By
Why the hostility?
Last week I chose against writing about the abortion display on campus because I assumed that niche in the opinion page would have already been filled to occupancy level. If you picked up an issue of The Cardinal last Tuesday, you probably know that I was correct in my assumption. One of these articles about the display specifically caught my eye: Brian Shosten’s “Want to know what an extremist thinks?”
Mr. Shosten’s article attracted my attention not because of his attacks on pro-lifers, but because of his attacks on religion. Mr. Shosten asserted multiple times that religion is a “scam” and that it is religion that is the source of much turmoil and violence in the world. I do not affiliate myself with any major religions, but I don’t understand open hostility towards them.
I found Mr. Shosten’s assertions to be both cynical and unsupported. He stated that religion is inherently false and unrealistic without providing any evidence for his conclusion. Mr. Shosten alluded to the disgusting actions of many of the Christian Crusaders as evidence that Christianity is flawed. While I agree that the actions of the Crusaders were morally wrong, I must contest his conclusion. A religion is not proven false simply because some of its adherents acted in a reprehensible way. Mr. Shosten only provided evidence that sometimes people who claim to be pious can be very destructive and hateful. He said nothing about the specific tenets of Christianity or any other religion. It may be true that religion is nothing more than humanity’s wishful thinking, but Mr. Shosten’s assertions never came close to proving it.
Mr. Shosten’s main mistake in his article was failing to recognize that religious beliefs and the actions of members of a religion are two separate things. It cannot be denied that horrible atrocities have been committed in the name of religion. However, it was humans who committed these atrocities. Religious beliefs have never committed murder, fought wars, or carried out plans of genocide.
Mr. Shosten also claimed that religion doesn’t “come into contact with reality or common sense at any point.” One may search high and low and never find such a simplistic statement as that one. It is very easy to claim that believing in ideas without any physical proof is insane, but Mr. Shosten has overlooked the very practical applications religion offers. To me, religion is not just going to church once a week, or saying the right combination of words in the proper sitting position. Religion is a way to conduct one’s life that may or may not entail belief in an afterlife. Building a guideline for our moral decisions throughout our life is not only practical, but necessary. A plan for how to make moral choices is deeply rooted in reality.
Fighting about religion is one of the most idiotic things that human beings do. We want so much to be on the winning side that we begin to assume that our way is the only way. This is not a crime ascribed only to the religious, but to humans in general. People from all religions can be accused of arrogance and being unwilling to allow for differences in style. However, people who claim that anyone who dares to believe in a religion is an “idiot” or a “fraud” are just as arrogant. Religion is not for everyone, but for others it works quite well. I think we should let people choose for themselves; let the people be.
Claire Parsons is a freshman philosophy major and a columnist for The Cardinal.
claire_parsons@louisvillecardinal.com
