In Defense Of Religion (some of the time)

In the last few years I've had several engrossing conversations about religion, no question one of the most incendiary topics out there.  As we watch the "My God is better than your God" argument be used to justify jihads, terrorist attacks and 'ethnic cleansing' (perhaps the most offensive term ever), and as we see the "We know what's okay with God! You don't!" stance espoused in the widespread attempted suppression of human rights -- it has made religion rife for attack.  As people slam religion for its attitudes of intolerance and bigotry, the bizarre irony is that the religious have become the one remaining "acceptable" bigotry target.  Not only is it acceptable to bash the religious en masse, but it's now considered both kool and progressive.  I don't think it's either.  Religion itself, as a concept, is not the problem. 

The problem, I believe most would agree, is the selective application, and deliberate misapplication, of religious doctrine for the sake of advancing sociopolitical and financial agendas.  Those who use it in this manner want to see their societies structured in a certain way, without compromise.  Rather than having the guts to say "This is what I want because I'm a self-centered and cruel bastard", their selfish desires are cloaked in the "This is what God wants" or "This is what God is telling me to do" veil.  They use people's fear of Divine judgment to rope them into the pigpen of similar thought.  

There are millions of believers, however, who are neither brainless sheep nor controlling haters.  There are those whose religion, as the centre of their lives, is the springboard for good works and compassion on a level that most of us could only dream of.  It is the perversion and misuse of religion -- much like the misuse of anything else from sex to food to the internet -- that is destroying us.  Scrolling through my Facebook feed one day, I saw that an acquaintance of mine had posted in a group called "Strong intelligent women don't choose religion.". I sighed.  As someone who was raised by an intelligent and fairly religious woman, I was irritated by the close-mindedness and judgment of that.  I loathe the generalizations that do zero to bridge gaps.  I also have a real problem with those who are religious being made to feel that they are inherently on the side of wrong.  That is happening more and more these days; everyone seems to have carte blanche to pummel those of faith relentlessly.  

Religion CAN be, and IS, a control mechanism in the wrong hands.  At its BEST, however, it is a path to moving through the world with love and provides a guide to living one's life with compassion and ethics.  "Thou shalt not kill", "Thou shalt not steal", and "Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour" are perfectly fine with me as a code of conduct.  How is the Bible exacting "Thou shalt" edicts on its followers any different from living in a society with laws?  What is the Criminal Code if not a tome of "Thou shalt not"s?  The interpretation of religion by many is flawed.  This is inarguable.  But the areas of religion that need examination and evolution are being discussed cogently those not just outside of, but within, all faiths.  I am appreciative of all of the imams, priests, nuns, ministers, rabbis and monks, as well as lay people of all faiths, who are trying to move religion forward to a place of evolution, in the face of great opposition from their internal hierarchies and fundamentalist ranks.

Not every religious person is a brainwashed sheep. Not every religious person wants to repress women. Not every religious person believes that his or her god is superior.  Not every religious person believes that God meant for the races to be separate.  Not every religious person thinks that walking into a crowd and blowing yourself up is godly. Not every religious person wants to make life for homosexuals hell on earth.  The one who do are the ones who make the news; conflict sells both literally and figuratively .  But they are NOT the entire story.

Everytime there is a "discussion" about religion, it seems to consist entirely of citing its ills.  It is the default response and I am over it.  As progressives, we demand a higher level of discourse on every other topic but are fine to reduce religion to "It's the cause of every problem in the world."  Uh, okay.  How is that any less dismissive than the Right's contention that "Liberalism is the cause of every problem in the world"? Those kind of near-sighted hypotheses will do nothing, absolutely nothing, to heal the divide caused by those who choose to pervert religion.  We seem to have developed some sort of collective amnesia as to the great good done by those who do identify with various organized religions, who use the principles of their particular tenets to love and to serve not only those in their own lives, but their communities and the world at large.  I've watched over the past few years as people seem to have engaged in a campaign to taint the legacy of Mother Teresa.  Why??  Why is that necessary?  The woman was human, therefore imperfect, and it was revealed after her death that she had questioned her faith in light of all the suffering she witnessed.  Who wouldn't have?  I am quite that those determined to reveal her as less than a saint haven't devote their lives to helping the dying in a destitute slum anytime recently.

When did it become so difficult to see religion as good AND bad?  Can we not both excise the venomous and exalt the virtuous within it?  Why do we forget the religious people who stand on the side of right?  Who watched the Democratic National Convention last year and didn't fall in love with Sister Simone Campbell, from Nuns On The Bus?  These people exist. They exist in large numbers.  Some religious people, believe it or not, actually get it.

I am not going to tell someone who has lived his or her whole lives as a devout Catholic, for example, and whose religious beliefs may be in large part responsible for the leading of a good and loving life, that he or she is an unintelligent sheep who cannot think for him or herself.  That is unkind, arrogant and diminishing.  At the same time, I will speak up about the parts of the doctrine that are concerning.  I will do that while also extoling the highest ideals of Catholicism in my attempt to engage and find common ground.  Both can be done -- the aclnowledgment within every religion of that which does and does not serve humanity.  To do any less is an insult to those whose religion is the basis for them living a life far more honourable and selfless than my own.  It isn't right.  If the most questionable elements of religious doctrine are being used to suppress, then we must put them under a microscope and work to redefine them -- as has been done throughout time -- rather than painting religion as a whole with a tarnished brush.  That's ironically prejudicial, and FAR too easy.

- TT