Simply Blogical

English writer, journalist, Oxford graduate, and public intellectual, Christopher Hitchens, is widely recognized for his involvement in the modern expansion of atheism. Hitchens has recently released his newest book titled god is not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything. Not only has he captured the eyes of the public through his books, but also through his appearances on talk shows, lecture circuits, and his columns on many publications such as Vanity Fair and World Affairs. Hitchens’ stance on the topic of religion is evident after observing the name of his book.

So how does religion poison everything? Hitchens states that religion is the root cause for an innumerable amount atrocious acts, which have been carried out throughout history and continue today; from countless wars, to rituals like the hacking away at the genitals of newborn children. The Bible commands such horrid things, which are often overlooked (knowingly?), such as genocide, slavery, racism, and the list goes on and on. Whereas people see the bible as a dictionary for morality, Hitchens sees it as a collection of irrational, meaningless rubbish, whose existence is a shame to even exist as it makes the whole world a dramatically worse place.

I share many personal opinions with Hitchens. I feel that it is a shame that the Bible’s “lessons” have been so highly cherished, because the ethics that it teaches are less than special. In fact, I would call many of the ethics that it commands flat out evil (i.e. murdering of anyone who does not belong to your religion, slavery, selling children as sex slaves, the list goes on). I find it interesting how people choose to overlook some commands (like not eating shellfish) but to focus on others (like prohibiting homosexual acts). I do not understand how some bright people could take such a poorly structured set of rules, written in a book of contradictions, so seriously.

Most of the ethical lessons in the bible revolve around stripping freedoms from someone in the name of God, whether it is stripping someone else of their freedoms, or sacrificing one's own to benefit another; both are immoral. Life is a limited resource, and I believe that the closest thing to a “meaning” in life is to get as much enjoyment out of it as possible during the time one can. Everyone should live in a way in which they are provided with the greatest overall opportunity for happiness. The only basic requirement for living this way is for every individual to pursue their own self-interests while not violating the individual rights of others.

The “ethics” that the bible teaches preach the stripping of freedoms from individuals. An example of this would be on the issue of gay marriage. When people decide to get married, it does not violate anyone’s rights; therefore there is no reason why it shouldn’t be permissible. I believe that the commanding of self-sacrifice is evil. During one’s life, they should live life for themselves, and not for the sake of others. One should get as much enjoyment out of life before his or her time is up, and not live life as a slave in hopes of being happier in an afterlife. By all means, if acting altruistically is in one’s self-interest, then they should do so, but forcing that decision upon someone else is a different story.

Disgustingly, religion has underhandedly crept itself into the concept of morality for most Americans, and many don’t even know it. At first, even I was having trouble comprehending the idea that self-sacrifice was a bad thing, which was due to my cultural surroundings growing up. These toxic religious ethics are slowly flowing through the citizens and into the state, thanks to the flawed system of democracy. The public sees that the Republican Party’s social policies are affected by religion in the form of prohibiting freedoms from certain individuals (i.e. homosexual marriage), but people overlook that the Democratic Party is just as effected. The only difference between the Democratic and the Republican party lays in which freedoms they are taking away; in the Democrats case, they are for the welfare state; i.e. self-sacrifice; i.e. slavery.