith who realize that in a nation with freedom of religion, it is a bad idea to introduce organized prayer into our public schools. They feel faith is important, but they recognize the schools’ role as an arm of the government. They are perfectly capable of realizing we have churches all over the place, and that parents are the ones best suited to guiding the moral and religious growth of their children anyway, so there is no need to put it in our public schools, too.
- I know good people of faith who have no inclination toward proselytizing whatsoever. They strive to be decent, and moral, and to treat others kindly — regardless of differing opinions regarding the Almighty. They don’t insist that you should believe as they do or get the hell out of the country.
- By the way, I know agnostics and atheists who also strive to be decent, and moral, and to treat others kindly — regardless of differing opinions and with no inclination toward proselytizing whatsoever. They don’t insist that you should believe as they do or get the hell out of the country.
In sum, it seems to me one can make a case for religion poisoning a lot of things. History and current politics are rife with examples, and Hitchens sheds light on these in a convincing way. But experience tells me some believers are immune to the poison.
So there. Religion does not poison everything.
– Steve
P.S. I found the Hitchens book more entertaining and absorbing than the Dawkins book, but I liked them both. Go with Hitchens if you are more into the socio-political thing, but definitely go with Dawkins if science is your ilk.
Funny how things that happened more than a thousand years ago keep popping up today …
I’ve been reading a British collegiate book called “The Rise of Magic in Early Medieval Europe,” by professor Valerie I.J. Flint. The title is just a tad misleading because it sort of sounds like some pro- New Age thingamajig, but it seriously takes a look at the relationships between the early church, paganism, magic and yes, science (of the time anyway, roughly 400-1100 A.D.).
I’m only about halfway through the book now, but so far the author provides evidence, and some conjecture on her part, about how the early church dealt with these other subjects. The author seems to be leaning toward evidence that early church was much more lenient against things such as witchcraft, paganism and science that the church of the late Middle Ages and the Renaissance. From what I’ve read so far, for the most part if you were caught practicing magic or paganism, you were usually just told to say some Hail Marys or whatever and eat nothing but bread and water for a week or so. It’s not really until the later Middle Ages that most of the witch burnings, torture, etc. come into fashion.
Also, Flint shows evidence that the early church even approved of the science of its time, using science as a weapon against the ideas of demons, augury and other magic-related subject. The early church definitely seemed to approve of science when it came to the medical skills, as far as I can tell. I mean heck, Augustine himself was a huge admirer of some of the classical philosophers, using some of Plato’s ideas for the church.
But what changed? Why did the church become more harsh toward science and magic?
Honestly, I’m not to that part of the book yet, but I have my own suspicions. One word: Power.
The early church wasn’t nearly the dominant factor in Europe it would become later. The early church was building a following, not trying to keep one going. The early church might move into a new arena (oh, let’s say modern Germany, for example), but would find the current powers that be were pagans, as were the commoners, and they might not take too well to these high-falutin’ priests spoutin’ off about things like peace and love.
Just my rather lengthy and wordy insights, for anybody who cares.
I think people some people use faith as an excuse for intellectual laziness. It’s easier to consider birth control, for instance, as God’s word, rather than considering that it’s been historically worthwhile for the church to build up their coffers with a breeding program.
And I agree with the above commenter, it all gets down to power, unfortunately. There’s a fine line between saving souls and recruiting. (I’m fairly faithful, but I don’t believe that it’s up to me to save anyone else’s soul. Everyone’s in charge of their own self–which is what I tell my kids nearly every day when they tattle.)
i am not religious myself, tho i do consider myself spiritual.
religion is subject to one of
those horrific human conditions
called people f*ck it up.
whether it be politics, love,
marriage, religion–people will
f*ck it up. and a few bad apples
throughout history is all it takes
for mayhem and horrors and general
badness to take place.
i’m of the mind that even without
religion or politics, we’d still
be out there, trying to f*ck
it up somehow. =)
Hi, I tend to search out sites that talk about heroic fantasy and sword and sorcery and found your site that way. Strangely enough, then, my blog is called “Razored Zen.”
I’m with you in hoping to see a revival of some sword and sorcery mags. I love the stuff, reading and writing it.