By David Hoffman
If there is one tragic reality about
human existence, it is the reality that human beings seem infinitely and
insanely capable of inventing "reasons" to kill their fellow human
beings. Throughout history, and continuing to the present day,
differences in race, ethnicity, nationality, tribal allegiance,
political belief, economic status, language, and gender have been used
to rationalize a myriad of human rights abuses, oftentimes on a massive
scale.
When examined objectively and
unemotionally, none of these "reasons" are adequate justifications to
take the life of another. But perhaps the most ludicrous and
inexplicable excuse used to oppress and murder others is religion.
Two recent Supreme Court decisions, Town of Greece vs. Galloway and Burwell vs. Hobby Lobby Stores,
coupled with world events, both past and present, have led me to wonder
if religion is not the most divisive, destructive, and deadliest
invention of humankind.
Before proceeding further, a few facts
regarding this article need to be clarified. First, unlike the
journalistic practices of the corporate-controlled media (where the lust
for ratings and profit incessantly trump ethics and integrity), this
article was not written to generate controversy simply for the sake of
controversy. It was written to provoke thought, dialogue, and questions
about human nature and societies, and religion's role in them.
Second, this article does not equate
religion with God. In fact, the author fully understands how, when most
of the great religions were formed, science was in its infancy, so many
of the universe's and earth's mysteries could not be explained by
anything other than faith in a Higher Power. And, even to this day,
science has been unable to answer the greatest question of all: What is
the meaning of life?
As I've stated in several previous Pravda.Ru articles,
if there is one cogent argument in favor of the existence of a Higher
Power, it is that human existence is so illogical. Regardless of the
extent of one's worldly success, regardless of the political or economic
power one obtains, and regardless of all the material possessions one
acquires, death is inevitable.
The dilemma arises when people acquire
or maintain worldly success, power, and possessions through the abuse,
exploitation, and, oftentimes, the murder of their fellow human beings.
If they are never brought to justice during their lifetimes (and those
who exploit, abuse, torture, murder, and instigate torture and murder
for political reasons rarely are), and if there is nothing beyond this
realm of existence, then these exploiters, abusers, torturers, and
murderers are essentially the "wise" ones, because they did not let
values like justice, fairness, decency, honesty, and respect for the
rights of others prevent them from acquiring all the necessities and
luxuries to live comfortable and successful lives. In fact, if
subscribing to these values creates lives replete with failure,
injustice, suffering, deprivation, and exploitation by others, clearly
one would be foolish to do so.
Since life is illogical, it seems
logical to assume that, at some point, everything will make sense.
Perhaps the very purpose of mortality is to ensure that people who
achieve power and success through the exploitation and abuse of humans,
animals, and/or the environment will not enjoy the benefits of their
ill-gotten gains forever. Maybe heaven and hell is nothing more than a
"balancing of the scales."
Finally, the author has the greatest
respect for the founders of the world's great religions. Having studied
the origins of these religions, it is evident that their founders were
conscientiously and courageously driven by faith, because many of them
suffered immensely for their vision.
What this article does take issue with
is the charlatans, exploiters, hypocrites, demagogues, and opportunists
who took (take) the words and deeds of these founders, and used (use)
them as a way to manipulate, control, and exploit others by preying upon
human ignorance.
Note I said ignorance, not stupidity. As
I've argued in previous articles, stupidity is a condition where an
individual is incapable, due to a mental or physical malady, of
understanding certain concepts, whereas ignorance is created by apathy
or credulity that causes people to blindly accept what a so-called
"religious" leader says, instead of questioning and researching the
issue themselves.
For example, I recently saw a sign on a
Christian church that said, "God wants obedience, not questions." This
immediately conjured up images of the Middle Ages, when the populace was
not allowed to read, and Bibles were chained to pulpits so nobody but
the religious hierarchy could access them. And, thanks to this
knowledge, I realized how hypocritical this sign really was, given that
the Christian faith was inspired by a Man who dared to question many of
the religious rituals and practices of His day.
So below are five reasons why religion may be humanity's most divisive, destructive, and deadly invention:
1). Religion cannot be proven. If faith could be proven, it would be called fact.
Many so-called "religious" leaders are
fond of saying that faith is a necessity because science alone has been
incapable of answering many relevant questions. While this is true,
science, unlike religion, acknowledges its shortcomings and continues to
seek answers, instead of simply accepting things on faith alone.
And they are wise for doing so.
Why? Because even religion cannot accept
religion on faith alone. All of the world's major religions have split
into different sects, and these sects have often split again and again.
Joseph Gaer's book How the Great Religions Began states that
there are over two hundred different versions of Christianity in America
alone. And I'm certain that each version is convinced their particular
view of Christianity is the "truth."
Since religion cannot be proven, it
clearly cannot be argued, at least in the traditional sense. Arguments
are built upon facts, evidence, and reason, which are habitually absent
in matters of faith. Granted, some individuals will argue that the
principal text underpinning their particular religious beliefs
establishes such facts, evidence, and reason. But if these facts,
evidence, and reason were indeed absolutes, then religious divisions
would never have occurred in the first place.
If religion cannot be proven, then only
two options are available: A society where all believers (and even
nonbelievers) are embraced or a society where the dominant religion is
imposed upon others. As evidenced by the Town of Greece and Hobby Lobby decisions,
societies that embrace all beliefs are more fictitious than real. And
the atrocities committed by those seeking to impose their religious
beliefs upon others continue to this day.
2). Religious selflessness has become religious selfishness. While,
as with most matters of religion, there may be some disagreement on
this point, many religious scholars, like Huston Smith in his book The Religions of Man,
contend that the power of faith resides in its ability to suppress the
selfish urges and capriciousness of the human ego so a person can have a
more inclusive, tolerant, and loving view of the world.
Unfortunately, the opposite has
occurred: The human ego has transformed religion into a cesspool of
persecution, intolerance, and hate. Clearly the incentive to impose, by
law or by force, religious beliefs upon others is driven by the
egoistical notion that "my religion is superior to your religion."
Sadly, even those who remain selfless
often transform it into a gullibility that makes them easy prey for
self-serving "religious" leaders. For example, a relative of mine
continued to send money to a prominent televangelist even after it had
been revealed that most of the "offerings" he received were paying for
his lavish lifestyle. She rationalized this by claiming her motives for
sending the money were pure, regardless of how this televangelist spent
it.
This thinking, of course, not only took
money from people and/or organizations more deserving of it, it also
demonstrated how those who exploit religion for personal gain often have
flocks of faithful followers duped into believing they can "buy their
way into heaven."
3). Religion cannot lose. In
developing this reason, two thoughts came to mind: The machinations of
the late "psychic" Sylvia Browne and the classic movie Amadeus.
Browne's popularity and staying power
were, like many so-called "psychics," created by the fact that she
always had an "out." When she was correct, her "psychic" abilities were
the reason, and when she was wrong (as she was in claiming that two
kidnapping victims, Shawn Hornbeck and Amanda Berry, were dead), her
routine answer was "Only God is right all the time."
In Amadeus, a mediocre composer
was driven to madness trying to understand why all his hard work,
dedication, religious faith, and sacrifice went unrewarded by a God who
instead favored the vulgar, irreligious Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart by
blessing him with prodigious musical talent.
These realities are present in the
religious arena. If someone's prayers are answered, it is because their
faith has been rewarded. If someone's prayers are not answered, it is
because they did not have enough faith, or they gave up too soon. If
somebody who prays for a healing is cured, God healed him/her. If that
person dies, then he/she is "in a better place." If a person survives
horrendous and/or catastrophic events, it is a "miracle." If a person
dies during those same horrendous and/or catastrophic events, it is
"God's will."
The purpose of the above paragraph is
not to question or mock the existence of a Higher Power. It is to
demonstrate how religion can be so easily exploited, manipulated, and
distorted. After all, one cannot lose if one can never be wrong. The
problem is there is an abundance of so-called "religious" people who
believe they can never be wrong, who believe they are favored by God,
and who are willing to kill to prove it.
4). Religious ritual has replaced religious substance. As
I stated above, it is ironic that religions created by those who
questioned the merit of religious rituals eventually came to be
controlled by individuals who demanded unquestioning and obsequious
obedience to such rituals.
The primary problem with religious
rituals is they entice people into believing they are being "religious,"
regardless of how they treat others. It is, after all, much easier to
kneel and worship the founder of a religion, or to quote his teachings,
than it is to emulate the founder of a religion, or follow his
teachings. Thus, dropping a dollar into the collection plate on Sunday
means one can lie and cheat the remainder of the week, and failure to
adhere to certain dietary restrictions, dress codes, or sexual mores is
viewed with more severity than killing others.
5). Religion is the great insulator for evil men. In
previous articles, I have stated that most of humanity's struggles are
less between good and evil, and more between which forms of evil are
acceptable and which are not. Leaders with political and/or economic
power, for example, are often just as sadistic, sociopathic, and
mendacious as criminals without such power, yet they consistently go
unpunished, and are sometimes even rewarded, because their criminality
serves the power structure.
And, like common criminals, those with
political and/or economic power routinely rely on
insulators-rationalizations used to minimize or evade culpability for
their crimes. If these insulators are exposed as lies, many of those in
power habitually turn to the ultimate insulator: The declaration that
they were simply "doing God's will." Tragically, throughout history and
up to the present day, this "will" has resulted in countless wars
causing millions of deaths, and/or support for repressive and murderous
regimes that have tortured and murdered millions more. And while many
countries have "blasphemy" laws that make it a crime to ridicule
religion, somehow it is not blasphemy to invoke a Higher Power to
sanction the most egregious crimes against humanity.
So while many religious-minded people
await the apocalypse, the irony is that religion itself might be the
spark that ignites it.
No comments:
Post a Comment