According to Richard Dawkins, society has erected an "abnormally thick wall of respect" for religion that needs to be lowered - if not brought down altogether.
Richard Dawkins, in his bestselling The God Delusion, argues that religion has received undeserved respect in our society. As Dawkins explains:
A widespread assumption, which nearly everybody in our society accepts - the non-religious included - is that religious faith is especially vulnerable to offence and should be protected by an abnormally thick wall of respect, in a different class of the respect that any human being should pay to any other.
This issue is perhaps even more on the minds of folks as at least some in America are mourning the death of the Reverend Jerry Falwell, a nationally (if not world) famous televangelist, megachurch pastor, and "Religious Right" leader.
Though I believe that TIMING and TASTE are called for in the criticism of ANY person (public or private), I am sympathetic with Mr. Dawkins on this point. Religion should not be off-limits to inquiry and scrutiny. The Apostle Paul agreed when he urged the Christian church in Thessalonica to "examine everything carefully" and "hold fast to that which is good." (I Thessalonians 5:21)
What's more, the criticism of religion should not invite physical threats or violence. Dawkins is, in my opinion, at his best in talking about the uproar, riotings, and death bounties which stemmed from the Danish cartoons depicting Muhammad in an unflattering light. Dawkins rightly regards that case as a "ludicrous episode, which veered wildly to the extremes of comedy and tragedy."
Dawkins and I, however, part ways pretty much from that point forward.
At one point, he writes: "I'm not suggesting that we should go out of our way to censor the views of [religious people]. But why does our society beat a path to their door, as though they had some expertise comparable to that of, say, a moral philosopher, a family lawyer or a doctor?"
Probably only a few readers will find this question ironic. ALL readers should. Consider that a lawyer is an expert in..what? If you said "law," very good. What's the law based upon? Follow that question back far enough and you will find religion somewhere at the root.
No legal scholar will dispute that America's legal system is heavily inspired and influenced by British legal commentator William Blackstone, who was overtly religious in his writings. Religion in fact permeated and defined Blackstone's famous Commentaries on the Laws of England.
Dawkins also acknowledges moral philosophers, but where does morality come from? George Washington famously warned in his Farewell Address that you can't have one without the other. Said the Father of our Country:
[L]et us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.
Does this mean atheists are all immoral? No. But it DOES mean that atheism undermines the very foundation of morality.
But even if you DISAGREE with the Father of America - and believe that religion has no bearing on morality whatsoever....it is STILL ludicrous to allow only non-religious moral philosophers to the public policy table.
The overwhelming majority of "moral philosophers" in human history have been religious. Why should atheist (or anti-supernatural) moral philosophers be automatically preferred over religious ones?
Bottom line...Dawkins starts off with a valid point. A person shouldn't be able to use religion as a Monopoly player uses a "Get out of Jail Free" card. In other words, when a person cites religion, that shouldn't end the conversation and/or remove their views from scrutiny.
But Richard Dawkins is wrong that any reference to religion or religious conviction should be ruled out of order. In saying so, he goes way too far. Going too far with his arguments, of course, is something Dawkins does very well in his book. In fact, that more or less sums up The God Delusion!
