[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help] 

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

Have You Noticed That Seismic Activity Has Been Going Nuts All Over The Globe

The Vax was meant to CAUSE cancer.... listen to this - this clip from RFK Jr's site

CNN Immediately Cuts Off Panelist Who Tells the Truth About the LA Riots

Army Secretary declares war on the military industrial complex

Former Israeli PM Threatens U.S. Will Get 'A Re-Run Of 9-11' If It Doesn't Fight Israel's Wars

7 Examples Of The “Mostly Peaceful” Los Angeles Riots Becoming Even More “Peaceful”

Biden Admin and ActBlue Funded Group Behind Abolish ICE Protests in LA

Murderers, rapists, gang members: ICE busts 12 of LA's 'worst' illegal alien criminals amid riots

LA Mayor Karen Bass Threatens Feds: Withdraw From LA Or the Violence Will Escalate –

Woman points gun at police and finds out

EXCLUSIVE: Rep. Ronny Jackson Accuses Biden Doctor Kevin O’Connor Of Sexual Misconduct

WHAT YOU’RE WITNESSING IN LOS ANGELES ISN’T JUST UNREST—IT’S MORAL COLLAPSE

Anna Paulina Luna Exposes the Guy Behind the Anti-ICE Riots

Mike Huckabee Working To Keep Netanyahu in Power

Israeli Military and Israeli-Backed Gang Shoot Aid Seekers in Gaza, Killing 14

Only 68 Building Permits Issued for Pacific Palisades After Wildfires Destroyed 6800 Structures

Violent Rioters Fire Off Exploding Projectiles at Police Horses Use Fireworks and Explosives to Attack Police

ICE Just Shattered Records With One Massive Operation That Has Democrats Fuming

Nolte: Insurrectionist Democrats Plan Another Summer of Blue City-Riots

Violent riots have now been reported in over 30 American cities. Heres a full list:

Mass shooter opened fire at graduation party was an migrant who was busted in LA ICE raids:

Cash Jordan: ICE Raids Home Depot... as California Collapses

Silver Is Finally Soaring: Here's Why

New 4um Interface Coming Soon

Attack of the Dead-2025.

Canada strips Jewish National Fund of charitable status

Minnesota State Rep. Vang just admitted that she is an ILLEGAL ALIEN.

1100% increase in neurological events since the roll-out of Covid mRNA

16 Things That Everyone Needs To Know About Violent Far-Left Revolution In Los Angeles

Undercover video in Arizona alleges ongoing consumer fraud by Fairlife


Religion
See other Religion Articles

Title: Hitchens Is Not Great: An Atheist's Defense of Religion
Source: TCSDaily
URL Source: http://www.tcsdaily.com/article.aspx?id=060807A
Published: Jun 8, 2007
Author: Karl Reitz
Post Date: 2007-06-11 17:09:43 by farmfriend
Keywords: religion, socialism, communism
Views: 152
Comments: 5

Hitchens Is Not Great: An Atheist's Defense of Religion

By Karl Reitz : BIO| 08 Jun 2007

Religion has been under more fire than usual lately. Daniel Dennett wrote "Breaking the Spell: Religion as a Natural Phenomenon", Sam Harris wrote "The End of Faith: Religion, Terror, and the Future of Reason", Richard Dawkins wrote "The God Delusion", and Christopher Hitchens wrote "God is not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything", to name just a few attacks.

Most reviews of these books and interviews with the authors have raised the not-so-hot record of atheistic societies. The authors, of course, promptly dismiss these concerns. As The Economist review of Mr. Hitchens "God is not Great" puts it:

"To the objection that irreligious fascists and communists found plenty of non-religious reasons for murder in the 20th century, Mr Hitchens retorts that these beliefs were types of secularised religion, and as such do not count."

However, it is not clear at all why "secularized religions" should not count. A world in which everyone stopped believing in God would likely provide fertile ground for such secular faiths. These secularized religions are what we would really have if we somehow got everyone to stop believing in God. Realistically, atheists (and we atheists take pride in only thinking realistically) may only have a choice between living in societies that are traditionally religious or ones that have adopted secularized religions.

So, far from "not counting," secular religions must be taken very seriously, and their implications understood, before we preach the benefits of godless society.

The obvious examples of secularized religions are communism, socialism, and fascism, each of which generally involves worshipping government by slightly different rituals or for slightly different reasons. As these convictions faded, faith in the welfare state, and especially environmental protection, has risen to take their place for reasons government should be worshipped. Environmentalist devotees claim that we will experience the apocalypse disasters, for which some people are rebuilding Noah's Ark. These disasters can be prevented if we take the advice of prophets people who understand, like Al Gore. Of course, if we sin pollute a little too much, well, we can always buy indulgences carbon offsets.

The fundamental difference between traditional religions and these secular religions is that secular religions promise us that perfection (heaven) is possible here, on earth, in present times. Conservatives, starting with Eric Voegelin, have long warned against buying into these secular religions by warning us not to "immanentize the eschaton." As Jonah Goldberg explained:

"Immanentize means to make part of the here and now. Eschaton, like eschatology, relates to the branch of theology which deals with humanity's destiny. You know, the end times, when all of that wacky, end-timey, Seventh-Seal stuff happens (oceans boil, the righteous ascend to heaven, Carrot Top is funny, etc). Hence 'immanentizing the eschaton' means, in effect, trying to make what is reserved for the next life part of the here and now."

I am atheist because I don't believe in faith, which I believe is the common dogma shared by traditional religion and secularized religions. This means that my atheism is somewhat foggy; because you can't prove that there isn't a God any more than you can prove that there is one, both are un-testable. By railing against God, especially the Christian God, these authors are missing the real target, faith.

Many reviews of these books have missed this point, which should be obvious to Conservatives. For example, the New Yorker reviewed these books and noted that "unbelievers" might be "the fourth-largest persuasion in the world, after Christianity, Islam and Hinduism." The flaw here is that there are very few true unbelievers. They may not believe in God, as a bearded man in the sky, but they do believe in god, in some other-worldly sense.

For the same reasons that I don't want religion taught to my [theoretical future] children in public schools, I don't want Al Gore's An Inconvenient Truth to be a requirement for graduation. If the First Amendment prohibits the teaching of religion in public schools, shouldn't it prohibit showing that movie? After all, what's the difference between that movie and one that presented a traditional religion in the same way?

Even if the secular authors' ire is well-justified, we are never going to live in a world in which the vast majority of people don't have faith in something, whether that something is God or Government. As an atheist I feel much less threatened by someone who is willing to put off perfection by relegating it to another place than I do by someone who thinks they can create it here and now. In other words, I think that the chance that a religion will "poison everything" is indirectly proportional to the length of time the proponents of the religion think it will take to perfect this world. Therefore, nothing scares me more than the demagogue who promises to immediately do just that. Without traditional religion, I think we would have a lot of demagogues in this mold.

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

#1. To: farmfriend (#0)

"To the objection that irreligious fascists and communists found plenty of non-religious reasons for murder in the 20th century, Mr Hitchens retorts that these beliefs were types of secularised religion, and as such do not count."

As if people need some form of dogma, either religious or non-religious, to slaughter each other.

Fundamental truth for the religious as well as the irreligious: People LIKE to kill each other, people LIKE to lock each other up, and people LIKE to take things that other people have worked for and get them for FREE. And they will use force if necessary, and even if unnecessary, and sometimes just for kicks. Just like people LIKE to rape, plunder, enslave, murder and pillage. No matter how we justify it, we're all Vikings at heart.

For me, whether you call it the effect of "original sin" or our "animal nature" or "latent evolutionary traits" makes no damn bit of difference.

I think what the atheists object to is the fact that men are, at their fundamental core, criminals, either caught or uncaught.

And the publican, standing far off, would not so much as lift his eyes unto heaven, but smote his breast, saying, God be merciful to me a sinner. I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather thant he other: for every one that exalteth himself shall be abased; and he that humbleth himself shall be exalted. -Luke 18: 14.

bluedogtxn  posted on  2007-06-11   17:21:37 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#2. To: farmfriend (#0)

Atheism is just another religion. If God doesn't exist, why bother proving he doesn't? It's like walking around denying the existence of pink marshmallow elephants who speak perfect German. Why bother?

I'm not sure what this atheist is getting at. I think, in some contorted way, he's trying to say belief in "isms" that will bring heaven on earth is more dangerous than believing in some cloud being. But he believes in conservatism, which last time I looked, was just such an "ism."

In the Al Gore comment, is he claiming that his future kids should not study science? Gore's movie is not a textbook and doesn't claim to be one. Why the need for a straw man, a gratuitous swipe at someone he considers to be a political enemy? Why not attack the politically neutral Darwin, if that's what he really means?

This sounds like a Fox News attempt at sounding philosophic. The game is given away when the spokesman for his point of view is the incredibly confused and truly stupid Jonah the Fatboy. It's almost as ridiculous as including in a sentence, without irony, the phrase, "according to Sean Hannity...."

Mekons4  posted on  2007-06-11   17:25:03 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#3. To: farmfriend (#0)

As Jonah Goldberg explained:

"Immanentize means to make part of the here and now. Eschaton, like eschatology, relates to the branch of theology which deals with humanity's destiny. You know, the end times, when all of that wacky, end-timey, Seventh-Seal stuff happens (oceans boil, the righteous ascend to heaven, Carrot Top is funny, etc). Hence 'immanentizing the eschaton' means, in effect, trying to make what is reserved for the next life part of the here and now."

When did Jonah Goldberg become a quotable expert in theology? He probably had to look all of those big words up in the dictionary before writing them down.

Rupert_Pupkin  posted on  2007-06-11   17:30:51 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#4. To: bluedogtxn (#1)

As if people need some form of dogma, either religious or non-religious, to slaughter each other.

They don't need it, but they do want it. It helps them sleep at night. Deep down there is that little voice telling them that murdering and stealing is wrong, but that voice is easily drowned out with "logic" like 'I'm serving my country' or 'It's God's will that I do this.' Never underestimate the human mind's ability to justify the unjustifiable.

Why do you think the neocons search desperatly for justification for their slaughter? If they were true animals they'd just bomb at random; yet they go through this "act" of trying to find some justification that makes them feel good about themselves when they punch the red button.

The same thing was reported in the USSR in the 1930's. The NKVD knew the people they were torturing had commited no crime, but they refused to ship them off to the gulags until they signed a confession. That peice of paper was their justification. That way they could go home at night and think of all those signed confessions and dream away happily about all the traitors they had locked up and lvies they had ruined. After all, every one of them had confessed and it was in defense of the state.

As the saying goes: "I was just following orders."

"The more I see of life, the less I fear death" - Me.

Pissed Off Janitor  posted on  2007-06-11   17:35:10 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#5. To: Pissed Off Janitor (#4)

They don't need it, but they do want it. It helps them sleep at night. Deep down there is that little voice telling them that murdering and stealing is wrong, but that voice is easily drowned out with "logic" like 'I'm serving my country' or 'It's God's will that I do this.' Never underestimate the human mind's ability to justify the unjustifiable.

Why do you think the neocons search desperatly for justification for their slaughter? If they were true animals they'd just bomb at random; yet they go through this "act" of trying to find some justification that makes them feel good about themselves when they punch the red button

True. Self-deception is what makes the world go round, and you don't need religion to lie to yourself. Political ideology (or just a catchy slogan) will do the job just as well.

Rupert_Pupkin  posted on  2007-06-12   12:44:47 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest


[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help]