From: mathew@mantis.co.uk (mathew)
Newsgroups: alt.atheism.moderated
Subject: TV vs Religion
Date: 23 Sep 92 08:43:20 GMT
Organization: Mantis Consultants, Cambridge. UK.

A couple of nights ago Channel 4 showed a religious programme with a
difference.  It was presented by secular humanists, and aimed to present the
case *against* religion.

Britain still has a state church and TV companies are required to show some
Christian programmes on Sundays -- although mercifully they don't have to
show *only* programmes deemed "Christian".

As a result, this new departure was deemed sufficiently radical and dangerous
that it was preceded by a warning from the continuity announcer.  This at
11pm.  However, unpeturbed by the prospect of "forthright views", I proceeded
to watch the programme.

It took the form of a courtroom, with "prosecution" (various humanists) and
"defence" (assorted theists from the major religions).  Both sides were given
equal time to air their views, and were allowed to cross-examine the
witnesses for the opposing side.  (Interesting to compare this presentation
with the degree of even-handedness shown on Christian TV shows.)

The first programme was about "Love and Sex".  The humanists made the usual
points:

1. Religions such as Catholicism prohibit contraception, helping to cause
   overpopulation and suffering

2. Religions such as Judaism and Christianity denigrate women -- Jewish men
   thank God "for not making me a woman", and the Church of England still
   does not allow women priests.

3. Many religions encourage their followers to mutilate young girls in
   horrific and painful circumcision rituals, as part of their "historical
   culture".  (That was the phrase used by a Moslem who tried to argue that
   it wasn't Islam doing it, it was Islam's historical culture.)  They showed
   a sickening film of this ritual.

4. Religions cause endless suffering to homosexuals, who are persecuted for
   their "deviance".  (Unless they're CofE clergy, of course, in which case
   they just get moved to a different parish whenever they're caught
   molesting little boys.)

5. There are plenty of alternative ways to reason about morality from a
   humanist viewpoint and provide moral guidance (but not orders) that young
   people can follow.  (This was put across eloquently by Claire Rayner, the
   agony aunt.)

The religious case was rather wishy-washy.  They said:

1. Religion is a power for good, through religious hospitals and charities.

2. The people who do bad aren't *real* Christians/Moslems/Jews, they're just
   using the religion as an excuse.

In cross-examination, the humanists pointed out that they couldn't have it
both ways.  If they weren't going to take responsibility for the evil done in
the name of religion, surely they couldn't take responsibility for the good
done in the name of religion?

3. Religion provides comfort to many people.

4. A doctor told a tear-jerker about how when he treats sick babies he
   pretends they're the baby Jesus, and how this helps him.

In cross-examination, he (amongst others) was asked about his views on
contraception.  He and the others were in favour.  But, pointed out the
humanists, the Catholic church says it is against God's will.  That's a
direct contradiction.  If God can't put across a non-contradictory message,
how are we supposed to follow his commandments?  None of the theists seemed
to have an answer.

The humanists also showed film of soldiers praying for the souls of people
they had just murdered.  Was that an example of God and religion helping them
to murder without guilt?  The theists sat in awkward silence for a while,
until the prosecution realised it wasn't going to get an answer.

Ultimately, it was a thought-provoking programme, although anyone who reads
alt.atheism will have encountered all the arguments before.  The one low
point was when the theists summed up and said that obviously they couldn't
defend the record of the Crusaders, any more than the prosecution could
defend the record of secular humanists such as Adolf Hitler.  I suppose they
haven't read the FAQ file.


mathew
-- 
Bush/Quayle in '92!
God Bless America!
God Bless Family Values!