It would be healthy in our society if a stigma would develop towards those who mock religion and symbols that are sacred. This holds true, I argued, not only for my Christian faith but for the religious symbols of all faiths.
(...)
Still, when it comes to those who want to mock religion, I think all people of faith should stand united. Human beings are fundmentally a religious people and the expression and discussion of our deepest held beliefs and convictions have a place in a civil society. Mockery and sacriledge do not, but it is the court of public opinion that provides our protection against that, not the power of the state.
I completely agree.
People who mock religion tend to be extremely adolescent and immature in their attitudes. They mock fundamentalists for being anti-intellectual, when they themselves don't have the first clue about the faith they're bashing, nor its intellectual tradition.
Because every major world religion has an intellectual tradition.
Recently, columnist Richard Martineau argued that religions do not teach people critical thought. They simply teach how to accept based on authority.
While it is true that religion is, generally, based on faith, and faith is based on authority, it does not mean that there is no critical thought exercised in that tradition.
Anyone who says that religions don't teach critical thought doesn't know what he's talking about.
Of course, there are some religious traditions that are not very strong on critical thought, because critical thought is not a big component of that culture. I'm thinking of animist cultures, or very anti-intellctual fundamentalist strains of religion.
But all of the world's great religions have an intellectual tradition that teaches how to apply logic and how to devise answers to one's questions based on reason alone.
It's only natural. When you develop theology, you raise questions that are sometimes very complex and which are not directly addressed in one's Scripture. Of course, I'm using a Christian paradigm, because other religions don't operate in the same way that Christianity does. Judaism, for instance, is more interested in how to apply Jewish Law, and less on dogmatic belief.
All knowledge raises question. Religious knowledge is no different. And no body of revelation can directly address every issue. But every religion can have implicit answers. We know that the Bible does not address abortion. But we can find in the Bible the principles to conclude that killing unborn humans is a sin. Being able to devise an unassailable conclusion requires a degree of intellectual force that cannot be ascribed to blind literalism.
But because some people have militant bias against religion because it prohibits them from doing what THEY want, and it's the fashion these days, they blindly mock it. They haven't the first clue about what they're talking about, and they don't care to learn. You know, because they're too smart and all.
Very adolescent.
