Palmer Blevins Blog

There is a global war on religious freedom being waged: religous fanatics wanting to shove religion down the throats of those who are more concerned about matters of real importance (such as trying to make ends meet, to enjoy at least a moment of happiness, etc.), funamentalists subverting democracy to rob moderates and the un-religious of their God-given right to criticize that which is illogical and often times criminal, and supposed “holy” men and women threatening to kill, and in most cases, threatening to kill anyone who musters the courage to combat them.

There is a war on free speech and free thinking, being carried out by the most savage and most vile of human beings; and it is a war that we should be concerned about losing.  Writer Johann Hari has written a beautiful piece entitled “Stand up for the Right to Criticize Religion,” and I implore everyone to read it.  And suprise, suprise, suprise, religious fanatics have their panties in a twist, and calling for not only the imprisonment of the editor, publisher and writtter…but some of the more “godly” want a worse punishment for daring to speak ill of their religion.  Who ever guesses followers of the “religion of peace” gets a cookie.

Yet, despite the riots and threats, he is continuing the fight.  This man has become a hero to me.

“All people deserve respect, but not all ideas do. I don’t respect the idea that a man was born of a virgin, walked on water, and rose from the dead. I don’t respect the idea that we should follow a ‘Prophet’ who at the age of 53 had sex with a nine-year old girl, and ordered the murder of whole villages of Jews because they wouldn’t follow him. I don’t respect the idea that the West Bank was handed to Jews by God and the Palestinians should be bombed or bullied into surrendering it. I don’t respect the idea that we may have lived before as goats, and could live again as woodlice. This is not because of “prejudice” or “ignorance”, but because there is no evidence for these claims. They belong to the childhood of our species, and will in time look as preposterous as believing in Zeus or Thor or Baal.

When you demand “respect”, you are demanding we lie to you. I have too much real respect for you as a human being to engage in that charade.

But why are religious sensitivities so much more likely to provoke demands for censorship than, say, political sensitivities? The answer lies in the nature of faith. If my views are challenged I can, in the end, check them against reality. If you deregulate markets, will they collapse? If you increase carbon dioxide emissions, does the climate become destabilised? If my views are wrong, I can correct them; if they are right, I am soothed.

But when the religious are challenged, there is no evidence for them to consult. By definition, if you have faith, you are choosing to believe in the absence of evidence. Nobody has ‘faith’ that fire hurts, or Australia exists; they know it, based on proof. But it is psychologically painful to be confronted with the fact that your core beliefs are based on thin air, or on the empty shells of revelation or contorted parodies of reason. It’s easier to demand the source of the pesky doubt be silenced.”

Amen, brother.  Amen.