Jump to content
IndiaDivine.org

Animal sacrifice and religion

Rate this topic


Guest guest

Recommended Posts

Guest guest

Dear colleagues,

Dr Krishna contends that religion is not our foe in

tackling evils like animal sacrifice. I hereby append some information on

religion being the root cause behind all evils, including animal sacrifice.

This is what the zoologist and animal rights activist Dawkins has to say

about religion : " The time has come for people of reason to say: enough is

enough. Religious faith discourages independent thought, it's divisive, and

it's dangerous. " The Nepali king's animal sacrifice adheres to Dawkins's

proposition. Regards,

 

 

 

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Root_of_All_Evil%3F The Root of All

Evil? From

Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to:

navigation<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Root_of_All_Evil%3F#column-one>,

search <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Root_of_All_Evil%3F#searchInput>

For other uses, see Root of all

evil<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Root_of_all_evil>

..

*The Root of All Evil?* Produced by Alan

Clements<http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Alan_Clements & action=edit & red\

link=1>

Written by Richard Dawkins Starring Richard Dawkins,

Yousef al-Khattab,

Ted Haggard <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_Haggard>,

Richard Harries <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Harries>

Distributed by Channel 4 <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Channel_4>

Release date(s) January 2006

 

*The Root of All Evil?* is a television

documentary<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Documentary_film>,

written and presented by Richard

Dawkins<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Dawkins>,

in which he argues that the world would be better off without

religion<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion>

..

 

The documentary was first broadcast in January 2006, in the form of two

45-minute episodes (excluding advertisement breaks), on Channel

4<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Channel_4>in the

UK <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom>.

 

Dawkins has said that the title *The Root of All Evil?* was not his

preferred choice, but that Channel 4 had insisted on it to create

controversy.[1]<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Root_of_All_Evil%3F#cite_note-0\

>The

sole concession from the producers on the title was the addition of

the

question mark. Dawkins has stated that the notion of anything being the root

of *all* evil is

ridiculous.[2]<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Root_of_All_Evil%3F#cite_note-1>\

Dawkins's

book

*The God Delusion <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_God_Delusion>*, released

in September 2006, goes on to examine the topics raised in the documentary

in greater detail.

Contents[hide <javascript:toggleToc()>]

 

- 1 Part 1: The God

Delusion<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Root_of_All_Evil%3F#Part_1:_The_God_De\

lusion>

- 1.1

Lourdes<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Root_of_All_Evil%3F#Lourdes>

- 1.2 Faith versus

science<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Root_of_All_Evil%3F#Faith_versus_scienc\

e>

- 1.3 Colorado

Springs<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Root_of_All_Evil%3F#Colorado_Springs>

- 1.4

Jerusalem<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Root_of_All_Evil%3F#Jerusalem>

- 1.5 Russell's

teapot<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Root_of_All_Evil%3F#Russell.27s_teapot>

- 2 Part 2: The Virus of

Faith<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Root_of_All_Evil%3F#Part_2:_The_Virus_of_\

Faith>

- 2.1 Sectarian

education<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Root_of_All_Evil%3F#Sectarian_educati\

on>

- 2.2 Religion as a

virus<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Root_of_All_Evil%3F#Religion_as_a_virus>

- 2.3 Biblical

morality<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Root_of_All_Evil%3F#Biblical_morality>

- 2.4 Secular

morality<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Root_of_All_Evil%3F#Secular_morality>

- 3 Uncut

interviews<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Root_of_All_Evil%3F#Uncut_interviews\

>

- 4

Quotations<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Root_of_All_Evil%3F#Quotations>

- 5 Critical

reception<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Root_of_All_Evil%3F#Critical_receptio\

n>

- 6 See also<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Root_of_All_Evil%3F#See_also>

- 7

References<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Root_of_All_Evil%3F#References>

- 8 External

links<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Root_of_All_Evil%3F#External_links>

 

 

[edit<http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Root_of_All_Evil%3F & action=e\

dit & section=1>

] Part 1: The God Delusion

 

" The God Delusion " explores the unproven beliefs that are treated as factual

by many religions and the extremes to which some followers have taken them.

Dawkins opens the programme by describing the " would-be murderers . . . who

want to kill you and me, and themselves, because they're motivated by what

they think is the highest ideal. " Dawkins argues that " the process of

non-thinking called faith " is not a way of understanding the world, but

instead stands in fundamental opposition to modern

science<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science>and the scientific

method <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method>, and is divisive and

dangerous.

 

[edit<http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Root_of_All_Evil%3F & action=e\

dit & section=2>

] Lourdes <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Lourdes_Grotte.jpg>

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Lourdes_Grotte.jpg>

Pilgrims <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pilgrimage> at

Lourdes<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lourdes>

 

Dawkins first visits the shrine of

Lourdes<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lourdes>in southern

France <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/France>, where he joins a candlelit

procession of pilgrims singing, " Laudate Maria! " He is particularly struck

by the sense of group solidarity in their delusion (religion), which he

contrasts with the lonely delusion of believing that one is

Napoleon<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Napoleon_I_of_France>,

for example. At daybreak, Dawkins surveys the faithful queuing up for

healing water, and says that they are more likely to catch a disease than

find a cure. He speaks to an

Irish<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic_of_Ireland>woman who has

found the experience beneficial.

 

Dawkins then quizzes Father Liam Griffin about the number of miraculous

cures <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Our_Lady_of_Lourdes> which have taken

place over the years. Griffin reports 66 declared

miracles<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miracle>and about 2,000

unexplained cures (out of approximately 80,000 sick visitors

per year over more than a century) but claims that millions more have been

healed spiritually. Dawkins remains sceptical, and remarks afterwards that

nobody has ever reported the miraculous re-growing of a severed leg, the

'cures' invariably comprise afflictions that could have improved without any

spiritual intervention whatsoever.

 

[edit<http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Root_of_All_Evil%3F & action=e\

dit & section=3>

] Faith versus science

 

Dawkins continues with a discussion of what he sees as a conflict between

faith <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faith> and

science<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science>.

He points out that science involves a process of constantly testing and

revising theories <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory> in the light of new

evidence, while faith makes a virtue out of believing unprovable and often

improbable propositions. For an example of faith, Dawkins takes the

infallible <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papal_infallibility> doctrine of

the Assumption <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assumption_of_Mary>, which Pope

Pius XII <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Pius_XII> declared in 1950 by

relying upon tradition <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tradition>. He

contrasts this with the scientific

method<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method>,

which he describes as a system whereby working

assumptions<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypothesis>may be

falsified <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falsifiability> by recourse to

reason <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reason> and

evidence<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence>.

Dawkins provides an example from his

undergraduate<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Undergraduate_education>study,

when a visiting researcher disproved a hypothesis of a professor, who

accepted the outcome with " My dear fellow, I wish to thank you, I have been

wrong these fifteen years. "

 

Dawkins then considers a scientific theory of great significance to

him – Charles

Darwin <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Darwin>'s theory of

evolution<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution>– which he discusses

by reference to his Mount

Improbable <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climbing_Mount_Improbable> analogy.

The notion that the full complexity of life emerged either through blind

chance or by the hand of an intelligent

designer<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligent_designer>,

he likens to leaping up the sheer face of a mountain in one bound. By

contrast, he suggests that Darwin's theory of design by natural

selection<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_selection>provides an

explanation which is akin to climbing a mountain gradually, via

a gentle gradient. Dawkins also comments that the design hypothesis raises

another question: who made the designer?

 

[edit<http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Root_of_All_Evil%3F & action=e\

dit & section=4>

] Colorado Springs

 

Next, Dawkins visits Colorado

Springs<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colorado_Springs%2C_Colorado>to

discuss the rise of fundamentalist

Christianity <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamentalist_Christianity> in

the United States <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States>. He visits

the New Life Church<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Life_Church%2C_Colorado>,

an $18 million worship centre where Pastor Ted

Haggard<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_Haggard>at the time presided

over a 14,000 strong congregation. Haggard was at the

time chairman of the National Association of

Evangelicals<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Association_of_Evangelicals>a\

nd,

according to Dawkins, Haggard said he had a weekly conference call

with

United States President George W.

Bush<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_W._Bush>

..[3] <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Root_of_All_Evil%3F#cite_note-2>

 

Dawkins interviews Haggard and begins by likening the worship experience to

a Nuremberg Rally <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuremberg_Rally> of which

Goebbels <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Goebbels> might have been

proud. Haggard says he knows nothing of the Nuremberg Rallies and goes on to

say that some evangelicals think of his services as something akin to rock

concerts <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rock_concert>. Haggard said the Bible

is true and doesn't contradict itself as science does. Dawkins contends that

the advantage of science is that new evidence changes ideas, allowing the

advancement of human knowledge, something religion does not allow. Steadily

the exchanges become increasingly fractious.

 

Haggard says that American

evangelicals<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evangelicalism>fully embrace

the scientific

method <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method>, expecting it to

show how God created the heavens and the earth. Dawkins asks if he accepts

the scientific demonstration that the earth is 4.5 billion years

old<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_the_Earth>.

According to Haggard, this is merely one view accepted by a portion of the

scientific community. He goes on to contend that Dawkins's own grandchildren

may laugh at him upon hearing this claim. Dawkins responds " do you want to

bet? " Haggard insists that some

evolutionists<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolutionism>think that the

ear or eye " happened by accident " and that " the eye just

formed itself somehow. " Dawkins replies that not a single evolutionary

biologist he knows would say that, and that Haggard clearly knows nothing

about the subject. In response Haggard implies that some evolutionists he's

met have said that. The meeting takes a markedly contentious turn with

Haggard asserting that " this issue " of " intellectual arrogance " is the

reason why people like Dawkins, and others who dispute creationism, have a

problem with people of faith. This scene ends with Haggard telling Dawkins

that as he [Dawkins] ages he will find himself " wrong on some things, right

on some other things " , and so he shouldn't be arrogant.

 

As Dawkins and his film crew pack up to leave, there is a brief altercation

in the car park. It is reported that Haggard ordered Dawkins's crew off his

land with threats of legal action and confiscation of their recording

hardware, along with the statement " you called my children animals. " Dawkins

retrospectively interprets this as saying that the evolutionary standpoint

indeed amounts to saying that Haggard's flock were animals, which all humans

are.

 

Dawkins then attends a meeting of

freethinkers<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freethought>,

where a biology <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biology> teacher reveals that

he has been labelled " Satan <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satan>'s

incarnate " for teaching evolution, and another freethinker compares the

present situation to the McCarthy era<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCarthyism>

..

 

[edit<http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Root_of_All_Evil%3F & action=e\

dit & section=5>

] Jerusalem <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Dome_of_the_rock_distance.jpg>

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Dome_of_the_rock_distance.jpg>

Jerusalem <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerusalem> – the Dome of the

Rock<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dome_of_the_Rock>

 

Finally, Dawkins visits Jerusalem <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerusalem>,

which he regards as a microcosm of everything that is wrong with

religion<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion>.

He is taken on a guided tour of the Church of the Holy

Sepulchre<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_of_the_Holy_Sepulchre>.

This church is considered by some

Christians<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christians>to be the site of

the

crucifixion <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crucifixion> and burial of

Jesus<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus>.

Dawkins comments on what he calls the " edgy watchfulness " in the Old

City<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerusalem%27s_Old_City_walls>.

One area in particular lies under heavy guard: the Temple

Mount<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temple_Mount>,

enclosing both the Al-Aqsa

Mosque<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Aqsa_Mosque>and the Dome

of the Rock <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dome_of_the_Rock>. The same ground

is also the site of the ancient Jewish Holy

Temple<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temple_in_Jerusalem>,

which has been a source of tension between the religious communities.

 

Dawkins listens to people from both sides of the

divide<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli-Palestinian_conflict>–

first, Jewish representative Yisrael Medad and then, the Grand

Mufti <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Mufti> of

Palestine<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestine>,

Sheikh Ekrima Sa'id Sabri<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ekrima_Sa%27id_Sabri>

..[4] <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Root_of_All_Evil%3F#cite_note-3> The

two sides appear irreconcilable. Hoping to meet someone who might be able to

see both viewpoints, Dawkins interviews Yousef

al-Khattab<http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Yousef_al-Khattab & action=ed\

it & redlink=1>,

formerly Joseph Cohen, an American-born

Jew<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jew>who came to

Israel <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel> as a settler before converting

to Islam <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam>. After offering Dawkins a

cheerful welcome, al-Khattab explains his views relating to the decadence of

Western <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_world> values.

 

Al-Khattab has two major concerns. Firstly, he wants all the

non-Muslims<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kafir>off the lands

of

Muhammad<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divisions_of_the_world_in_Islam#Dar_al-Isl\

am>.

Secondly, he is concerned about the manner in which women are dressed. He

doesn't want to see women dressed " like

whores<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prostitution>, "

as he puts it, or " bouncing around on television

topless<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toplessness>. "

When asked for his thoughts on the September 11

attacks<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_11%2C_2001_attacks>,

he traces the blame back to the creation of the state of

Israel<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel>.

He also takes the opportunity to advise Great Britain to " Get your forces

off our lands, fix your society, and fix your women. "

 

Al-Khattab later criticized the way his comments were edited for this

documentary, saying his comments were used out of

context.[5]<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Root_of_All_Evil%3F#cite_note-4>

 

[edit<http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Root_of_All_Evil%3F & action=e\

dit & section=6>

] Russell's teapot

 

Dawkins rounds off this episode with a presentation of Bertrand

Russell<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bertrand_Russell>'s

celestial teapot <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell%27s_teapot> analogy.

He argues that just because science

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science>has not yet answered every

conceivable question about the

universe <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universe>, there is no need to turn

to faith <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faith>, which has never answered

anything of significance.

 

[edit<http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Root_of_All_Evil%3F & action=e\

dit & section=7>

] Part 2: The Virus of Faith

 

In " The Virus of Faith " , Dawkins opines that the moral

framework<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morality>of

religions <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion> is warped, and argues

against the religious indoctrination of children. The title of this episode

comes from *The Selfish Gene <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Selfish_Gene>

*, in which Dawkins discussed the concept of

memes<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meme>

..

 

[edit<http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Root_of_All_Evil%3F & action=e\

dit & section=8>

] Sectarian education

 

Dawkins discusses what he considers as the divisive influence of sectarian

education <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parochial_school>, with children

segregated and labelled by their religion. He describes the Hasidic

Jewish<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hasidic_Judaism>community of North

London <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_London> as cloistered away from

external influences such as television, with children attending exclusive

religious schools. He questions Rabbi Herschel Gluck to find if their

culture allows children to access scientific ideas.

 

Gluck believes that it is important for a minority group to have a space in

which to learn and express their culture and beliefs. Dawkins states that he

would prefer traditions taught without imposing demonstrable falsehoods.

Gluck emphasises that although the students believe that God created the

world in six literal days <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creationism> and

have studied evolution <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution> in school,

the majority will not believe in it when they leave the school. Gluck

contrasts the tradition of Judaism with scientists who " have their

tradition " . Dawkins`s facial expression at this point seems to suggest he is

taken aback[*citation

needed<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citation_needed>

*] at the assertion that science is based solely on " tradition " . Gluck then

goes on to contend that it's called the " theory of evolution " rather than

the " law of

evolution " .[6]<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Root_of_All_Evil%3F#cite_note-5>\

When

Dawkins points out that the term is used in a technical sense and

describes evolution as a fact, Gluck suggests he's a " fundamentalist

believer " . However, when Dawkins asks Gluck how many children from his

school have grown up believing in evolution, Gluck is lost for words, and

eventually admits that most of them probably don't.

 

Dawkins expresses concern about increasing religious influence in British

schools with over 7,000 faith schools already and the government encouraging

more, so over half of the new City

Academies<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academy_%28England%29>are

expected to be sponsored by religious organisations. He says that the

most worrying development is a new wave of private Evangelical schools that

have adopted the American Baptist Accelerated Christian

Education<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accelerated_Christian_Education>curriculu\

m,

and as an example calls on Phoenix Academy in

London

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London>.[7]<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Root_\

of_All_Evil%3F#cite_note-6>Dawkins

is shown around the school by head teacher Adrian Hawkes and remarks

on how the teaching material appears to mention

God<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God>or

Jesus <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus> on almost every page; such as a

reference to Noah's Ark <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noah%27s_Ark> in a

science <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science> textbook. Hawkes responds by

saying that the stories could have a lot to do with science if you believe

in them, and that the science he was taught at school is laughable today. As

an example, he mentions that he was taught that the moon came from the

Earth's ocean and was " somehow flung out into space " during the early years

of the Earth's life. Dawkins says that it should have been presented as a

strong current

theory.[8]<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Root_of_All_Evil%3F#cite_note-7>Anot\

her

lesson talks about

AIDS <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AIDS> as being the " wages of sin " , so

Dawkins inquires whether this might not be mixing health

education<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_education>with

moralistic preaching. Hawkes responds that without a law-giver, " Why

is

rape wrong? Why is paedophilia wrong? " and that if people believe they can

get away with committing bad deeds then they will tend to do them. Dawkins

responds to this claim by asking Hawkes if the only reason he doesn't do

these things is that he's frightened of God and subsequently suggests that

this attitude is characteristic of the warped morality that religion tends

to instil in people.

 

[edit<http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Root_of_All_Evil%3F & action=e\

dit & section=9>

] Religion as a virus

 

Next, Dawkins discusses specifically the idea of

religion<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion>seen as a

virus <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virus> in the sense of a

meme<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meme>.

He begins by explaining how a child is genetically programmed to believe

without questioning the word of authority figures, especially parents – the

evolutionary imperative being that no child would survive by adopting a

sceptical attitude towards everything their elders said. But this same

imperative, he claims, leaves children open to " infection " by religion.

 

Dawkins meets the psychologist Jill Mytton who suffered an abusive religious

upbringing in the Exclusive

Brethren<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exclusive_Brethren>

[9] <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Root_of_All_Evil%3F#cite_note-8> – she

now helps to rehabilitate similarly affected children. Mytton explains how,

for a child, images of hell fire <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hell> are in

no sense metaphorical, but instead inspire real terror. She portrays her own

childhood as one " dominated by fear. " When pressed by Dawkins to describe

the realities of Hell, Mytton hesitates, explaining that the images of

eternal damnation which she absorbed as a child still have the power to

affect her now.

 

Then Dawkins visits Pastor Keenan Roberts, who has been running the Hell

House <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hell_house> Outreach programme for 15

years, producing theatre shows aimed at giving children of twelve or older

an indelible impression that " sin destroys " . We see rehearsal scenes

depicting doctors forcing an

abortion<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion>on a woman despite her

changing her mind, and a

lesbian <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lesbian> gay

marriage<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Same-sex_marriage>ceremony

presided over by

Satan <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satan> in which the women swear to

" never believe that you are normal " and Satan cites First

Corinthians<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Epistle_to_the_Corinthians>6

as God saying homosexuality equals sin. Roberts absolutely and

unapologetically believes the scriptures about sin, and when Dawkins

questions this basis for morality, replies that it is a faith issue.

 

[edit<http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Root_of_All_Evil%3F & action=e\

dit & section=10>

] Biblical morality

 

Next, Dawkins questions whether the

Bible<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bible>really does provide a

suitable moral

framework <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morality>, and contends that the

texts are of dubious origin and veracity, are internally contradictory and,

examined closely, describe a system of morals that any civilised person

should find

poisonous.[10]<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Root_of_All_Evil%3F#cite_note-9>\

He

describes the Old

Testament <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Testament> as the root of

Judaism, Christianity and Islam; and, as example, readings are given of

Deuteronomy <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deuteronomy> 13 which instructs

believers to kill any friend or family member who favours serving other

gods, and Numbers <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Numbers> 31 where

Moses <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moses>, angered at the mercy his

victorious forces show in taking women and children captive, instructs them

to kill all save virgin girls, who are to be taken as slaves: an act Dawkins

describes as genocide. Dawkins also questions another story from

Judges<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Judges>19 in which a

lesser character, an old man, offers his maiden daughter out

to an angry mob of " wicked men " to be

raped<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raped>and humiliated to save his

male guest from being raped by the " wicked men " .

In Dawkins's opinion, the Old Testament God must be the most unpleasant

character in all fiction.

 

Dawkins then discusses the New

Testament<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Testament>which, at first,

he describes as being a huge improvement from the moral

viewpoint. But he is repelled by what he calls St

Paul<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_of_Tarsus>'s

nasty sadomasochistic <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sadomasochism> doctrine

that Jesus <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus> had to be hideously tortured

and killed so that we might be redeemed – the doctrine of

atonement<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atonement>for original

sin <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Original_sin> – and asks " if God wanted to

forgive our sins, why not just forgive them? Who is God trying to impress? "

He says that modern science shows that the alleged perpetrators Adam

and Eve<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_and_Eve>never even existed,

undermining St Paul's doctrine.

 

Dawkins then interviews Michael

Bray<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Bray>who interprets the

Bible literally – he would like to see capital

punishment <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment> enforced for

the sin of adultery <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adultery>, for instance.

Bray was a friend of Paul

Hill<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Jennings_Hill>,

who was executed in 2003 for murdering a doctor who performed

abortion<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion>and the doctor's

escort, James Barrett. Bray defends Hill's actions and

speculates that he is now " doing well " in

Heaven<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heaven>.

Later, Dawkins converses with his friend Richard

Harries<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Harries%2C_Baron_Harries_of_Pentreg\

arth>,

the former Bishop of Oxford

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bishop_of_Oxford>and a liberal

Anglican <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglicanism>. Harries sees the

scriptures as texts which should be read in the context of the time they

were written, and interpreted in the light of modern insights. Dawkins asks

Harries about his attitude towards

miracles<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miracle>– does he believe in the

Virgin

Birth <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virgin_Birth>, for instance? It's not

" on a par with " the

resurrection<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resurrection_of_Jesus>,

says Harries.

 

[edit<http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Root_of_All_Evil%3F & action=e\

dit & section=11>

] Secular morality

 

Finally, Dawkins searches for an explanation of

morality<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morality>based upon evolutionary

biology <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolutionary_biology>, which he

considers more hopeful than ancient texts. Together with the evolutionary

psychologist <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolutionary_psychology> Oliver

Curry<http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Oliver_Curry & action=edit & redlink\

=1>,

he discusses the primordial morality to be found among

chimpanzees<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chimpanzee>.

Curry explains his view that we don't need religion to explain morality and

if anything it simply gets in the way. Instead, he claims, a more convincing

explanation is to be found in the concepts of reciprocal

altruism<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reciprocal_altruism>and kin

selection <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kin_selection>.

 

After briefly addressing the rise of

secular<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secularism>values, Dawkins goes

on to discuss morality with the novelist Ian

McEwan <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ian_McEwan>. McEwan takes as his

starting point the mortality of human life, which he says should naturally

lead to a morality based on empathy <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empathy>

one which he claims should confer upon us a clear sense of responsibility

for our brief span on earth.

 

Dawkins finishes by arguing that atheism is not a recipe for despair but

just the opposite; rather than viewing life as a trial that must be endured

before reaching a mythical hereafter, an atheist sees this life as all we

have, and by disclaiming a next life can take more excitement in this one.

Atheism, Dawkins concludes, is life-affirming in a way that religion can

never be.

 

[edit<http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Root_of_All_Evil%3F & action=e\

dit & section=12>

] Uncut interviews

 

Many of the interviews used in *The Root of All Evil?* were compiled on a

three-disk DVD set entitled *The Root of All Evil? The Uncut Interviews*.

Dawkins introduces the DVD by saying, " the full interview where you saw

people's hesitations and slowings-down and pauses for thought were revealing

and, I thought, fascinating. " The footage included on the DVDs includes

interviews with Jill Mytton, Ian McEwan, Bishop Harries, Michael Bray, the

cast and director of Hell House, Alister McGrath, Adrian Hawkes and Rabbi

Gluck. The Yousef al-Khattab and Ted Haggard interviews were not included

for legal reasons.

 

[edit<http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Root_of_All_Evil%3F & action=e\

dit & section=13>

] Quotations " The time has come for people of reason to say: enough is

enough. Religious faith discourages independent thought, it's divisive, and

it's dangerous. " " For many people, part of growing up is killing off the

virus of faith with a good strong dose of rational thinking. But if an

individual doesn't succeed in shaking it off, his mind is stuck in a

permanent state of infancy, and there is a real danger that he will infect

the next generation. " " The god of the Old Testament has got to be the

most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it, petty,

vindictive, unjust, unforgiving, racist, an ethnic-cleanser urging his

people on to acts of genocide. " " Fundamentalist Christianity is on the

rise among the electorate of the world's only superpower, right up to and

including the President. If you believe the surveys, 45 percent of

Americans, that's about 135 million people, believe the universe is less

than ten thousand years old. " " We are all

atheists<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheism>about most of the gods

that societies have ever believed in. Some of us just

go one god further. " " We are going to die, and that makes us the lucky

ones. Most people are never going to die, because they are never going to be

born. The number of people who could be here in my place outnumbers the sand

grains of Sahara <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sahara_desert>. If you think

about all the different ways our genes could be

permuted<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permutation>,

you and I are quite grotesquely lucky to be here: the number of events that

had to happen in order for you to exist, in order for me to exist. We are

privileged to be alive and we should make the most of our time on this

world. "

 

[edit<http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Root_of_All_Evil%3F & action=e\

dit & section=14>

] Critical reception

 

Writing in the *New Statesman <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Statesman>*,

Dawkins stated that Channel 4's correspondence in response to the

documentary had been running at two to one in

favour.[11]<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Root_of_All_Evil%3F#cite_note-diary\

-10>Journalists

including Howard

Jacobson <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Howard_Jacobson> had accused Dawkins

of giving voice to

extremists,[12]<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Root_of_All_Evil%3F#cite_note-1\

1>a

claim Dawkins responded to by noting that the National

Association of

Evangelicals<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Association_of_Evangelicals>h\

as

some 30 million members, and also that he had invited the main UK

religious leaders to participate, but they all

declined.[11]<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Root_of_All_Evil%3F#cite_note-dia\

ry-10>However,

Alister

McGrath <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alister_McGrath>, a Professor of

Historical Theology at Oxford University, was interviewed for the program,

but was not included in the

documentary.[13]<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Root_of_All_Evil%3F#cite_note-\

12>McGrath

claimed to have made Dawkins " appear uncomfortable " with his

explanations of religious belief and the implication, made by McGrath, was

that Dawkins's program showed journalistic dishonesty. In a lecture at City

Church of San

Francisco<http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=City_Church_of_San_Francisco\

& action=edit & redlink=1>McGrath

said that his interview was cut because he said things that did not

promote the message that Dawkins and the producers wanted to get

across.[14]<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Root_of_All_Evil%3F#cite_note-13>Th\

e

footage of this interview has been made available for public scrutiny.

[15] <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Root_of_All_Evil%3F#cite_note-14>.

However, this interview, together with other interviews not shown in the

programme " The Root of All Evil? " , was released in the DVD " Root of All

Evil? The Uncut

Inverviews " .[16]<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Root_of_All_Evil%3F#cite_note-\

15>

 

The religious journalist Madeleine

Bunting<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madeleine_Bunting>produced a

scathing review for

*The Guardian <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Guardian>*, in which she

described the documentary as " a piece of intellectually lazy polemic not

worthy of a great

scientist. " [17]<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Root_of_All_Evil%3F#cite_note-1\

6>In

*The Tablet <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Tablet>*, Keith

Ward<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keith_Ward>criticised Dawkins for

what he considered to be an indiscriminate and

simplistic approach to

religion.[18]<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Root_of_All_Evil%3F#cite_note-17>\

But

praise came from Johann

Hari <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johann_Hari> for *The

Independent<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Independent>

*, who said " We have never needed Richard Dawkins more than

now. " [19]<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Root_of_All_Evil%3F#cite_note-18>

 

In a video log posted on YouTube <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/YouTube>,

Youssef Al Khattab alleges that the producers altered and misconstrued the

interview with him which resulted in irrational answers to Dawkins's

seemingly rational

questions.[20]<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Root_of_All_Evil%3F#cite_note-19\

>

 

Professor Keith Ward <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keith_Ward>'s book *Is

Religion Dangerous? <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Is_Religion_Dangerous%3F>*,

responding to the Dawkins programme, analyses the claim that religion does

more harm than good and suggests that " such assertions ... ignore the

available evidence... and substitute rhetoric for analysis " .

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...