-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Rape or Religion?
- Thread starter Nakosis
- Start date
Source and context for the quote?
I pick rape....to get rid of, that is.
It's a stupid quote, imo. I think that the atmosphere that allows rape is a religion and that some religions can be likened to rape. But, if I really could eliminate one, it would be rape, of course. To choose to get rid of religion instead of rape is crazy. It just is.
If I could wave a magic wand and get rid of either rape or religion, I would not hesitate to get rid of religion. I think more people are dying as a result of our religious myths than as a result of any other ideology. I would not say that all human conflict is born of religion or religious differences, but for the human community to be fractured on the basis of religious doctrines that are fundamentally incompatible, in an age when nuclear weapons are proliferating, is a terrifying scenario.
- Sam Harris, in Saltman, Bethany (September 2006), "The Temple Of Reason", The Sun, ISSN 0744-9666, retrieved on 2012-09-30
I definitely don't agree with the comparison as stated, and I think it only serves to incite an emotional reaction by comparing two completely different things and effectively using rape as an emotional prop for a specific argument.
In my opinion, both rape and religion have done extreme harm to humanity, but that seems to me to be like saying "both nuclear weapons and tobacco have harmed humanity": the comparison is arbitrary and, as I said, only serves to draw an emotional reaction without any relevant or productive substance. They have caused different types of harm that aren't really comparable except in very specific contexts where they overlap.
If I had to get rid of one, though, it would be rape. Religion is conditionally harmful, no matter how harmful it can be, while rape is invariably so. I think in the hypothetical situation of having the option to get rid of one or the other, getting rid of rape should be a no-brainer.
Sam Harris, as far as I can see, is usually quite uncompromising and direct in the way he states his opinions, so when he's right, he's usually very much so, and when he's wrong, he's horribly, horribly wrong—and the quote in the OP is an example of the latter case.
I think that in all religions there exist checks and balances. So, yes, religion really does cause some serious problems, but religion also does a lot of good. Is there anything good about rape? I think not.
If I wanted to waste my time I would Change the Image to harvey wienstien or Bill cosby
Yeah, for all of the good things about the movement, it still has a markedly misogynistic element, unfortunately. I wish there were a movement that combined the uncompromising moral stances of "New Atheism" with the support for women's rights of liberals who don't necessarily oppose religion as vocally, if at all. Maybe someday there will be... hopefully.
Indeed yes, I agree. He is ignoring the good side of religion and only focusing on the bad side. And that quote demeans women as well - this latter point is more important.
It also demeans male victims of rape, who do exist despite the brushing aside of the issue of male rape by some people.
Whether you agree with him or not you won't be able to wave a magic wand and end either so why imagine it. I prefer to work towards real solutions.
I was a bit surprised myself when I came across this quote.
Usually I like Sam Harris. Can't really agree with him in this case. Not in any context.
Curious George
Veteran Member
Because rape is only for women? Or because rape is a women's issue?
There's no win, win here for religious folks.
Yes, same here, on both counts. I used to find such blunders from public intellectuals I usually agreed with disappointing until I just decided to have no expectations toward them and only take their opinions on a case-by-case basis.
I have a conspiracy theory about this....
Some secret atheist cabal (one I'm not invited to) created Harris as a Poe.
He serves the purpose of a lightning rod....attracting all the vitriol which
might otherwise rain down upon us more slack jawed atheists.
I find that he has sharply insightful and accurate comments about certain issues, though. Sometimes he's insanely wrong, but I've never thought of him as a Poe.