Rhetoric Race and Religion
We are at a moment in history where it is clear that new religions are going to be created in a big way. The growing 20 percent of Americans with no religious affiliation may not want new religions, but the existence of such a huge market of potential converts to something other than the traditional choices guarantees that people will be inventing new religions to win these converts like never before. The last 80 years have been unprecedented in humanity’s generation of new religions already, and we are on the verge of something much bigger than that.
The market for new religions is so hot at the moment that atheists are getting into the act. Alain de Botton’s 2012 book “Religion for Atheists” exhorts nonbelievers to replicate the comforts of religion–the choirs, the beautiful architecture, the mutual aid and charity, rituals to mourn the dead–without all the faith claptrap. The Sunday Assembly and Jerry De Witt’s atheist church are two efforts that have received recent press. I am personally more sympathetic to Religious Naturalism or the Spiritual Naturalist Society, but I applaud all these developments, being an atheist who is particularly friendly toward religion in general. But I worry that some of the new religions or quasi-religions in the works may replicate some of the worst qualities of the old ones.
To my mind there is one measure by which religions can be judged that is arguably more important than all others: does it truly treat other religions and non-religious belief systems with respect and friendliness, refraining entirely from claiming that it holds exclusive or privileged access to the truth? This measure, I posit, is most important because without it, any claim that a religion makes to universal love, brotherhood, humanity, etc., is contradicted by the attitude its believers will take towards others with different beliefs.
Read the rest here
Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In