God is not Great

I'm currently reading Hitchen's anti-religious book, which has awakened once again my thoughts on the subject.

About a couple of years ago I decided to sweep away the topic, disillusioned by the church but also finding the opposite end to be somewhat arrogant. I decided that I was in no position to think for myself such a difficult question and contented to remain agnostic. However, there are things that I do have a clear stand on and which irks me.

1. Claims without being well-read
I am truly uncomfortable when I meet either a religious or non-religious man who claims, or takes a stand on the issue without being well-read in the subject. The underlying cause is that such a subject is meant to breed loudmouths. The religious (at least for the more evangelical sorts) are encouraged to proclaim, shout out, exalt their faith. Meanwhile, the non-religious (especially those who de-converted after being disillusioned) get very emotional and hardy with their beliefs as they feel betrayed. Both are natural of course, it is the nature of the subject.

However, just as I would find it uncomfortable having a conversation on foreign policy with someone who doesn't know the capital of China, I find it equally discomfiting to talk to an evangelizing Christian who doesn't know about the Thirty Years War, or worse, the crusades. It is not that I take such evidence to be definitive - that it surely means religion is wrong - it is just that I believe that to make such sweeping claims on an important subject, one must take the time to absorb the context of it all. Plainly speaking, I believe one must endeavor to research, to learn before concluding. Not necessarily be an expert, but at least know the fundamentals. To be fair, I am equally irked by self-proclaimed atheists who think religion is wrong based on their own experience in say, city harvest church because it shows that they did not stop to think that maybe a religion cannot be exemplified on one church and there are better examples.

2. Usage of extremes without disclaiming
Many anti-religious folk like to point to terrorism and crusades at the mention of the topic. While I have no issue with using the example per se (because one can reasonably argue that religion in some way has played a part in their cause), I believe the arguer should make an effort to temper his statements. A nuanced speaker would use the example but also concede that terrorism for example, is a result of fringe versions of the various religions (yes, all religions have gave birth to such organizations). I would go as far as to say groups such as Al-Qaeda were born in some political context (they were funded by the U.S against the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan) and as such, are not entirely religious. On the flip side are the religious folk who would perhaps use the godless, genocidal communists as an example of atheist brutality. Eesh. Where do I begin on how retarded that argument is without context.

3. Disrespect for people who don't agree
I am very glad to be born in Singapore, where I was brought up to be tolerant, and in fact harmonious with the numerous races that live together on an island so small it would be accurately represented in Civ 5 as one hex on a huge map. As a result of this luck of birth, I have both religious and non-religious friends who are probably smarter and more hardworking than me. I give them all due respect because a person should not be characterized by his one belief in one subject. To each his own. I am reminded of the Peace of Westphalia here, where culturally different European states settled on a balance of power that established peace after the Thirty Years War. What was special was that the peace did not determine whose state was better run or which was the correct religion, etc. but understood that the common quest for peace outweighed their differences. Non-interference in each other's affairs was borne out of respect of rivals.

Reza Aslan, Hitchens, C.S Lewis, I have respect for all these writers because they are more well-read, nuanced and respectful than most and which is why I read each of their works with gusto. It is perfectly natural to disagree even if given the same source material. Respect the peace!