[For those of you who have been playing along at home, I’ve said a few times here that I’m a Buddhist. I’ve drifted away from that over the last few years.]
Megan and I went to go see Bill Maher’s new documentary Religulous yesterday. I use the term “documentary” loosely here–it’s a documentary in the same vein as any of Michael Moore’s work. His viewpoint is clearly expressed, and anyone who disagrees with him is shown at their worst, mocked, and their words twisted–assuming they’re allowed to speak at all.
I consider myself to be an agnostic. I don’t like the connotations that come along with the word “atheist,” since to my mind it conjures the same sort of dogmatic certainties that exist within religion itself. It’s too easy to say “there is no God” or “there is a God.” They’re opposite sides of the same coin. If you’re willing to go to either extreme–and be absolutely certain of it, despite any evidence to the contrary–I find that to be frightening. If someone is able to show to me that God/Allah/Osiris/Quetzalcoatl is real, fine. I’m willing to accept the possibility that I’m wrong. But to believe anything so blindly as to refuse to take into account contradictory evidence is a sad thing to me. It means that the intellect has been completely defeated by dogma–that the person has shut down their capacity for rational thought and replaced it with what they believe to be the Truth.
That said, Bill Maher found ways to mock the interviewees he disagrees with, splice footage to remove any context from their remarks, and generally prove himself to be a self-important jackass. Even as someone who agrees with the major points of his movie–religion has no place in government; it enforces hatred and bigotry; it’s been hijacked for use as a club and a checkbook by corrupt leaders, it’s ludicrous gibberish–he lost me. If you’re preaching to the choir and lose the crowd, you really need to work on your sermon.
In a related matter, I’ve found out that I react to people speaking in tongues exactly the same as I would to someone with running sores on their face: with barely-restrained, polite horror and revulsion.
October 13, 2008 at 8:59 pm
Bill Maher was on “The Daily Show” where he explained that it was a humorous movie. He said, in the interest of time, that he focused on the footage they could do and in the vein that the religious right often attacks others to point out how ridiculous that kind of behavior is, but he knew the irony would be lost. He’s also got over 200 hours of footage he wants to turn it into a TV series to get discussions going on religion.
On atheism, it sounds more like you’re a secular humanist. That’s a position I often take because it causes less argument and explaining. When you attempt to be an atheist, you open yourself up to attack from every angle. It’s a group lower on the totem poll, almost, than being gay in societal layers. Obviously, I disagree that atheism as a philosophy is a dogma. I think it’s actually the more secure and rational point because there will never be any valid evidence that a god (or devil of other) exists. Magic is just science that hasn’t been understood, and godliness/religion is magic.
Too, I think religion is the point many people take because the idea of a chaotic universe is scary, unacceptable, and people need order (cause and effect) to general operate in their daily lives. However, because they cannot explain everything, or comprehend science on any serious level, and it takes too much time to think things through, people allow magical thinking to intervene and simply their lives, while providing reassurance.
And, like Bill Maher said on The Daily Show, his movie is partly to point out how little tolerance there is for differerings views by the 85% Christian majority in this country, and even outside that Christian majority and the rest of the world. Most wars can be traced to religious intolerance, bolstered by grabs for power and wealth. They have created an environment of intolerance while playing the victim constantly. Hanging themselves on crosses constantly as the victim when, in reality, they have all the power, prestige, and wealth. By creating this notion of the “liberal elite” they can shun intelligent debate and even open, friendly conversation about religion and push their mores on everyone else.