Prejudice, Criticism of Religion, criticism of monotheism and other Wikipedia pages

Religious liberalism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search



 This article possibly contains original research. Please improve it by verifying the claims made and adding inline citations. Statements consisting only of original research should be removed. (January 2015)
Religious liberalism is a form of approach to religion which is critical, rationalistic or humanistic.[1] It is an attitude towards one's own religion (as opposed to criticism of religion from a secular position, or criticism of a religion other than one's own) which contrasts with a traditionalist or orthodox approach, and it is directly opposed by trends of religious fundamentalism.
"Liberalism" is here used in the sense of classical liberalism as it developed in the Enlightenment era, which forms the starting point of both religious and political liberalism, but religious liberalism does not necessarily coincide with "liberalism" in its various contemporary meanings in political philosophy. Attempts to show a link between religious liberal and political liberal adherents have proved inconclusive in a 1973 study,[clarification needed][2] Usage of "liberalism" in the context of religious philosophy began to be established in the first part of the 20th century; in 1936, Edward Scribner Ames wrote in his article 'Liberalism in Religion' "The term "liberalism" seems to be developing a religious usage which gives it growing significance… sharply contrasted with fundamentalism… [which describes] a relatively uncritical attitude." [3]
Religious liberalism is ultimately based in the attempt to reconcile pre-modern religious tradition with modernity. This project is, of course, contentious, and is challenged both by traditionalist religionists, who reject the idea that that tenets of modernity should have any impact on religious tradition, and by secularists, who reject the idea that implementation of rationalistic or critical thought leaves any room for religion altogether. Liberal Christianity is an umbrella term for the developments in Christian theology and culture since the Enlightenment since the late 18th century. It is now mostly mainstream within the major Christian denominations in the Western World, but is opposed by a movement of Christian fundamentalism which developed in response to these trends, and also contrasts with conservative forms of Christianity outside of the Western world and the reach of Enlightenment philosophy and modernism, mostly within Eastern Christianity. The Roman Catholic Church in particular has a long tradition of controversy regarding questions of religious liberalism. Cardinal John Henry Newman, for example, was seen as moderately liberal by 19th-century standards because he was critical of papal infallibility, but he was still explicitly opposed to "liberalism in religion" because he argued it would lead to complete relativism.[4] A similar argument was voiced in the 20th century by (Anglican) Christian apologist C. S. Lewis, who argued that "theology of the liberal type" amounted to a complete re-invention of Christianity and a rejection of Christianity as understood by its own founders. [5]
Alongside the development of liberal theology in Christianity, German-Jewish religious Reformers began to incorporate critical thought and humanist ideas into Judaism from the early 19th century. This resulted in the creation of various non-Orthodox denominations, from the moderately liberal Conservative Judaism to ultra-liberal Reform Judaism (North America) and Liberal Judaism. The moderate wing of Modern Orthodox Judaism, especially Open Orthodoxy, espouses a similar approach.
While Christianity and Judaism in the western world had to deal with modernity since its emergence in the 18th century, or even since the Renaissance and its consequences of Reformation and Counter-Reformation, Islam along with Jewish and Christian traditions in the Middle East was not immediately affected by modernity and Enlightenment thought. Such liberal movements within Islam as there are today are mostly limited to intellectuals active in the western world, with a number of organizations founded in response to the Jihadism of the early 21st century, such as Progressive British Muslims (formed following the 2005 London terrorist attacks, defunct by 2012), British Muslims for Secular Democracy (formed 2006), or Muslims for Progressive Values (formed 2007).
Similarly, eastern religions were not immediately affected by liberalism and Enlightenment thought, and have partly undertaken reform movements only after contact with western philosophy in the 19th or 20th centuries. Thus, Hindu reform movements emerge in British India in the 19th century, and Buddhist modernism (or "New Buddhism") arises in Japan as a reaction to the Meiji Restoration, and is again transformed in the United States from the 1930s, notably giving rise to modern Zen Buddhism.
See also[edit]
Secularism
Post-theism
liberal religion
Liberal Christianity
Post-Christianity
Secular Judaism
Unitarian Universalism
Institute for the Secularisation of Islamic Society
References[edit]
1.Jump up ^ http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/590847/theological-liberalism
2.Jump up ^ The Correspondence between Religious Orientation and Socio-Political Liberalism and Conservatism Richard J. Stellway, Sociological Quarterly Vol 14 No3 1973, pp 430-439 http://www.jstor.org/stable/4105689
3.Jump up ^ International Journal of Ethics, Vol. 46, No. 4 (Jul., 1936) (pp. 429-443) http://www.jstor.org/stable/2989282
4.Jump up ^ "Liberalism in religion is the doctrine that there is no positive truth in religion, but that one creed is as good as another…", JH Newman 'Biglietto Speech' http://www.newmanreader.org/works/addresses/file2.html
5.Jump up ^ "All theology of the liberal type involves at some point - and often involves throughout - the claim that the real behavior and purpose and teaching of Christ came very rapidly to be misunderstood and misrepresented by his followers, and has been recovered or exhumed only by modern scholars." Modern Theology and Biblical Criticism, Christian Reflections, 1981, republished in Fern Seed and Elephants, 1998
Stub icon This religion-related article is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.




  


Categories: Liberalism
Religion
Religion stubs







Navigation menu



Create account
Log in



Article

Talk









Read

Edit

View history

















Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store

Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page

Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page

Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version

Languages
العربية
Edit links
This page was last modified on 15 June 2015, at 14:43.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
  

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_liberalism









Religious liberalism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search



 This article possibly contains original research. Please improve it by verifying the claims made and adding inline citations. Statements consisting only of original research should be removed. (January 2015)
Religious liberalism is a form of approach to religion which is critical, rationalistic or humanistic.[1] It is an attitude towards one's own religion (as opposed to criticism of religion from a secular position, or criticism of a religion other than one's own) which contrasts with a traditionalist or orthodox approach, and it is directly opposed by trends of religious fundamentalism.
"Liberalism" is here used in the sense of classical liberalism as it developed in the Enlightenment era, which forms the starting point of both religious and political liberalism, but religious liberalism does not necessarily coincide with "liberalism" in its various contemporary meanings in political philosophy. Attempts to show a link between religious liberal and political liberal adherents have proved inconclusive in a 1973 study,[clarification needed][2] Usage of "liberalism" in the context of religious philosophy began to be established in the first part of the 20th century; in 1936, Edward Scribner Ames wrote in his article 'Liberalism in Religion' "The term "liberalism" seems to be developing a religious usage which gives it growing significance… sharply contrasted with fundamentalism… [which describes] a relatively uncritical attitude." [3]
Religious liberalism is ultimately based in the attempt to reconcile pre-modern religious tradition with modernity. This project is, of course, contentious, and is challenged both by traditionalist religionists, who reject the idea that that tenets of modernity should have any impact on religious tradition, and by secularists, who reject the idea that implementation of rationalistic or critical thought leaves any room for religion altogether. Liberal Christianity is an umbrella term for the developments in Christian theology and culture since the Enlightenment since the late 18th century. It is now mostly mainstream within the major Christian denominations in the Western World, but is opposed by a movement of Christian fundamentalism which developed in response to these trends, and also contrasts with conservative forms of Christianity outside of the Western world and the reach of Enlightenment philosophy and modernism, mostly within Eastern Christianity. The Roman Catholic Church in particular has a long tradition of controversy regarding questions of religious liberalism. Cardinal John Henry Newman, for example, was seen as moderately liberal by 19th-century standards because he was critical of papal infallibility, but he was still explicitly opposed to "liberalism in religion" because he argued it would lead to complete relativism.[4] A similar argument was voiced in the 20th century by (Anglican) Christian apologist C. S. Lewis, who argued that "theology of the liberal type" amounted to a complete re-invention of Christianity and a rejection of Christianity as understood by its own founders. [5]
Alongside the development of liberal theology in Christianity, German-Jewish religious Reformers began to incorporate critical thought and humanist ideas into Judaism from the early 19th century. This resulted in the creation of various non-Orthodox denominations, from the moderately liberal Conservative Judaism to ultra-liberal Reform Judaism (North America) and Liberal Judaism. The moderate wing of Modern Orthodox Judaism, especially Open Orthodoxy, espouses a similar approach.
While Christianity and Judaism in the western world had to deal with modernity since its emergence in the 18th century, or even since the Renaissance and its consequences of Reformation and Counter-Reformation, Islam along with Jewish and Christian traditions in the Middle East was not immediately affected by modernity and Enlightenment thought. Such liberal movements within Islam as there are today are mostly limited to intellectuals active in the western world, with a number of organizations founded in response to the Jihadism of the early 21st century, such as Progressive British Muslims (formed following the 2005 London terrorist attacks, defunct by 2012), British Muslims for Secular Democracy (formed 2006), or Muslims for Progressive Values (formed 2007).
Similarly, eastern religions were not immediately affected by liberalism and Enlightenment thought, and have partly undertaken reform movements only after contact with western philosophy in the 19th or 20th centuries. Thus, Hindu reform movements emerge in British India in the 19th century, and Buddhist modernism (or "New Buddhism") arises in Japan as a reaction to the Meiji Restoration, and is again transformed in the United States from the 1930s, notably giving rise to modern Zen Buddhism.
See also[edit]
Secularism
Post-theism
liberal religion
Liberal Christianity
Post-Christianity
Secular Judaism
Unitarian Universalism
Institute for the Secularisation of Islamic Society
References[edit]
1.Jump up ^ http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/590847/theological-liberalism
2.Jump up ^ The Correspondence between Religious Orientation and Socio-Political Liberalism and Conservatism Richard J. Stellway, Sociological Quarterly Vol 14 No3 1973, pp 430-439 http://www.jstor.org/stable/4105689
3.Jump up ^ International Journal of Ethics, Vol. 46, No. 4 (Jul., 1936) (pp. 429-443) http://www.jstor.org/stable/2989282
4.Jump up ^ "Liberalism in religion is the doctrine that there is no positive truth in religion, but that one creed is as good as another…", JH Newman 'Biglietto Speech' http://www.newmanreader.org/works/addresses/file2.html
5.Jump up ^ "All theology of the liberal type involves at some point - and often involves throughout - the claim that the real behavior and purpose and teaching of Christ came very rapidly to be misunderstood and misrepresented by his followers, and has been recovered or exhumed only by modern scholars." Modern Theology and Biblical Criticism, Christian Reflections, 1981, republished in Fern Seed and Elephants, 1998
Stub icon This religion-related article is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.




  


Categories: Liberalism
Religion
Religion stubs







Navigation menu



Create account
Log in



Article

Talk









Read

Edit

View history

















Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store

Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page

Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page

Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version

Languages
العربية
Edit links
This page was last modified on 15 June 2015, at 14:43.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
  

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_liberalism








Criticism of religion

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

"Religious criticism" redirects here. For other definitions of religious criticism, see Varieties of criticism § Religious criticism.
Part of a series on
Irreligion
"αθεοι" (atheoi), Greek for "those without god", as it appears in the Epistle to the Ephesians on the third-century papyrus known as "Papyrus 46"

Irreligion[show]












Atheism[show]






























Agnosticism[show]










Nontheism[show]

















Naturalism[show]








People[show]








Books[show]











Secularist organizations[show]







Related topics[show]





Irreligion by country

v ·
 t ·
 e
   
Part of a series on
Criticism of religion

By religion
Buddhism ·
 Christianity  (Catholicism ·
 Jehovah's Witnesses ·
 Seventh-day Adventist)
   ·
 Protestantism ·
 Hinduism ·
 Islam  (Twelver Islam)
   ·
 Jainism ·
 Judaism ·
 Mormonism ·
 Sikhism
 
By religious figure
Jesus ·
 Moses ·
 Muhammad ·
 Ellen G. White
 
By text
Bible ·
 Book of Mormon ·
 Quran ·
 Talmud
 
Critics
Mikhail Bakunin ·
 Giordano Bruno ·
 Richard Dawkins ·
 Denis Diderot ·
 Epicurus ·
 Ludwig Feuerbach ·
 Stephen Fry ·
 Sita Ram Goel ·
 Emma Goldman ·
 Sam Harris ·
 Ayaan Hirsi Ali ·
 Christopher Hitchens ·
 Baron d'Holbach ·
 David Hume ·
 Robert G. Ingersoll ·
 Karl Marx ·
 Friedrich Nietzsche ·
 Michel Onfray ·
 Thomas Paine ·
 Pierre-Joseph Proudhon ·
 Ayn Rand ·
 André Servier ·
 David Silverman ·
 Max Stirner ·
 Bertrand Russell ·
 Dayananda Saraswati ·
 Victor J. Stenger ·
 Voltaire
 
Religious violence
Terrorism ·
 War ·
 Buddhism ·
 Christianity ·
 Islam ·
 Judaism ·
 Mormonism
 
Related topics
Abuse ·
 Apostasy ·
 Crisis of faith ·
 Criticism of atheism ·
 Criticism of monotheism ·
 Persecution ·
 Sexuality ·
 Slavery
 
v ·
 t ·
 e
   
Criticism of religion is criticism of the concepts, doctrines, validity, and/or practices of religion, including associated political and social implications.[1]
Criticism of religion has a long history. In ancient Greece, it goes back at least to the 5th century BCE with Diagoras "the Atheist" of Melos; in ancient Rome, an early known example is Lucretius' De Rerum Natura from the 1st century BCE. Criticism of religion is complicated by the fact that there exist multiple definitions and concepts of religion in different cultures and languages. With the existence of diverse categories of religion such as monotheism, polytheism, pantheism, nontheism and diverse specific religions such as Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Taoism, Buddhism, and many others; it is not always clear to whom the criticisms are aimed at or to what extent they are applicable to other religions.
Critics often consider religion to be outdated, harmful to the individual, harmful to society, an impediment to the progress of science, a source of immoral acts or customs, and a political tool for social control.


Contents  [hide]
1 History
2 Criticism of religious concepts 2.1 Conflicting claims of "one true faith"
2.2 Lack of permanence
3 Explanations as non-divine in origin 3.1 Social construct
3.2 Narratives to provide comfort and meaning 3.2.1 Opium of the people
3.3 Viruses of the mind
3.4 Mental illness or delusion
3.5 Immature stage of societal development
4 Harm to individuals 4.1 Inadequate medical care
4.2 Jerusalem syndrome
4.3 Issues related to sexuality
4.4 Honor killings and stoning
4.5 Blood sacrifice
4.6 Genital modification and mutilation
4.7 Counterarguments
5 Harm to society 5.1 Holy war and religious terrorism 5.1.1 Arguments against religion being a significant cause of violence
5.2 Suppression of scientific progress
5.3 Counterarguments to religion as harmful to society
6 Morality 6.1 Children
6.2 Homosexuals
6.3 Racism
6.4 Women
6.5 Animals
7 Corrupt purposes of leaders 7.1 Corrupt or immoral leaders
7.2 Dominionism
8 See also 8.1 Criticism of specific religions
8.2 Notable critics of religion
9 References
10 Further reading
11 External links

History[edit]
The 1st century BCE Roman poet, Titus Lucretius Carus, in his work De Rerum Natura, wrote: "But 'tis that same religion oftener far / Hath bred the foul impieties of men:"[2] A philosopher of the Epicurean school, Lucretius believed the world was composed solely of matter and void, and that all phenomena could be understood as resulting from purely natural causes. Lucretius, like Epicurus, felt that religion was born of fear and ignorance, and that understanding the natural world would free people of its shackles;[3] however, he did believe in gods.[4] He was not against religion in and of itself, but against traditional religion which he saw as superstition for teaching that gods interfered with the world.[5]
Niccolò Machiavelli, at the beginning of the 16th century said: "We Italians are irreligious and corrupt above others... because the church and her representatives have set us the worst example."[6] To Machiavelli, religion was merely a tool, useful for a ruler wishing to manipulate public opinion.[7]
In the 18th century Voltaire was a deist and was strongly critical of religious intolerance. Voltaire complained about Jews killed by other Jews for worshiping a golden calf and similar actions, he also condemned how Christians killed other Christians over religious differences and how Christians killed Native Americans for not being baptised. Voltaire claimed the real reason for these killings was that Christians wanted to plunder the wealth of those killed. Voltaire was also critical of Muslim intolerance.[8]
Also in the 18th century David Hume criticised teleological arguments for religion. Hume claimed that natural explanations for the order in the universe were reasonable, see Design argument. Demonstrating the unsoundness of the philosophical basis for religion was an important aim of Hume's writings.[9]
In the early 21st century the New Atheists, Sam Harris, Daniel Dennett, Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens, were prominent as critics of religion.[10][11]
Criticism of religious concepts[edit]
See also: Faith and rationality



 A sign that criticizes religion and draws attention to the September 11 attacks, by the Connecticut Valley Atheists in Rockville's Central Park, Vernon in December 2007. The group issued an explanatory press release, stating: "Clearly, 9/11 is the work of fanatics. However, we feel that religion even in moderation provides a foundation for fanatical groups to thrive."[12]
Some criticisms on monotheistic religions have been:
Sometimes conflict with science.[13]
Requiring behaviors that are not sensible (i.e. Old Testament prohibition against wearing garments of mixed fabrics, or punishing children of guilty parents).[14]
Revelations may conflict internally (i.e. discrepancies in the Bible among the four Gospels of the New Testament).[15][16][17]
Conflicting claims of "one true faith"[edit]
See also: Argument from inconsistent revelations
In the context of theistic belief, Stephen Roberts[18] has claimed that he dismisses all gods in the same way others dismiss all other gods.[19]
Lack of permanence[edit]
Opsopaus and Hitchens note obsolete religions — which no longer have active adherents — are evidence that religions are not everlasting.[20] Including Greek mythology, Millerism, Roman mythology, Sabbatai Sevi, and Norse mythology.[21]
Explanations as non-divine in origin[edit]
Social construct[edit]



Christopher Hitchens, journalist and author of God is not Great
See also: Development of religion
Dennett, Harris, and Hitchens have asserted that theist religions and their scriptures are not divinely inspired, but man made to fulfill social, biological, and political needs.[22][page needed][23][page needed][24][page needed] Dawkins balances the benefits of religious beliefs (mental solace, community-building, promotion of virtuous behavior) against the drawbacks.[25][page needed] Such criticisms treat religion as a social construct[26] and thus just another human ideology.
Narratives to provide comfort and meaning[edit]
Daniel Dennett has argued that, with the exception of more modern religions such as Raëlism, Mormonism, Scientology, and the Bahá'í Faith, most religions were formulated at a time when the origin of life, the workings of the body, and the nature of the stars and planets were poorly understood.[27]
These narratives were intended to give solace and a sense of relationship with larger forces. As such, they may have served several important functions in ancient societies. Examples include the views many religions traditionally had towards solar and lunar eclipses, and the appearance of comets (forms of astrology).[28][29] Given current understanding of the physical world, where human knowledge has increased dramatically; Hitchens, Dawkins, and French atheist philosopher Michel Onfray contend that continuing to hold on to these belief systems is irrational and no longer useful.[24][25][30]
Opium of the people[edit]



Karl Marx
Religious suffering is, at the same time, the expression of real suffering and a protest against real suffering. Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people.
—Karl Marx[31]
According to Karl Marx, the father of "scientific socialism", religion is a tool used by the ruling classes whereby the masses can shortly relieve their suffering via the act of experiencing religious emotions. It is in the interest of the ruling classes to instill in the masses the religious conviction that their current suffering will lead to eventual happiness. Therefore, as long as the public believes in religion, they will not attempt to make any genuine effort to understand and overcome the real source of their suffering, which in Marx's opinion was their capitalist economic system. In this perspective, Marx saw religion as escapism.[31]
Marx also viewed the Christian doctrine of original sin as being deeply anti-social in character. Original sin, he argued, convinces people that the source of their misery lies in the inherent and unchangeable "sinfulness" of humanity rather than in the forms of social organization and institutions, which, Marx argued, can be changed through the application of collective social planning.[32]
Viruses of the mind[edit]



Richard Dawkins, author of The God Delusion
In his 1976 book The Selfish Gene, Richard Dawkins coined the term memes to describe informational units that can be transmitted culturally, analogous to genes.[33] He later used this concept in the essay "Viruses of the Mind" to explain the persistence of religious ideas in human culture.[34]
John Bowker criticized the idea that "God" and "Faith" are viruses of the mind, suggesting that Dawkins' "account of religious motivation ... is ... far removed from evidence and data" and that, even if the God-meme approach were valid, "it does not give rise to one set of consequences ... Out of the many behaviours it produces, why are we required to isolate only those that might be regarded as diseased?"[35] Alister McGrath has responded by arguing that "memes have no place in serious scientific reflection",[36] that there is strong evidence that such ideas are not spread by random processes, but by deliberate intentional actions,[37] that "evolution" of ideas is more Lamarckian than Darwinian,[38] and that there is no evidence (and certainly none in the essay) that epidemiological models usefully explain the spread of religious ideas.[39] McGrath also cites a metareview of 100 studies[citation needed] and argues that "if religion is reported as having a positive effect on human well-being by 79% of recent studies in the field, then it cannot be conceivably regarded as analogous to a virus?"[40]
Mental illness or delusion[edit]



 Bodies recovered from the Jonestown massacre, in which members of a religious cult committed a mass murder/suicide
Richard Dawkins argues that religious belief often involves delusional behavior.[25] Others, such as Sam Harris, compare religion to mental illness, saying it "allows otherwise normal human beings to reap the fruits of madness and consider them holy."[41]
There are also psychological studies into the phenomenon of mysticism, and the links between disturbing aspects of certain mystic's experiences and their links to childhood abuse.[42][43][44] In another line of research, Clifford A. Pickover explores evidence suggesting that temporal lobe epilepsy may be linked to a variety of spiritual or ‘other worldly’ experiences, such as spiritual possession, originating from altered electrical activity in the brain.[45] Carl Sagan, in his last book The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark, presented his case for the miraculous sightings of religious figures in the past and the modern sightings of UFOs coming from the same mental disorder. According to Vilayanur S. Ramachandran, "It's possible that many great religious leaders had temporal lobe seizures and this predisposes them to having visions, having mystical experiences."[46] Michael Persinger stimulated the temporal lobes of the brain artificially with a magnetic field using a device nicknamed the "God helmet," and was able to artificially induce religious experiences along with near-death experiences and ghost sightings.[47] John Bradshaw has stated, "Some forms of temporal lobe tumours or epilepsy are associated with extreme religiosity. Recent brain imaging of devotees engaging in prayer or transcendental meditation has more precisely identified activation in such sites — God-spots, as Vilayanur Ramachandran calls them. Psilocybin from mushrooms contacts the serotonergic system, with terminals in these and other brain regions, generating a sense of cosmic unity, transcendental meaning and religious ecstasy. Certain physical rituals can generate both these feelings and corresponding serotonergic activity."[48]
Keith Ward in his book Is Religion Dangerous? addresses the claim that religious belief is a delusion. He quotes the definition in the Oxford Companion to Mind as "a fixed, idiosyncratic belief, unusual in the culture to which the person belongs," and notes that "[n]ot all false opinions are delusions." Ward then characterizes a delusion as a "clearly false opinion, especially as a symptom of a mental illness," an "irrational belief" that is "so obviously false that all reasonable people would see it as mistaken." He then says that belief in God is different, since "[m]ost great philosophers have believed in God, and they are rational people". He argues that "[a]ll that is needed to refute the claim that religious belief is a delusion is one clear example of someone who exhibits a high degree of rational ability, who functions well in the ordinary affairs of life ... and who can produce a reasonable and coherent defense of their beliefs" and claims that there are many such people, "including some of the most able philosophers and scientists in the world today."[49]
Immature stage of societal development[edit]



Philosophy and Christian Art. W. Ridgway, 1878
Philosopher Auguste Comte posited that many societal constructs pass through three stages, and that religion corresponds to the two earlier, or more primitive stages by stating: "From the study of the development of human intelligence, in all directions, and through all times, the discovery arises of a great fundamental law, to which it is necessarily subject, and which has a solid foundation of proof, both in the facts of our organization and in our historical experience. The law is this: that each of our leading conceptions – each branch of our knowledge – passes successively through three different theoretical conditions: the theological, or fictitious; the metaphysical, or abstract; and the scientific, or positive." [50]
Harm to individuals[edit]
Some have criticized the effects of adherence to dangerous practices such as self-sacrifice,[51] as well as unnatural restrictions on human behavior (such as teetotalism and sexual prohibitions) and claim that these result in mental and emotional trauma of fear and guilt.[52]
Inadequate medical care[edit]



Saint Francis Borgia performing an exorcism, by Goya
See also: Exorcism and Faith healing
A detailed study in 1998 found 140 instances of deaths of children due to religion-based medical neglect. Most of these cases involved religious parents relying on prayer to cure the child's disease, and withholding medical care.[53]
Jerusalem syndrome[edit]
Main article: Jerusalem syndrome
Jerusalem has lent its name to a unique psychological phenomenon where Jewish or Christian individuals who develop obsessive religious themed ideas or delusions (sometimes believing themselves to be Jesus Christ or another prophet) will feel compelled to travel to Jerusalem.[54][55]
During a period of 13 years (1980–1993) for which admissions to the Kfar Shaul Mental Health Centre in Jerusalem were analyzed, it was reported[56] that 1,200 tourists with severe, Jerusalem-themed mental problems, were referred to this clinic. Of these, 470 were admitted to hospital. On average, 100 such tourists have been seen annually, 40 of them requiring admission to hospital. About 2 million tourists visit Jerusalem each year. Kalian and Witztum note that as a proportion of the total numbers of tourists visiting the city, this is not significantly different from any other city.[57][58] The statements of these claims has however been disputed, with the arguments that experiencers of the Jerusalem syndrome already were mentally ill.[57][59]
Issues related to sexuality[edit]
See also: Religion and sexuality
According to Christopher Hitchens, religion has opposed certain practices such as masturbation, or certain consensual sexual acts between adults that they see as "unnatural" and asked for their legal prohibition (see sodomy laws).[52]
Honor killings and stoning[edit]
Main articles: Honor killings and stoning
Still occurring in some parts of the world, an honor killing is when a person is killed by family for bringing dishonor or shame upon the family.[60] While religions such as Islam are often blamed for such acts, Tahira Shaid Khan, a professor of women's issues at Aga Khan University, notes that there is nothing in the Qur'an that permits or sanctions honor killings.[61] Khan instead blames it on attitudes (across different classes, ethnic and religious groups) that view women as property with no rights of their own as the motivation for honor killings.[61] Khan also argues that this view results in violence against women and their being turned "into a commodity which can be exchanged, bought and sold".[62]
Stoning is a form of capital punishment whereby a group throws stones at a person until death ensues. As of September 2010, stoning is a punishment that is included in the laws in some countries including Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Yemen, the United Arab Emirates, and some states in Nigeria[63] as punishment for zina al-mohsena ("adultery of married persons").[64] While stoning may not be codified in the laws of Afghanistan and Somalia, both countries have seen several incidents of stoning to death.[65][66]
Until the early 2000s, stoning was a legal form of capital punishment in Iran. In 2002, the Iranian judiciary officially placed a moratorium on stoning.[67] In 2005, judiciary spokesman Jamal Karimirad stated, "in the Islamic republic, we do not see such punishments being carried out", further adding that if stoning sentences were passed by lower courts, they were overruled by higher courts and "no such verdicts have been carried out."[68] In 2008, the judiciary decided to fully scrap the punishment from the books in legislation submitted to parliament for approval.[69] In early 2013, Iranian parliament published official report about excluding stoning from penal code and it accused Western media for spreading "noisy propaganda" about the case.[70]
Blood sacrifice[edit]
See also: Blood sacrifice and Human sacrifice
Hitchens claims that many religions endorse blood sacrifice, wherein innocent victims are killed or harmed to appease deities,[71] specifically citing Judaism for its obsession with blood and sacrifice, particularly the goal of identifying and sacrificing of a pure red heifer (described in Numbers 19), the pursuit of which Hitchens characterizes as "absurd", singling out the goal of raising a human child in a "bubble" so as to "be privileged to cut that heifer's throat".[72]
Genital modification and mutilation[edit]
Hitchens claims that many religions endorse male circumcision and female genital cutting, which he views as genital mutilation, and as immoral, unhealthy, and unnecessary.[73]
Counterarguments[edit]
Responding in the book The Irrational Atheist to criticisms that religion is harmful, Theodore Beale argues that religious individuals tend to be happier and healthier, more likely to have children, and more sexually satisfied than non-religious individuals.[74] There is substantial research suggesting that religious people are happier and less stressed.[75][76] Surveys by Gallup, the National Opinion Research Center and the Pew Organization conclude that spiritually committed people are twice as likely to report being "very happy" than the least religiously committed people.[77] An analysis of over 200 social studies contends that "high religiousness predicts a rather lower risk of depression and drug abuse and fewer suicide attempts, and more reports of satisfaction with sex life and a sense of well-being,"[78] and a review of 498 studies published in peer-reviewed journals concluded that a large majority of them showed a positive correlation between religious commitment and higher levels of perceived well-being and self-esteem and lower levels of hypertension, depression, and clinical delinquency.[79][vague][80] Surveys suggest a strong link between faith and altruism.[81] Studies by Keith Ward show that overall religion is a positive contributor to mental health,[82] and a meta-analysis of 34 recent studies published between 1990 and 2001 also found that religiosity has a salutary relationship with psychological adjustment, being related to less psychological distress, more life satisfaction, and better self-actualization.[83] Andrew E. Clark and Orsolya Lelkes surveyed 90,000 people in 26 European countries and found that "[one's own] religious behaviour is positively correlated with individual life satisfaction.", greater overall "religiosity" in a region also correlates positively with "individual life satisfaction". The reverse was found to be true: a large "atheist" (non-religious) population "has negative spillover effects" for both the religious and non-religious members of the population.[84] Finally, a recent systematic review of 850 research papers on the topic concluded that "the majority of well-conducted studies found that higher levels of religious involvement are positively associated with indicators of psychological well-being (life satisfaction, happiness, positive affect, and higher morale) and with less depression, suicidal thoughts and behavior, drug/alcohol use/abuse."[85]
However, as of 2001, most of those studies were conducted within the United States.[86] There is no significant correlation between religiosity and individual happiness in Denmark and the Netherlands, countries that have lower rates of religion than the United States.[87] A cross-national investigation on subjective well-being has noted that, globally, religious people are usually happier than nonreligious people, though nonreligious people can also reach high levels of happiness.[88] The 2013 World Happiness Report mentions that once crude factors are taken into account, there are no differences in life satisfaction between religious and less religious countries, even though a meta analysis concludes that greater religiosity is mildly associated with fewer depressive symptoms and 75% of studies find at least some positive effect of religion on well-being.[89]
Harm to society[edit]
Some aspects of religion are criticized on the basis that they damage society as a whole. Steven Weinberg, for example, states it takes religion to make good people do evil.[90] Bertrand Russell and Richard Dawkins cite religiously inspired or justified violence, resistance to social change, attacks on science, repression of women, and homophobia.[91]
Hartung has claimed that major religious moral codes can lead to "us vs. them" group solidarity and mentality which can dehumanise or demonise individuals outside their group as "not fully human", or less worthy. Results can vary from mild discrimination to outright genocide.[92] A poll by The Guardian, a UK newspaper noted that 82% of the British people believe that religion is socially divisive and that this effect is harmful despite the observation that non-believers outnumber believers 2 to 1.[93]
Holy war and religious terrorism[edit]



 Entry of the Crusaders into Constantinople by Gustave Doré (1832–1883)
Main articles: Religious war, Religious terrorism and Religious violence
Hitchens and Dawkins say that religions do tremendous harm to society in three ways:[24][page needed][25][page needed]
Religions sometimes encourage war (Crusades, Jihad), violence, and terrorism to promote their religious goals
Religious leaders contribute to secular wars and terrorism by endorsing or supporting the violence
Religious fervor is exploited by secular leaders to support war and terrorism
Although the causes of terrorism are complex, it may be that terrorists are partially reassured by their religious views that God is on their side and will reward them in heaven for punishing unbelievers.[94][95]
These conflicts are among the most difficult to resolve, particularly where both sides believe that God is on their side and has endorsed the moral righteousness of their claims.[94] One of the most infamous quotes associated with religious fanaticism was made in 1209 during the siege of Béziers, a Crusader asked the Papal Legate Arnaud Amalric how to tell Catholics from Cathars when the city was taken, to which Amalric replied: "Tuez-les tous; Dieu reconnaitra les siens," or "Kill them all; God will recognize his own."[96]
Theoretical physicist Michio Kaku considers religious terrorism as one of the main threats in humanity's evolution from a Type 0 to Type 1 civilization.[97]
Arguments against religion being a significant cause of violence[edit]



Michel Onfray, French philosopher who wrote the Atheist Manifesto: The Case Against Christianity, Judaism, and Islam
Some argue that religious violence is mostly caused by misinterpretations of the relevant religions' ethical rules and a combination of non-religious factors.[98][99][100][101] This includes the claim that events like terrorist bombings are more politically motivated than religious.[100][102][103] Mark Juergensmeyer argues that religion "does not ordinarily lead to violence.That happens only with the coalescence of a peculiar set of circumstances—political, social, and ideological—when religion becomes fused with violent expressions of social aspirations, personal pride, and movements for political change."[104]:10 It is also argued that the same violence happens in non-religious countries or regimes such as in communist Soviet Union.[105][106][self-published source?][101][107]
Christopher Hitchens notes that "it is interesting to find that people of faith now seek defensively to say that they are no worse than fascists or Nazis or Stalinists."[108] Richard Dawkins, in response to Pope Benedict's accusations that atheism was responsible for "some 20th-century atrocities", has replied: "how dare Ratzinger suggest that atheism has any connection whatsoever with their horrific deeds? Any more than Hitler and Stalin's non-belief in leprechauns or unicorns.... There is no logical pathway from atheism to wickedness."[109]
Suppression of scientific progress[edit]



Galileo facing the Roman Inquisition
John William Draper and Andrew Dickson White, authors of the conflict thesis, have argued that when a religion offers a complete set of answers to the problems of purpose, morality, origins, or science, it often discourages exploration of those areas by suppressing curiosity, denies its followers a broader perspective, and can prevent social, moral and scientific progress. Examples cited in their writings include the trial of Galileo and Giordano Bruno's execution.
During the 19th century the conflict thesis developed. According to this model, any interaction between religion and science must inevitably lead to open hostility, with religion usually taking the part of the aggressor against new scientific ideas.[110] The historical conflict thesis was a popular historiographical approach in the history of science during the late 19th and early 20th centuries, but its original form is almost entirely discarded by scholars today.[111][112][113] Despite that, conflict theory remains a popular view among the general public,[114] and has been publicized by the success of books such as The God Delusion.
Historians of science including John Hedley Brooke and Ronald Numbers consider the "religion vs. science" concept an oversimplification, and prefer to take a more nuanced view of the subject.[114][115] These historians cite, for example, the Galileo affair[116] and the Scopes trial,[117] and assert that these were not purely instances of conflict between science and religion; personal and political factors also weighed heavily in the development of each. In addition, some historians contend[citation needed] that religious organizations figure prominently in the broader histories of many sciences, with many of the scientific minds until the professionalization of scientific enterprise (in the 19th century) being clergy and other religious thinkers.[118][119][120] Some historians contend that many scientific developments, such as Kepler's laws[121] and the 19th century reformulation of physics in terms of energy,[122] were explicitly driven by religious ideas.
Recent examples of tensions have been the creation-evolution controversy, controversies over the use of birth control, opposition to research into embryonic stem cells, or theological objections to vaccination, anesthesia, and blood transfusion.[123][124][125][126][127]
Counterarguments against assumed conflict between the sciences and religions have been offered. For example, C. S. Lewis, a Christian, suggested that all religions, by definition, involve faith, or a belief in concepts that cannot be proven or disproven by the sciences. However, some religious beliefs have not been in line with views of the scientific community, for instance Young Earth creationism.[128] Though some who criticize religions subscribe to the conflict thesis, others do not. For example, Stephen Jay Gould agrees with C. S. Lewis and suggested that religion and science were non-overlapping magisteria.[129] Scientist Richard Dawkins has said that religious practitioners often do not believe in the view of non-overlapping magisteria (NOMA).[130]
However, research on perceptions of science among the American public concludes that most religious groups see no general epistemological conflict with science or with the seeking out of scientific knowledge, although there may be epistemic or moral conflicts when scientists make counterclaims to religious tenets.[131][132] Even strict creationists tend to have very favorable views on science.[133] Also, cross-national studies, polled from 1981-2001, on views of science and religion have noted that countries with higher religiosity have stronger trust in science, whereas countries that are seen as more secular are more skeptical about the impact of science and technology.[134] Though the United States is a highly religious country compared to other advanced industrial countries, according to the National Science Foundation, public attitudes towards science are more favorable in the United States than Europe, Russia, and Japan.[133] A study on a national sample of US college students examined whether they viewed the science / religion relationship as reflecting primarily conflict, collaboration, or independence. The study concluded that the majority of undergraduates in both the natural and social sciences do not see conflict between science and religion. Another finding in the study was that it is more likely for students to move away from a conflict perspective to an independence or collaboration perspective than vice versa.[135]
Counterarguments to religion as harmful to society[edit]
One study notes that significant levels of social dysfunction are found in highly religious countries such as the US and that countries which have lower religiosity also tend to have lower levels of dysfunction though it is noted in a later edition that correlation does not necessarily imply causation.[136][137][138]
Other studies show positive links in the relationship between religiosity and moral behavior, artruism and crime.[139][140][141][142][143][144] Indeed, a meta-analysis of 60 studies on religion and crime concluded, "religious behaviors and beliefs exert a moderate deterrent effect on individuals' criminal behavior".[139] [140][141][145][146][147][148][149] One study revealed that, at least in the United States forty percent of worship service attenders volunteer regularly to help the poor and elderly as opposed to 15% of Americans who never attend services.[148] Moreover, religious individuals are more likely than non-religious individuals to volunteer for school and youth programs (36% vs. 15%), a neighborhood or civic group (26% vs. 13%), and for health care (21% vs. 13%).[148] Other research has shown similar correlations between religiosity and giving.[150][151][152][153][153][154][155] In similar surveys, those who attended church were also more likely to report that they were registered to vote, that they volunteered, that they personally helped someone who was homeless, and to describe themselves as "active in the community."[156]
Morality[edit]
See also: Human sacrifice, Morality and religion and Religious intolerance
Dawkins contends that theistic religions devalue human compassion and morality. In his view, the Bible contains many injunctions against following one's conscience over scripture, and positive actions are supposed to originate not from compassion, but from the fear of punishment.[25] Albert Einstein stated that no religious basis is needed in order to display ethical behavior.[157]
Survey research suggests that believers do tend to hold different views than non-believers on a variety of social, ethical and moral questions. According to a 2003 survey conducted in the United States by The Barna Group, those who described themselves as believers were less likely than those describing themselves as atheists or agnostics to consider the following behaviors morally acceptable: cohabitating with someone of the opposite sex outside of marriage, enjoying sexual fantasies, having an abortion, sexual relationships outside of marriage, gambling, looking at pictures of nudity or explicit sexual behavior, getting drunk, and "having a sexual relationship with someone of the same sex."[158]
Children[edit]
See also: Indoctrination, Mind control, Religion and children and Child marriage
In the 19th century, philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer argued that teaching some ideas to children at a young age could foster resistance to doubting those ideas later on.[159] Richard Dawkins maintains that the children of religious parents are often unfairly indoctrinated because they do not have yet sufficient maturity and knowledge to make their own conclusions.[160] Christopher Hitchens and Richard Dawkins use the term child abuse to describe what they see as the harm inflicted on children by some religious upbringings.[161][162]
Dawkins states that labeling children as "Muslim child" or "Catholic child" is unreasonable since children are not mature enough to decide major questions in life for themselves. In his view, no reasonable person would speak of a "Marxist child" or a "Tory child", for instance.[161] He suggests such labeling is not seen as controversial because of the "weirdly privileged status of religion".
Islam[163] has permitted the child marriage of older men to girls as young as 9 years of age. Baptist pastor Jerry Vines has cited the age of one of Muhammad's wives, Aisha, to denounce him for having had sex with a nine-year-old, referring to Muhammad as a pedophile.[164]
The Seyaj Organization for the Protection of Children describes cases of a 10-year-old girl being married and raped in Yemen (Nujood Ali),[165] a 13-year-old Yemeni girl dying of internal bleeding three days after marriage,[166][167] and a 12-year-old girl dying in childbirth after marriage.[163][168] Yemen currently does not have a minimum age for marriage.[169]
Latter Day Saint church founder Joseph Smith married girls as young as 13 and 14,[170] and other Latter Day Saints married girls as young as 10.[171] The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints eliminated underaged marriages in the 19th century, but several branches of Mormonism continue the practice.[172]
Homosexuals[edit]


A Westboro Baptist Church picket in Northlake, Illinois, US on November 29, 2005
Main article: Homosexuality and religion
Elton John has said that organized religion promotes the hatred of homosexuals.[173] Unlike many other religions, Hinduism does not view homosexuality as an issue.[174]
In the United States, conservative Christian groups such as the Christian Legal Society and the Alliance Defense Fund have filed numerous lawsuits against public universities, aimed at overturning policies that protect homosexuals from discrimination and hate speech. These groups argue that such policies infringe their right to freely exercise religion as guaranteed by the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment of the United States Constitution.[175]
Homosexuality is illegal in most Muslim countries, and several of these countries impose the death penalty for homosexual behavior. In July 2005, two Iranian men, aged sixteen and eighteen, were publicly hanged for homosexuality, causing an international outcry.[176]
Racism[edit]



 Burning cross often used by Ku Klux Klan to intimidate minorities
Religion has been used by some as justification for advocating racism. The Christian Identity movement has been associated with racism.[177] There are arguments, however, that these positions may be as much reflections of contemporary social views as of what has been called scientific racism.[178]
The LDS Church excluded blacks from the priesthood in the church, from 1860 to 1978.[179] Most Fundamentalist Mormon sects within the Latter Day Saint movement, rejected the LDS Church’s 1978 decision to allow African Americans to hold the priesthood, and continue to deny activity in the church due to race.[180] Due to these beliefs, in its Spring 2005 "Intelligence Report", the Southern Poverty Law Center named the FLDS Church to its "hate group" listing[181] because of the church's teachings on race, which include a fierce condemnation of interracial relationships.
On the other hand, many Christians have made efforts toward establishing racial equality, contributing to the Civil Rights Movement.[182] The African American Review sees as important the role Christian revivalism in the black church played in the Civil Rights Movement.[183] Martin Luther King, Jr., an ordained Baptist minister, was a leader of the American Civil Rights Movement and president of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, a Christian Civil Rights organization.[184]
Women[edit]
See also: Gender and religion, Christianity and domestic violence, Islam and domestic violence and Misogyny
Islamic laws have been criticized by human rights organizations for exposing women to mistreatment and violence, preventing women from reporting rape, and contributing to the discrimination of women.[185] Hitchens and the United Nations also say that Islam is used to justify unnecessary and harmful female genital mutilation (FGM), when the purposes range from deprivation of sexual satisfaction to discourage adultery, insuring virginity to their husbands, or generating appearance of virginity.[73][186] Maryam Namazie argues that women are victimized under Sharia law, both in criminal matters (such as punishment for improper veiling) and in civil matters, and also that women have judicial hurdles that are lenient or advantageous for men.[187]
According to Phyllis Chesler, Islam is connected to violence against women, especially in the form of honor killings. She rejects the argument that honor killings are not related to Islam, and claims that while fundamentalists of all religions place restrictions on women, in Islam not only are these restrictions harsher, but Islam also reacts more violently when these rules are broken.[188]
Christianity has been criticized for painting women as sinful, untrustful, deceiving, and desiring to seduce and incite men into sexual sin.[189] Katharine M. Rogers argues that Christianity is misogynistic, and that the "dread of female seduction" can be found in St. Paul's epistles.[190] K. K. Ruthven argues that the "legacy of Christian misogyny was consolidated by the so-called 'Fathers' of the Church, like Tertullian, who thought a woman was not only 'the gateway of the devil' but also 'a temple built over a sewer'."[191] Jack Holland argues the concept of fall of man is misogynistic as "a myth that blames woman for the ills and sufferings of mankind".[192]
According to Polly Toynbee, religion interferes with physical autonomy, and fosters negative attitudes towards women's bodies. Toynbee writes that "Women's bodies are always the issue - too unclean to be bishops, and dangerous enough to be covered up by Islam and mikvahed by Judaism".[193]
One criticism of religion is that it contributes to unequal relations in marriage, creating norms which subordinate the wife to the husband. The word בעל (ba`al), Hebrew for husband, used throughout the Bible, is synonymous with owner and master.[194] Hitchens argued that the commandment of Thou shalt not covet is sexist because it "throws in 'wife' along with the other property, animal, human, and material, of the neighbor" and considers the wife as "chattel".[195] Hitchens pointed out that divorce in Ireland was only legalized in 1996, and argued that the Roman Catholic Church in Ireland preferred for women to be trapped with violent husbands, rather than to change its dogma.[196]
Feminist Julie Bindel argues that religions encourage the domination of men over women, and that Islam promotes the submission of women to their husbands, and encourages practices such as child marriage. She wrote that religion "promotes inequality between men and women", that Islam's message for a woman includes that "she will be subservient to her husband and devote her life to pleasing him", and that "Islam's obsession with virginity and childbirth has led to gender segregation and early marriage.[197] Another feminist criticism of religion is the portrayal of God as an omnipotent, perfect power, where this power is one of domination, which is persistently associated with the characteristics of ideal masculinity.[198] Sheila Jeffreys argues that "Religion gives authority to traditional, patriarchal beliefs about the essentially subordinate nature of women and their naturally separate roles, such as the need for women to be confined to the private world of the home and family, that women should be obedient to their husbands, that women's sexuality should be modest and under the control of their menfolk, and that women should not use contraception or abortion to limit their childbearing. The practice of such ancient beliefs interferes profoundly with women's abilities to exercise their human rights".[199]
Christian religious figures have been involved in the Middle Ages and early modern period Witch trials, which were generally used to punish assertive or independent women, such as midwives, since witchcraft was often not in evidence,[200] or activists.[201]
Animals[edit]



Shechita
Kosher slaughter has historically attracted criticism from non-Jews as allegedly being inhumane and unsanitary,[202] in part as an antisemitic canard that eating ritually slaughtered meat caused degeneration,[203] and in part out of economic motivation to remove Jews from the meat industry.[202] Sometimes, however, these criticisms were directed at Judaism as a religion. In 1893, animal advocates campaigning against kosher slaughter in Aberdeen attempted to link cruelty with Jewish religious practice.[204] In the 1920s, Polish critics of kosher slaughter claimed that the practice actually had no basis in Scripture.[202] In contrast, Jewish authorities argue that the slaughter methods are based directly upon Genesis IX:3, and that "these laws are binding on Jews today."[205]
Supporters of kosher slaughter counter that Judaism requires the practice precisely because it is considered humane.[205] Research conducted by Temple Grandin and Joe M. Regenstein in 1994 concluded that, practiced correctly with proper restraint systems, kosher slaughter results in little pain and suffering, and notes that behavioral reactions to the incision made during kosher slaughter are less than those to noises such as clanging or hissing, inversion or pressure during restraint.[206] Those who practice and subscribe religiously and philosophically to Jewish vegetarianism disagree, stating that such slaughter is not required, while a number, including medieval scholars of Judaism such as Joseph Albo and Isaac Arama, regard vegetarianism as a moral ideal, not just out of a concern for animal welfare but also the slaughterer.[207]
Other forms of ritual slaughter, such as Islamic ritual slaughter, have also come under controversy. Logan Scherer, writing for PETA, said that animals sacrificed according to Islamic law can not be stunned before they are killed.[208] Muslims are only allowed to eat meat that has been killed according to Sharia law, and they say that Islamic law on ritual slaughter is designed to reduce the pain and distress that the animal suffers.[209]
According to the Farm Animal Welfare Council (FAWC), Halal and Kosher practices should be banned because when animals are not stunned before death, they suffer needles pain for up to 2 minutes, however, Muslims and Jews argue that loss of blood from slash to the throat renders the animals unconscious pretty quickly.[210]
Corrupt purposes of leaders[edit]
Corrupt or immoral leaders[edit]



 Caricature of Mormon leader Brigham Young's wives at his death
Hitchens has noted some leaders who have abused their positions for financial gains such as the Indian mystic Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh who owned 90 Rolls Royce cars, cult leader David Koresh, Joseph Smith who had about 27 wives, and Brigham Young who had about 57 wives.[211]
Dominionism[edit]
Main article: Dominionism
See also: Dominion Theology and Christian Reconstructionism
The term dominionism is often used to describe a political movement among fundamentalist Christians. Critics view dominionism as an attempt to improperly impose Christianity as the national faith of the United States. It emerged in the late 1980s inspired by the book, film and lecture series, "Whatever Happened to the Human Race?" by Francis A. Schaeffer and C. Everett Koop.[212] Schaeffer's views influenced conservatives like Jerry Falwell, Tim LaHaye, John W. Whitehead, and although they represent different theological and political ideas, dominionists believe they have a Christian duty to take "control of a sinful secular society", either by putting fundamentalist Christians in office, or by introducing biblical law into the secular sphere.[123][213][214] Social scientists have used the word "dominionism" to refer to adherence to Dominion Theology[215][216][217] as well as to the influence in the broader Christian Right of ideas inspired by Dominion Theology.[215]
In the early 1990s, sociologist Sara Diamond[218][219] and journalist Frederick Clarkson[220][221] defined dominionism as a movement that, while including Dominion Theology and Christian Reconstructionism as subsets, is much broader in scope, extending to much of the Christian Right.[222] Beginning in 2004 with essayist Katherine Yurica,[223][224][225] a group of authors including journalist Chris Hedges[226][227][228] Marion Maddox,[229] James Rudin,[230] Sam Harris,[231] and the group TheocracyWatch[232] began applying the term to a broader spectrum of people than have sociologists such as Diamond.
Full adherents to reconstructionism are few and marginalized among conservative Christians.[233][page needed][234][235] The terms "dominionist" and "dominionism" are rarely used for self-description, and their usage has been attacked from several quarters. Chip Berlet wrote that "some critics of the Christian Right have stretched the term dominionism past its breaking point."[236] Sara Diamond wrote that "[l]iberals' writing about the Christian Right's take-over plans has generally taken the form of conspiracy theory."[237] Journalist Anthony Williams charged that its purpose is "to smear the Republican Party as the party of domestic Theocracy, facts be damned."[238] Stanley Kurtz labeled it "conspiratorial nonsense," "political paranoia," and "guilt by association,"[239] and decried Hedges' "vague characterizations" that allow him to "paint a highly questionable picture of a virtually faceless and nameless 'Dominionist' Christian mass."[240] Kurtz also complained about a perceived link between average Christian evangelicals and extremism such as Christian Reconstructionism.[239]
See also[edit]
Anthropology of religion
Antireligion
Antitheism
Atheism
Biblical inerrancy
Christianity and violence
Civil religion
Cognitive dissonance
Conversational intolerance
Deism
Development of religion
Folk religion
God is dead
Metaethics
Morality without religion
Philosophy of religion
Problem of evil
Theodicy
Psychology of religion
Rationalism
Religion
Religiosity and intelligence
Religious belief
Religious paranoia
Religious satire
Russell's teapot
Social criticism
Sociology of religion
Supernatural
Superstition
Theism
Theology
True-believer syndrome
Criticism of specific religions[edit]
Controversies about Opus Dei
Criticism of Buddhism
Criticism of Christianity
Criticism of Hinduism
Criticism of Islam
Criticism of Jainism
Criticism of Jehovah's Witnesses
Criticism of Judaism
Criticism of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints
Criticism of Sikhism
Criticism of the Roman Catholic Church
Scientology controversy
Notable critics of religion[edit]
Douglas Adams
George Carlin
Daniel Dennett
Richard Dawkins
Sam Harris
Christopher Hitchens
Baron d'Holbach
David Hume
Lawrence Krauss
Friedrich Nietzsche
Thomas Paine
Bertrand Russell
Dayanand Saraswati
Mark Twain
Voltaire
References[edit]
1.Jump up ^ Beckford, James A. (2003). Social Theory and Religion. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. p. 2. ISBN 0-521-77431-4.
2.Jump up ^ Titus Lucretius Carus. "De Rerum Natura". Retrieved 2007-08-05.
3.Jump up ^ "Lucretius (c.99 – c.55 BCE)". Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved 2007-08-05.
4.Jump up ^ "Lucretius – Stanford Encyclopedia". Retrieved 19 April 2012.
5.Jump up ^ Lucretius (1992). On the Nature of Things Translated by W.H.D. Rouse. Harvard University Press. p. 8. ISBN 0-674-99200-8. "This (superstition) or "false religion", not "religion," is the meaning of "religio". The Epicureans were opposed, not to religion (cf. 6.68–79), but to traditional religion which taught that the gods govern the world. That Lucretius regarded "religio" as synonymous with "superstitio" is implied by "super....instans" in [line] 65."
6.Jump up ^ Middlemore, S. G. C.; Burckhardt, Jacob; Murray, Peter; Burke, Peter (1990). The Civilization of the Renaissance in Italy. Penguin Classics. ISBN 0-14-044534-X.
7.Jump up ^ Machiavelli, Nicolo (1532). "The Prince". Retrieved 2007-08-10.
8.Jump up ^ "Voltaire's Philosophical Dictionary". Retrieved 30 September 2014.
9.Jump up ^ "Hume on Religion". Retrieved 30 September 2014.
10.Jump up ^ Bailey, David. "What are the merits of recent claims by atheistic scholars that modern science proves religion to be false and vain?".
11.Jump up ^ "The New Atheists". Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
12.Jump up ^ "The Vernon Atheist Display," Press Release, CT Valley Atheists, December 17, 2007 . Retrieved October 1, 2008.
13.Jump up ^ White, Andrew D. (1993). A History of the Warfare of Science with Theology in Christendom : Two volumes. Prometheus Books. ISBN 0879758260.
14.Jump up ^ Hitchens, Christopher (2007). God is Not Great. Random House, Inc. p. 99. ISBN 0-7710-4142-X.
15.Jump up ^ Bart Ehrman; Misquoting Jesus, 166
16.Jump up ^ Bruce M. Metzger, The Text of the New Testament: its transmission, corruption, and restoration, pp. 199–200
17.Jump up ^ Brown, Raymond Edward (1999-05-18). The Birth of the Messiah: a commentary on the infancy narratives in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke. The Anchor Yale Bible Reference Library. Yale University Press. p. 36. ISBN 0-300-14008-8.
18.Jump up ^ "History of The Quote". Retrieved 30 September 2014.
19.Jump up ^ Narciso, Dianna (2003). Like Rolling Uphill: realizing the honesty of atheism. Coral Springs, FL: Llumina Press. p. 6. ISBN 1-932560-74-2.
20.Jump up ^ Opsopaus, John. The Art of Haruspicy.
21.Jump up ^ Hitchens, Christopher. God is Not Great. pp. 169–173.
22.Jump up ^ Dennett, Daniel (2006). Breaking the Spell. Allen Lane. ISBN 0-7139-9789-3.
23.Jump up ^ Harris, Sam (2005). The End of Faith. W. W. Norton. ISBN 0-393-32765-5.
24.^ Jump up to: a b c Hitchens, Christopher (2007). God is not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything. New York: Twelve. ISBN 978-0-446-57980-3.
25.^ Jump up to: a b c d e Dawkins, Richard (2006). The God Delusion. Houghton Mifflin. ISBN 0-618-68000-4.
26.Jump up ^ Lim, Chaeyoon; Puntam, Robert (2010). "Religion, Social Networks, and Life Satisfaction". American Sociological Review 75 (6): 914–933. doi:10.1177/0003122410386686.
27.Jump up ^ Dennett, Daniel Clement (2006). Breaking the Spell : Religion as a Natural Phenomenon. Viking Adult. ISBN 0-670-03472-X.
28.Jump up ^ "When solar fears eclipse reason". BBC News. 2006-03-28. Retrieved 2010-01-02.
29.Jump up ^ "Comets in Ancient Cultures". NASA.
30.Jump up ^ Onfray, Michel (2007). Atheist Manifesto: The Case Against Christianity, Judaism, and Islam. Arcade Publishing. ISBN 1-55970-820-4.
31.^ Jump up to: a b Marx, Karl (February 1844). "Introduction". A Contribution to the Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right. Deutsch-Französische Jahrbücher.
32.Jump up ^ Marx, Karl (1867). Das Kapital. Volume 1, Part VIII.
33.Jump up ^ Dawkins, Richard (2006). The Selfish Gene, 30th Anniversary edition.
34.Jump up ^ Dawkins, Richard (1991). "Viruses of the Mind".
35.Jump up ^ In his 1992–93 Gresham College lectures, written in collaboration with the psychiatrist Quinton Deeley and published as Is God a Virus?, SPCK, 1995, 274 pp. The quotes here come from p.73.
36.Jump up ^ Dawkins's God: Genes, Memes and the Meaning of Life, p.125, quoting Simon Conway Morris in support
37.Jump up ^ Dawkins's God: Genes, Memes and the Meaning of Life, p.126
38.Jump up ^ Dawkins's God: Genes, Memes and the Meaning of Life, p.127
39.Jump up ^ Dawkins's God: Genes, Memes and the Meaning of Life pp.137–138
40.Jump up ^ Dawkins's God: Genes, Memes and the Meaning of Life, p.136, citing Koenig and Cohen, The Link between Religion and Health, OUP, 2002.
41.Jump up ^ Harris, Sam (2005). The End of Faith. W.W. Norton. p. 73. ISBN 978-0-393-03515-5.
42.Jump up ^ "The Psychology of Mysticism". The Primal page.
43.Jump up ^ "Mysticism and Psychopathology". The Primal page.
44.Jump up ^ Atlas, Jerrold (2003). "Medieval Mystics' Lives As Self-Medication for Childhood Abuse".
45.Jump up ^ Pickover, Clifford (September–October 1999). The Vision of the Chariot: Transcendent Experience and Temporal Lobe Epilepsy. Science & Spirit.
46.Jump up ^ "God on the Brain". BBC Science & Nature.
47.Jump up ^ Shermer, Michael (1999-11-01). "Why People Believe in God: An Empirical Study on a Deep Question". American Humanist Association. p. 2. Retrieved 2006-04-05.
48.Jump up ^ Bradshaw, John (18 June 2006). "A God of the Gaps?". Ockham’s Razor (ABC).
49.Jump up ^ Ward, Keith (2006). Is Religion Dangerous?. London:Lion Hudson Plc: Lion. p. 172. ISBN 978-0-7459-5262-8.
50.Jump up ^ Comte, Auguste. "Course of Positive Philosophy (1830)".
51.Jump up ^ Branden, N. (1963), "Mental Health versus Mysticism and Self-Sacrifice," Ayn Rand – The Virtue of Selfishness: A New Concept of Egoism.
52.^ Jump up to: a b Hitchens, Christopher. God is Not Great. pp. 205–217.
53.Jump up ^ Asser, S. M.; Swan, R (1998-Apr; vol 101 (issue 4 Pt 1)). "Child fatalities from religion-motivated medical neglect". Pediatrics 101 (4 Pt 1): pp 625–9. doi:10.1542/peds.101.4.625. PMID 9521945. Check date values in: |date= (help)
54.Jump up ^ "Jerusalem Syndrome: Jewish Virtual Library".
55.Jump up ^ "Jerusalem Syndrome".
56.Jump up ^ Bar-el, Y; Durst, R; Katz, G; Zislin, J; Strauss, Z; Knobler, HY. (2000). "Jerusalem syndrome". British Journal of Psychiatry 176 (1): 86–90. doi:10.1192/bjp.176.1.86.
57.^ Jump up to: a b Kalian, M; Witztum, E. (2000). "Comments on Jerusalem syndrome". British Journal of Psychiatry 176 (5): 492. doi:10.1192/bjp.176.5.492-a.
58.Jump up ^ Tannock C, Turner T. (1995) Psychiatric tourism is overloading London beds. BMJ 1995;311:806 Full Text
59.Jump up ^ Kalian, M; Witztum, E. (1999). "The Jerusalem syndrome"—fantasy and reality a survey of accounts from the 19th and 20th centuries". Isr. J. Psychiatry Relat Sci. 36 (4): 260–71. PMID 10687302.
60.Jump up ^ "Ethics - Honour crimes". BBC. 1970-01-01. Retrieved 2013-08-16.
61.^ Jump up to: a b Hilary Mantell Thousands of Women Killed for Family "Honor". National Geographic News. February 12, 2002
62.Jump up ^ "International Domestic Violence Issues". Sanctuary For Families. Retrieved 2011-12-05.
63.Jump up ^ Handley, Paul (11 Sep 2010). "Islamic countries under pressure over stoning". AFP. Retrieved 22 April 2011.
64.Jump up ^ "Frequently Asked Questions about Stoning". violence is not our culture. Retrieved 14 May 2013.
65.Jump up ^ Sommerville, Quentin (26 Jan 2011). "Afghan police pledge justice for Taliban stoning". BBC. Retrieved 22 April 2011.
66.Jump up ^ Nebehay, Stephanie (10 Jul 2009). "Pillay accuses Somali rebels of possible war crimes". Times of India. Retrieved 22 April 2011.
67.Jump up ^ "Iran 'adulterer' stoned to death". BBC News. 10 July 2007. Archived from the original on 3 December 2012. Retrieved 3 December 2012.
68.Jump up ^ "Iran denies execution by stoning". BBC News. 11 January 2005. Retrieved 2010-09-23.
69.Jump up ^ "Iran to scrap death by stoning". AFP. August 6, 2008. Retrieved September 23, 2010.
70.Jump up ^ «سنگسار» در شرع حذف شدنی نیست
71.Jump up ^ Hitchens, Christopher. God is Not Great. pp. 205–217.
72.Jump up ^ Hitchens, Christopher. God is Not Great. p. 206.
73.^ Jump up to: a b Hitchens, Christopher. God is Not Great. pp. 223–226.
74.Jump up ^ Beale, Theodore as Vox Day, The Irrational Atheist, Benbella Books, 2008. ISBN 978-1-933771-36-6
75.Jump up ^ Rudin, Mike (30 April 2006). "The science of happiness". BBC. Retrieved 2010-01-02.
76.Jump up ^ Paul, Pamela (9 January 2005). "The New Science of Happiness". Time.
77.Jump up ^ Ward, Keith. Is Religion Dangerous?, p.156, citing David Myers The Science of Subjective Well-Being, Guilford Press, 2007.
78.Jump up ^ Smith, Timothy; McCullough, Michael; Poll, Justin (2003). "Religiousness and Depression: Evidence for a Main Effect and Moderating Influence of Stressful Life Events". Psychological Bulletin 129 (4): 614–36. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.129.4.614. PMID 12848223.
79.Jump up ^ Bryan Johnson & colleagues at the University of Pennsylvania (2002)
80.Jump up ^ Is Religion Dangerous? cites similar results from the Handbook of Religion and Mental Health, Harold Koenig (ed.) ISBN 978-0-12-417645-4
81.Jump up ^ e.g. a survey by Robert Putnam showing that membership of religious groups was positively correlated with membership of voluntary organizations
82.Jump up ^ Is Religion Dangerous?, Chapter 9.
83.Jump up ^ Hackney, Charles H.; Sanders, Glenn S. (2003). "Religiosity and Mental Health: A Meta–Analysis of Recent Studies". Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 42 (1): 43–55. doi:10.1111/1468-5906.t01-1-00160.
84.Jump up ^ Clark, A. E., & Lelkes, O. (January 2009). "Let us pray: religious interactions in life satisfaction", working paper no. 2009-01. Paris-Jourdan Sciences Economiques. Abstract retrieved July 2, 2009.
85.Jump up ^ Moreira-Almeida, Alexander; Neto, Francisco Lotufo; Koenig, Harold G. (September 2006). "Religiousness and mental health: a review". Rev. Bras. Psiquiatr. 28 (3): 242–250. doi:10.1590/S1516-44462006005000006. PMID 16924349.
86.Jump up ^ Koenig HG, McCullough M, Larson DB (2001). Handbook of Religion and Health. New York: Oxford University Press. p. 18.
87.Jump up ^ Snoep, Liesbeth (6 February 2007). "Religiousness and happiness in three nations: a research note". Journal of Happiness Studies.
88.Jump up ^ Ronald Inglehart (2010). "Faith and Freedom: Traditional and Modern Ways to Happiness". In Ed Diener, John F. Helliwell, Daniel Kahneman. International Differences in Well-Being. Oxford University Press. pp. 378–385. ISBN 978-0-19-973273-9.
89.Jump up ^ "World Happiness Report 2013" (PDF). Columbia University. pp. 71–72.
90.Jump up ^ Weinberg, Steven (April 1999). "A Designer Universe?". PhysLink.com. Washington, D.C. Retrieved 2010-02-22. "With or without religion, good people can behave well and bad people can do evil; but for good people to do evil — that takes religion."
91.Jump up ^ Russell, Bertrand. "Has Religion Made Useful Contributions to Civilization?". Retrieved 2009-10-23.
92.Jump up ^ Hartung, John (1995). "Love Thy Neighbour, The Evolution of In-Group Morality". Skeptic 3 (5).
93.Jump up ^ Julian Glover. "Religion does more harm than good - poll". the Guardian. Retrieved 30 September 2014.
94.^ Jump up to: a b Juergensmeyer, Mark (2001-09-21). Terror in the Mind of God: The Global Rise of Religious Violence. Updated edition. University of California Press.
95.Jump up ^ "Christian Jihad: The Crusades and Killing in the Name of Christ". Cbn.com. 1998-02-23. Retrieved 2011-10-08.
96.Jump up ^ "Kill Them All; For The Lord Knoweth Them That Are His Steve Locks (Reply) (9-00)". Retrieved 2007-08-18.
97.Jump up ^ "Cover Story – businesstoday – February 2007". Apexstuff.com. 1947-01-24. Retrieved 2009-10-24.
98.Jump up ^ Kabbani, Hisham; Seraj Hendricks; Ahmad Hendricks. "Jihad — A Misunderstood Concept from Islam".
99.Jump up ^ Esposito, John (2005), Islam: The Straight Path, p.93.
100.^ Jump up to: a b Pape, Robert (2005). Dying to Win: The Strategic Logic of Suicide Terrorism. New York, New York: Random House. ISBN 1-4000-6317-5.
101.^ Jump up to: a b Orr, H. Allen (1999). "Gould on God". bostonreview.net. Retrieved 24 January 2009.
102.Jump up ^ "Terrorism: The Current Threat", The Brookings Institution, Washington, DC, 10 February 2000.
103.Jump up ^ Nardin, Terry (May 2001). "Review of Terror in the Mind of God". The Journal of Politics (Southern Political Science Association) 64 (2): 683–684.
104.Jump up ^ Mark Juergensmeyer (2004). Terror in the Mind of God: The Global Rise of Religious Violence. University of California Press. ISBN 0-520-24011-1.
105.Jump up ^ Feinberg, John S.; Feinberg, Paul D. (2010-11-04). Ethics for a Brave New World. Crossway Books. ISBN 978-1-58134-712-8. Retrieved 2007-10-18. "Over a half century ago, while I was still a child, I recall hearing a number of old people offer the following explanation for the great disasters that had befallen Russia: 'Men have forgotten God; that's why all this has happened.' Since then I have spent well-nigh 50 years working on the history of our revolution; in the process I have read hundreds of books, collected hundreds of personal testimonies, and have already contributed eight volumes of my own toward the effort of clearing away the rubble left by that upheaval. But if I were asked today to formulate as concisely as possible the main cause of the ruinous revolution that swallowed up some 60 million of our people, I could not put it more accurately than to repeat: 'Men have forgotten God; that's why all this has happened.'"
106.Jump up ^ Koukl, Gregory. "The Real Murderers: Atheism or Christianity?". Stand To Reason. Retrieved 2007-10-18.
107.Jump up ^ D'Souza, Dinesh. "Answering Atheist’s Arguments". Catholic Education Resource Center. Retrieved 2007-10-18. "And who can deny that Stalin and Mao, not to mention Pol Pot and a host of others, all committed atrocities in the name of a Communist ideology that was explicitly atheistic? Who can dispute that they did their bloody deeds by claiming to be establishing a 'new man' and a religion-free utopia? These were mass murders performed with atheism as a central part of their ideological inspiration, they were not mass murders done by people who simply happened to be atheist."
108.Jump up ^ Hitchens, Christopher (2007). God is not Great. p. 230.
109.Jump up ^ "Richard Dawkins Responds to Papal Attack on Atheists", The Atlantic Wire, September 2010.
110.Jump up ^ Wilson, David B. (2002). "The Historiography of Science and Religion". In Gary Ferngren. Science & Religion: A Historical Introduction. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. ISBN 0-8018-7038-0.
111.Jump up ^ Russell, Colin A. (2002). "The Conflict Thesis". In Gary Ferngren. Science & Religion: A Historical Introduction. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. p. 7. ISBN 0-8018-7038-0. "The conflict thesis, at least in its simple form, is now widely perceived as a wholly inadequate intellectual framework within which to construct a sensible and realistic historiography of Western science"
112.Jump up ^ Shapin, S. (1996). The Scientific Revolution. Chicago, Illinois: University of Chicago Press. p. 195. "In the late Victorian period it was common to write about the ‘warfare between science and religion’ and to presume that the two bodies of culture must always have been in conflict. However, it is a very long time since these attitudes have been held by historians of science"
113.Jump up ^ Brooke, J.H. (1991). Science and Religion: Some Historical Perspectives. Cambridge University Press. p. 42. "In its traditional forms, the conflict thesis has been largely discredited."
114.^ Jump up to: a b Ferngren, Gary (2002). "Introduction". In Gary Ferngren. Science & Religion: A Historical Introduction. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. p. x. ISBN 0-8018-7038-0. "while [John] Brooke's view [of a complexity thesis rather than an historical conflict thesis] has gained widespread acceptance among professional historians of science, the traditional view remains strong elsewhere, not least in the popular mind"
115.Jump up ^ Russell, Colin A. (2002). "The Conflict Thesis". In Gary Ferngren. Science & Religion: A Historical Introduction. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. ISBN 0-8018-7038-0. "The conflict thesis, at least in its simple form, is perceived by some historians as a wholly inadequate intellectual framework within which to construct a sensible and realistic historiography of Western science."
116.Jump up ^ Blackwell, Richard J. (2002). "Galileo Galilei". In Gary Ferngren. Science & Religion: A Historical Introduction. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. ISBN 0-8018-7038-0.
117.Jump up ^ Larson, Edward J. (1997). Summer for the Gods: The Scopes Trial and America's Continuing Battle over Science and Religion. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.
118.Jump up ^ Rupke, Nicolaas A. (2002). "Geology and Paleontology". In Gary Ferngren. Science & Religion: A Historical Introduction. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. ISBN 0-8018-7038-0.
119.Jump up ^ Hess, Peter M. (2002). "Natural History". In Gary Ferngren. Science & Religion: A Historical Introduction. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. ISBN 0-8018-7038-0.
120.Jump up ^ Moore, James (2002). "Charles Darwin". In Gary Ferngren. Science & Religion: A Historical Introduction. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. ISBN 0-8018-7038-0.
121.Jump up ^ Barker, Peter; Goldstein, Bernard R. (2001). "Theological Foundations of Kepler's Astronomy". Osiris. Science in Theistic Contexts 16. University of Chicago Press. pp. 88–113.
122.Jump up ^ Smith, Crosbie (1998). The Science of Energy: A Cultural History of Energy Physics in Victorian Britain. London: The Athlone Press.
123.^ Jump up to: a b Berlet, Chip. "Following the Threads," in Ansell, Amy E. Unraveling the Right: The New Conservatism in American Thought and Politics, pp. 24, Westview Press, 1998, ISBN 0-8133-3147-1
124.Jump up ^ "Humanae Vitae: Encyclical of Pope Paul VI on the Regulation of Birth, July 25, 1968". The Vatican. Retrieved 2006-10-01.
125.Jump up ^ "MPs turn attack back on Cardinal Pell". Sydney Morning Herald. 2007-06-06.
126.Jump up ^ "Pope warns Bush on stem cells". BBC News. 2001-07-23.
127.Jump up ^ Andrew Dickson, White (1898). A History of the Warfare of Science with Theology in Christendom. p. X. Theological Opposition to Inoculation, Vaccination, and the Use of Anaesthetics.
128.Jump up ^ "IAP Statement on the teaching of evolution" (PDF). the Interacademy Panel on international issues. 2006. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2007-07-01. Retrieved 2007-07-03.
129.Jump up ^ Gould, Stephen Jay (2002). Rocks of Ages: Science and Religion in the Fullness of Life. New York: Ballantine Books. ISBN 0-345-45040-X.
130.Jump up ^ Dawkins, Richard (2007). The God Delusion (Paperback ed.). p. 77.
131.Jump up ^ Evans, John (2011). "Epistemological and Moral Conflict Between Religion and Science". Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 50 (4): 707–727. doi:10.1111/j.1468-5906.2011.01603.x.
132.Jump up ^ Baker, Joseph O.; Public Understanding of Science (April 2012). "Public Perceptions of Incompatibility Between "Science and Religion"" 21 (3). pp. 340–353.
133.^ Jump up to: a b Keeter, Scott; Smith, Gregory; Masci, David (2011). "Religious Belief and Attitudes about Science in the United States". The Culture of science: How the Public Relates to Science Across the Globe. New York: Routledge. p. 336,345–346. ISBN 978-0415873697. "The United States is perhaps the most religious out of the advanced industrial democracies." ; "In fact, large majorities of the traditionally religious American nevertheless hold very positive views of science and scientists. Even people who accept a strict creationist view, regarding the origins of life are mostly favorable towards science." ; "According to the National Science Foundation, public attitudes about science are more favorable in the United States than in Europe, Russia, and Japan, despite great differences across these cultures in level of religiosity (National Science Foundation, 2008)."
134.Jump up ^ Norris, Pippa; Ronald Inglehart (2011). Sacred and Secular: Religion and Politics Worldwide (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press. pp. 67–68. ISBN 978-1-107-64837-1.
135.Jump up ^ Christopher P. Scheitle (2011). "U.S. College students' perception of religion and science: Conflict, collaboration, or independence? A research note". Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion (Blackwell) 50 (1): 175–186. doi:10.1111/j.1468-5906.2010.01558.x. ISSN 1468-5906.
136.Jump up ^ "Cross-National Correlations of Quantifiable Societal Health with Popular Religiosity and Secularism in the Prosperous Democracies)". Retrieved 2007-10-30. "There is evidence that within the U.S. strong disparities in religious belief versus acceptance of evolution are correlated with similarly varying rates of societal dysfunction, the strongly theistic, anti-evolution south and mid-west having markedly worse homicide, mortality, STD, youth pregnancy, marital and related problems than the northeast where societal conditions, secularization, and acceptance of evolution approach European norms."
137.Jump up ^ Moreno-Riaño, Gerson; Smith, Mark Caleb; Mach, Thomas (2006). "Religiosity, Secularism, and Social Health" (PDF). Journal of Religion and Society (Cedarville University) 8.
138.Jump up ^ Jensen, Gary F. (2006) Religious Cosmologies and Homicide Rates among Nations: A Closer Look, Journal of Religion and Society, Department of Sociology, Vanderbilt University, Vol. 8, ISSN 1522-5658
139.^ Jump up to: a b Kerley, Kent R.; Matthews, Todd L.; Blanchard, Troy C. (2005). "Religiosity, Religious Participation, and Negative Prison Behaviors". Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 44 (4): 443–457. doi:10.1111/j.1468-5906.2005.00296.x.
140.^ Jump up to: a b Saroglou, Vassilis; Pichon, Isabelle; Trompette, Laurence; Verschueren, Marijke; Dernelle, Rebecca (2005). "Prosocial Behavior and Religion: New Evidence Based on Projective Measures and Peer Ratings". Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 44 (3): 323–348. doi:10.1111/j.1468-5906.2005.00289.x.
141.^ Jump up to: a b Regnerus, Mark D.; Burdette, Amy (2006). "Religious Change and Adolescent Family Dynamics". The Sociological Quarterly 47 (1): 175–194. doi:10.1111/j.1533-8525.2006.00042.x.
142.Jump up ^ for example, a survey by Robert Putnam showing that membership of religious groups was positively correlated with membership of voluntary organisations
143.Jump up ^ As is stated in: Doris C. Chu (2007). Religiosity and Desistance From Drug Use" Criminal Justice and Behavior 2007; 34; 661 originally published online Mar 7, 2007; doi:10.1177/0093854806293485
144.Jump up ^ For example: Albrecht, S. I.; Chadwick, B. A.; Alcorn, D. S. (1977). "Religiosity and deviance:Application of an attitude-behavior contingent consistency model". Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 16 (3): 263–274. doi:10.2307/1385697.
Burkett, S.; White, M. (1974). "Hellfire and delinquency:Another look". Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 13 (4): 455–462. doi:10.2307/1384608.
Chard-Wierschem, D. (1998). In pursuit of the "true" relationship: A longitudinal study of the effects of religiosity on delinquency and substance abuse. Ann Arbor, MI: UMI Dissertation.
Cochran, J. K.; Akers, R. L. (1989). "Beyond hellfire:An explanation of the variable effects of religiosity on adolescent marijuana and alcohol use". Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency 26 (3): 198–225. doi:10.1177/0022427889026003002.
Evans, T. D.; Cullen, F. T.; Burton, V. S.; Jr; Dunaway, R. G.; Payne, G. L.; Kethineni, S. R. (1996). "Religion, social bonds, and delinquency". Deviant Behavior 17: 43–70. doi:10.1080/01639625.1996.9968014.
Grasmick, H. G.; Bursik, R. J.; Cochran, J. K. (1991). "Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's": Religiosity and taxpayer's inclinations to cheat". The Sociological Quarterly 32: 251–266. doi:10.1111/j.1533-8525.1991.tb00356.x.
Higgins, P. C.; Albrecht, G. L. (1977). "Hellfire and delinquency revisited". Social Forces 55: 952–958. doi:10.1093/sf/55.4.952.
Johnson, B. R.; Larson, D. B.; DeLi, S.; Jang, S. J. (2000). "Escaping from the crime of inner cities:Church attendance and religious salience among disadvantaged youth". Justice Quarterly 17: 377–391. doi:10.1080/07418820000096371.
Johnson, R. E.; Marcos, A. C.; Bahr, S. J. (1987). "The role of peers in the complex etiology of adolescent drug use". Criminology 25: 323–340. doi:10.1111/j.1745-9125.1987.tb00800.x.
Powell, K. (1997). Correlates of violent and nonviolent behavior among vulnerable inner-city youths. Family and Community Health, 20, 38–47.
145.Jump up ^ Baier, C. J.; Wright, B. R. (2001). "If you love me, keep my commandments":A meta-analysis of the effect of religion on crime". Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency 38: 3–21. doi:10.1177/0022427801038001001.
146.Jump up ^ Conroy, S. J.; Emerson, T. L. N. (2004). "Business Ethics and Religion: Religiosity as a Predictor of Ethical Awareness Among Students". Journal of Business Ethics 50 (4): 383–396. doi:10.1023/B:BUSI.0000025040.41263.09.
147.Jump up ^ e.g. a survey by Robert Putnam showing that membership of religious groups was positively correlated with membership of voluntary organizations
148.^ Jump up to: a b c "Religious people make better citizens, study says". Pew Research Center. Retrieved 2007-10-18. "The scholars say their studies found that religious people are three to four times more likely to be involved in their community. They are more apt than nonreligious Americans to work on community projects, belong to voluntary associations, attend public meetings, vote in local elections, attend protest demonstrations and political rallies, and donate time and money to causes – including secular ones. At the same time, Putnam and Campbell say their data show that religious people are just "nicer": they carry packages for people, don't mind folks cutting ahead in line and give money to panhandlers."
149.Jump up ^ Campbell, David; Putnam, Robert (2010-11-14). "Religious people are 'better neighbors'". USA Today. Retrieved 2007-10-18. "However, on the other side of the ledger, religious people are also "better neighbors" than their secular counterparts. No matter the civic activity, being more religious means being more involved. Take, for example, volunteer work. Compared with people who never attend worship services, those who attend weekly are more likely to volunteer in religious activities (no surprise there), but also for secular causes. The differences between religious and secular Americans can be dramatic. Forty percent of worship-attending Americans volunteer regularly to help the poor and elderly, compared with 15% of Americans who never attend services. Frequent-attenders are also more likely than the never-attenders to volunteer for school and youth programs (36% vs. 15%), a neighborhood or civic group (26% vs. 13%), and for health care (21% vs. 13%). The same is true for philanthropic giving; religious Americans give more money to secular causes than do secular Americans. And the list goes on, as it is true for good deeds such as helping someone find a job, donating blood, and spending time with someone who is feeling blue. Furthermore, the "religious edge" holds up for organized forms of community involvement: membership in organizations, working to solve community problems, attending local meetings, voting in local elections, and working for social or political reform. On this last point, it is not just that religious people are advocating for right-leaning causes, although many are. Religious liberals are actually more likely to be community activists than are religious conservatives."
150.Jump up ^ Brooks, Arthur. "Religious Faith and Charitable Giving".
151.Jump up ^ Brooks, Arthur C. "Religious faith and charitable giving", Policy Review, Oct–Dec 2003.
152.Jump up ^ Will, George F. "Bleeding Hearts but Tight Fists", Washington Post, 27 March 2008; Page A17
153.^ Jump up to: a b Gose, Ben. "Charity's Political Divide", The Chronicle of Philanthropy, 23 November 2006.
154.Jump up ^ Brooks, Arthur C. Who Really Cares: The Surprising Truth about Compassionate Conservatism, Basic Books, 27 November 2006. ISBN 0-465-00821-6
155.Jump up ^ Stossel, John; Kendall, Kristina (28 November 2006). "Who Gives and Who Doesn't? Putting the Stereotypes to the Test". ABC News.
156.Jump up ^ "Atheists and Agnostics Take Aim at Christians", The Barna Update, The Barna Group, 11 June 2007.
157.Jump up ^ Einstein, Albert (1930-11-09). "Religion and Science". New York Times Magazine. "A man's ethical behavior should be based effectually on sympathy, education, and social ties; no religious basis is necessary. Man would indeed be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear of punishment and hope of reward after death."
158.Jump up ^ "The Barna Update: Morality Continues to Decay" (archive copy at the Internet Archive), The Barna Group, November 3, 2003 ("The Barna Update: Morality Continues to Decay" – Summary version posted on the Barna website)
159.Jump up ^ "And as the capacity for believing is strongest in childhood, special care is taken to make sure of this tender age. This has much more to do with the doctrines of belief taking root than threats and reports of miracles. If, in early childhood, certain fundamental views and doctrines are paraded with unusual solemnity, and an air of the greatest earnestness never before visible in anything else; if, at the same time, the possibility of a doubt about them be completely passed over, or touched upon only to indicate that doubt is the first step to eternal perdition, the resulting impression will be so deep that, as a rule, that is, in almost every case, doubt about them will be almost as impossible as doubt about one's own existence."- Arthur Schopenhauer -On Religion: A Dialogue
160.Jump up ^ Dawkins, Richard. The God Delusion. New York: Bantam Books, 2006. Print. Pp. 25, 28, 206, 367.
161.^ Jump up to: a b Richard Dawkins. "Childhood, abuse and the escape from religion". The God Delusion.
162.Jump up ^ Hitchens, Christopher. "Is Religion Child Abuse?". God is Not Great.
163.^ Jump up to: a b "Seyaj Organization for the Protection of Children.".[dead link]
164.Jump up ^ Cooperman, Alan (2002-06-20). "Anti-Muslim Remarks Stir Tempest". The Washington Post.
165.Jump up ^ Daragahi, Borzou (June 11, 2008). "Yemeni bride, 10, says I won't". Los Angeles Times. Retrieved 16 February 2010.
166.Jump up ^ "Dead Yemeni child bride tied up, raped, says mom". Fox News. 2010-04-10.
167.Jump up ^ "Yemeni child bride dies of internal bleeding". CNN. 2010-04-09.
168.Jump up ^ "CNN article on 12 year old bride death". 2009-09-14.
169.Jump up ^ "Yemeni minister seeks law to end child marriage". BBC News. 2013-09-13.
170.Jump up ^ Compton, Todd (1997). In Sacred Loneliness: The Plural Wives of Joseph Smith. Salt Lake City, UT: Signature Books. ISBN 1-56085-085-X.
171.Jump up ^ Hirshon, Stanley P. (1969). The Lion of the Lord. Alfred A. Knopf.
172.Jump up ^ D’Onofrio, Eve (2005). "Child Brides, Inegalitarianism, and the Fundamentalist Polygamous Family in the United States". International Journal of Law, Policy and the Family 19 (3): 373–394. doi:10.1093/lawfam/ebi028.
173.Jump up ^ "When Elton met Jake |". The Observer url=http://observer.guardian.co.uk/omm/story/0,,1942193,00.html (London). 13 November 2006.
174.Jump up ^ [1] quote - "Hinduism, unlike Christianity and Islam, does not view homosexuality as a religious sin."
175.Jump up ^ Simon, Stephanie (10 April 2006). "Christians Sue for Right Not to Tolerate Policies". Los Angeles Times.
176.Jump up ^ Eke, Steven (28 July 2005). "Iran 'must stop youth executions'". BBC News. Retrieved 2010-01-02.
177.Jump up ^ Berlet, Chip (2004). "A New Face for Racism & Fascism". White Supremacist, Antisemitic, and Race Hate Groups in the U.S.: A Geneaology. Political Research Associates. Retrieved 2007-02-18.
178.Jump up ^ "Ostensibly scientific": cf. Adam Kuper, Jessica Kuper (eds.), The social science encyclopedia (1996), "Racism", p. 716: "This [sc. scientific] racism entailed the use of 'scientific techniques', to sanction the belief in European and American racial superiority"; Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy: Questions to sociobiology (1998), "Race, theories of", p. 18: "Its exponents [sc. of scientific racism] tended to equate race with species and claimed that it constituted a scientific explanation of human history"; Terry Jay Ellingson, The myth of the noble savage (2001), 147ff. "In scientific racism, the racism was never very scientific; nor, it could at least be argued, was whatever met the qualifications of actual science ever very racist" (p. 151); Paul A. Erickson,Liam D. Murphy, A History of Anthropological Theory (2008), p. 152: "Scientific racism: Improper or incorrect science that actively or passively supports racism".
179.Jump up ^ Abanes, Richard (2002). One Nation Under Gods: A History of the Mormon Church. Four Walls Eight Windows. ISBN 1-56858-219-6.
180.Jump up ^ "The Primer, Helping Victims of Domestic Violence and Child Abuse in Polygamous Communities: Fundamentalist Mormon Communities" (PDF). Utah Attorney General’s Office and Arizona Attorney General's Office. June 2006. p. 41. Retrieved 29 June 2010
181.Jump up ^ "Hate Groups Map: Utah". Southern Poverty Law Center.
182.Jump up ^ "Civil Rights Movement in the United States". MSN Encyclopedia Encarta. Microsoft. Archived from the original on 2009-10-31. Retrieved 3 January 2007.
183.Jump up ^ "Religious Revivalism in the Civil Rights Movement". African American Review. Winter 2002. Retrieved 2007-01-03.
184.Jump up ^ "Martin Luther King: The Nobel Peace Prize 1964". The Nobel Foundation. Retrieved 2006-01-03.
185.Jump up ^ http://www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/reports/afghanistan0312webwcover_0.pdf
186.Jump up ^ Ahmed Obaid, Thoraya (6 February 2007). "Statement on the International Day Against Female Genital Mutilation". United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA). Retrieved 2008-02-08.
187.Jump up ^ http://www.onelawforall.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/New-Report-Sharia-Law-in-Britain_fixed.pdf
188.Jump up ^ "Are Honor Killings Simply Domestic Violence?". Middle East Forum. Retrieved 30 September 2014.
189.Jump up ^ "The Christian Men’s Oldest Prejudice: Misogyny, Hate Or Fear?". Retrieved 30 September 2014.
190.Jump up ^ Rogers, Katharine M. The Troublesome Helpmate: A History of Misogyny in Literature, 1966.
191.Jump up ^ Ruthven, K. K (1990). "Feminist literary studies: An introduction". ISBN 978-0-521-39852-7.
192.Jump up ^ Holland, Jack (2006). Misogyny: The World's Oldest Prejudice (1st ed.). New York: Carroll & Graf. ISBN 0-7867-1823-4.
193.Jump up ^ Polly Toynbee. "Polly Toynbee: A woman's supreme right over her own body and destiny is in jeopardy - Comment is free - The Guardian". the Guardian. Retrieved 30 September 2014.
194.Jump up ^ "Religion and Sexism: Images of Woman in the Jewish and Christian Traditions". Retrieved 30 September 2014.
195.Jump up ^ Hitchens, Christopher (2006). Thomas Paine's Rights of Man. Grove Press. p. 37. ISBN 0-8021-4383-0.
196.Jump up ^ http://www.newsweek.com/book-excerpt-hitchenss-god-not-great-99357
197.Jump up ^ "Why do Western Women Convert? - Standpoint". Retrieved 30 September 2014.
198.Jump up ^ "Feminist Philosophy of Religion". Retrieved 30 September 2014.
199.Jump up ^ "Man's Dominion: The Rise of Religion and the Eclipse of Women's Rights - Google Search". Retrieved 30 September 2014.
200.Jump up ^ Teijlingen, Edwin R. (2004). Midwifery and the medicalization of childbirth: comparative perspectives. Nova Publishers. p. 46.
201.Jump up ^ Eller, Cynthia (1995). Living in the lap of the Goddess: the feminist spirituality movement in America. Beacon Press. pp. 170–175.
202.^ Jump up to: a b c Melzer, Emanuel (1997). No way out: the politics of Polish Jewry, 1935–1939. Hebrew Union College Press. pp. 81–90. ISBN 0-87820-418-0.
203.Jump up ^ Poliakov, Léon (1968). The History of Anti-semitism: From Voltaire to Wagner. University of Pennsylvania Press. p. 153. ISBN 0-8122-3766-8.
204.Jump up ^ Collins, Kenneth (November 2010). "A Community on Trial: The Aberdeen Shechita Case, 1893". Journal of Scottish Historical Studies 30: 75. doi:10.3366/jshs.2010.0103.
205.^ Jump up to: a b Shechita UK. "Why Do Jews Practice Shechita?". Chabad.org. Chabad-Lubavitch Media Center. Retrieved 2012-02-26.
206.Jump up ^ Grandin, Temple; Regenstein, Joe M. (March 1994). "Religious slaughter and animal welfare: a discussion for meat scientists.". Meat Focus International (CAB International): 115–123.
207.Jump up ^ Bleich, J. David (1989). Contemporary Halakhic Problems 3. KTAV Publishing House. "A number of medieval scholars regard vegetarianism as a moral ideal, not because of a concern for the welfare of animals, but because of the fact that the slaughter of animals might cause the individual who performs such acts to develop negative character traits, viz., meanness and cruelty"
208.Jump up ^ Scherer, Logan (December 8, 2009). "The Cruelty Behind Muslim Ritual Slaughter". PETA. Retrieved July 25, 2012.
209.Jump up ^ "Treatment of animals: Islam and animals". BBC. August 13, 2009. Retrieved July 25, 2012.
210.Jump up ^ "Halal and Kosher slaughter 'must end'". BBC News. 2003-06-10.
211.Jump up ^ Hitchens, Christopher. God is not Great. pp. 155–169.
212.Jump up ^ Diamond, Sara (1989). Spiritual Warfare: The Politics of the Christian Right. Boston: South End Press.
213.Jump up ^ Ansell, Amy E (1998). Unraveling the Right: The New Conservatism in American Thought and Politics. Westview Press. ISBN 0-8133-3147-1.
214.Jump up ^ Schaeffer, Francis (1982). A Christian Manifesto. Crossway Books. ISBN 0-89107-233-0.
215.^ Jump up to: a b Barron, Bruce (1992). Heaven on Earth? The Social & Political Agendas of Dominion Theology. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan. ISBN 0-310-53611-1.
216.Jump up ^ Davis, Derek H.; Hankins, Barry (2003). New Religious Movements and Religious Liberty in America. Baylor University Press.
217.Jump up ^ Davidson, Carl; Harris, Jerry (2006). "Globalisation, theocracy and the new fascism: the US Right's rise to power". Race and Class 47 (3): 47–67. doi:10.1177/0306396806061086.
218.Jump up ^ Diamond, Sara. 1989. Spiritual Warfare: The Politics of the Christian Right. Boston: South End Press.
219.Jump up ^ Diamond, Sara. 1995. Roads to Dominion: Right-Wing Movements and Political Power in the United States. New York: Guilford Press. ISBN 0-89862-864-4.
220.Jump up ^ Clarkson, Frederick (March/June 1994.). "Christian Reconstructionism: Theocratic Dominionism Gains Influence". The Public Eye 8 (1 & 2). Check date values in: |date= (help)
221.Jump up ^ Clarkson, Frederick (1997). Eternal Hostility: The Struggle Between Theocracy and Democracy. Monroe, Maine: Common Courage. ISBN 1-56751-088-4.
222.Jump up ^ In her early work, Diamond sometimes used the term dominion theology to refer to this broader movement, rather than to the specific theological system of Reconstructionism.
223.Jump up ^ Yurica, Katherine (11 February 2004). "The Despoiling of America". Retrieved 3 October 2007.
224.Jump up ^ Yurica, Katherine 2004. Blood Guilty Churches, 19 January 2005. Retrieved 6 October 2007.
225.Jump up ^ Yurica, Katherine 2005. Yurica Responds to Stanley Kurtz Attack, 23 May 2005. Retrieved 6 October 2007.
226.Jump up ^ The Christian Right and the Rise of American Fascism By Chris Hedges, TheocracyWatch.
227.Jump up ^ Hedges, Chris (May 2005). "Feeling the hate with the National Religious Broadcasters". Harper's. Retrieved 2007-04-11.
228.Jump up ^ Hedges, Chris, American Fascists: The Christian Right and the War on America, Free Press, 2006.
229.Jump up ^ Maddox, Marion 2005. God under Howard: The Rise of the Religious Right in Australian Politics, Allen & Unwin.
230.Jump up ^ Rudin, James 2006. The Baptizing of America: The Religious Right's Plans for the Rest of Us, New York: Thunder's Mouth Press.
231.Jump up ^ Harris, Sam 2007. "God's dupes", Los Angeles Times, 15 March 2007. Retrieved 8 October 2007.
232.Jump up ^ "The Rise of the Religious Right in the Republican Party", TheocracyWatch, Last updated: December 2005; URL accessed May 8, 2006.
233.Jump up ^ Martin, William. 1996. With God on Our Side: The Rise of the Religious Right in America. New York: Broadway Books.
234.Jump up ^ Diamond, Sara, 1998. Not by Politics Alone: The Enduring Influence of the Christian Right, New York: Guilford Press, p.213.
235.Jump up ^ Ortiz, Chris 2007. "Gary North on D. James Kennedy", Chalcedon Blog, 6 September 2007.
236.Jump up ^ Berlet, Chip, 2005. The Christian Right, Dominionism, and Theocracy. Retrieved 25 September 2007.
237.Jump up ^ Diamond, Sara. 1995. "Dominion Theology." Z Magazine, February 1995
238.Jump up ^ Anthony Williams (2005-05-04). "Dominionist Fantasies". FrontPage Magazine. Retrieved 2007-05-04.
239.^ Jump up to: a b Kurtz, Stanley (2005-05-02). "Dominionist Domination: The Left runs with a wild theory". National Review Online. Retrieved 2007-10-06.
240.Jump up ^ Kurtz, Stanley (28 April 2005). "Scary Stuff". National Review Online. Retrieved 2007-10-06.
Further reading[edit]
Mencken, H. L. (1930). Treatise on the Gods. The Johns Hopkins University Press. ISBN 0-8018-8536-1.
Russell, Bertrand (1957). Why I am not a Christian. Barlow Press. ISBN 1-4097-2721-1.
Ellens, J. Harold (2002). The Destructive Power of Religion: Violence in Judaism, Christianity and Islam. Praeger Publishers. ISBN 0-275-99708-1.
External links[edit]
A Historical Outline of Modern Religious Criticism in Western Civilization
The Science of Religion by Gregory S. Paul
The Poverty of Theistic Morality by Adolf Grünbaum
Is there an Artificial God? by Douglas Adams


[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Criticism of religion


































































































































[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Philosophy of religion











































































































































































































































































Portal
Category




[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Religion























































































































































































































































































































































































































































































Atheism template.svgAtheism portal
 

  


Categories: Criticism of religion
Irreligion
Antireligion

















Navigation menu



Create account
Log in



Article

Talk









Read

Edit

View history

















Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store

Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page

Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page

Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version

Languages
العربية
Bosanski
Dansk
Deutsch
Español
فارسی
Français
Bahasa Indonesia
עברית
Kiswahili
Magyar
Bahasa Melayu
Norsk bokmål
Polski
Português
Română
Русский
Српски / srpski
Srpskohrvatski / српскохрватски
Suomi
Svenska
Українська
中文
Edit links
This page was last modified on 21 June 2015, at 15:11.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
  

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_religion









Criticism of religion

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

"Religious criticism" redirects here. For other definitions of religious criticism, see Varieties of criticism § Religious criticism.
Part of a series on
Irreligion
"αθεοι" (atheoi), Greek for "those without god", as it appears in the Epistle to the Ephesians on the third-century papyrus known as "Papyrus 46"

Irreligion[show]












Atheism[show]






























Agnosticism[show]










Nontheism[show]

















Naturalism[show]








People[show]








Books[show]











Secularist organizations[show]







Related topics[show]





Irreligion by country

v ·
 t ·
 e
   
Part of a series on
Criticism of religion

By religion
Buddhism ·
 Christianity  (Catholicism ·
 Jehovah's Witnesses ·
 Seventh-day Adventist)
   ·
 Protestantism ·
 Hinduism ·
 Islam  (Twelver Islam)
   ·
 Jainism ·
 Judaism ·
 Mormonism ·
 Sikhism
 
By religious figure
Jesus ·
 Moses ·
 Muhammad ·
 Ellen G. White
 
By text
Bible ·
 Book of Mormon ·
 Quran ·
 Talmud
 
Critics
Mikhail Bakunin ·
 Giordano Bruno ·
 Richard Dawkins ·
 Denis Diderot ·
 Epicurus ·
 Ludwig Feuerbach ·
 Stephen Fry ·
 Sita Ram Goel ·
 Emma Goldman ·
 Sam Harris ·
 Ayaan Hirsi Ali ·
 Christopher Hitchens ·
 Baron d'Holbach ·
 David Hume ·
 Robert G. Ingersoll ·
 Karl Marx ·
 Friedrich Nietzsche ·
 Michel Onfray ·
 Thomas Paine ·
 Pierre-Joseph Proudhon ·
 Ayn Rand ·
 André Servier ·
 David Silverman ·
 Max Stirner ·
 Bertrand Russell ·
 Dayananda Saraswati ·
 Victor J. Stenger ·
 Voltaire
 
Religious violence
Terrorism ·
 War ·
 Buddhism ·
 Christianity ·
 Islam ·
 Judaism ·
 Mormonism
 
Related topics
Abuse ·
 Apostasy ·
 Crisis of faith ·
 Criticism of atheism ·
 Criticism of monotheism ·
 Persecution ·
 Sexuality ·
 Slavery
 
v ·
 t ·
 e
   
Criticism of religion is criticism of the concepts, doctrines, validity, and/or practices of religion, including associated political and social implications.[1]
Criticism of religion has a long history. In ancient Greece, it goes back at least to the 5th century BCE with Diagoras "the Atheist" of Melos; in ancient Rome, an early known example is Lucretius' De Rerum Natura from the 1st century BCE. Criticism of religion is complicated by the fact that there exist multiple definitions and concepts of religion in different cultures and languages. With the existence of diverse categories of religion such as monotheism, polytheism, pantheism, nontheism and diverse specific religions such as Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Taoism, Buddhism, and many others; it is not always clear to whom the criticisms are aimed at or to what extent they are applicable to other religions.
Critics often consider religion to be outdated, harmful to the individual, harmful to society, an impediment to the progress of science, a source of immoral acts or customs, and a political tool for social control.


Contents  [hide]
1 History
2 Criticism of religious concepts 2.1 Conflicting claims of "one true faith"
2.2 Lack of permanence
3 Explanations as non-divine in origin 3.1 Social construct
3.2 Narratives to provide comfort and meaning 3.2.1 Opium of the people
3.3 Viruses of the mind
3.4 Mental illness or delusion
3.5 Immature stage of societal development
4 Harm to individuals 4.1 Inadequate medical care
4.2 Jerusalem syndrome
4.3 Issues related to sexuality
4.4 Honor killings and stoning
4.5 Blood sacrifice
4.6 Genital modification and mutilation
4.7 Counterarguments
5 Harm to society 5.1 Holy war and religious terrorism 5.1.1 Arguments against religion being a significant cause of violence
5.2 Suppression of scientific progress
5.3 Counterarguments to religion as harmful to society
6 Morality 6.1 Children
6.2 Homosexuals
6.3 Racism
6.4 Women
6.5 Animals
7 Corrupt purposes of leaders 7.1 Corrupt or immoral leaders
7.2 Dominionism
8 See also 8.1 Criticism of specific religions
8.2 Notable critics of religion
9 References
10 Further reading
11 External links

History[edit]
The 1st century BCE Roman poet, Titus Lucretius Carus, in his work De Rerum Natura, wrote: "But 'tis that same religion oftener far / Hath bred the foul impieties of men:"[2] A philosopher of the Epicurean school, Lucretius believed the world was composed solely of matter and void, and that all phenomena could be understood as resulting from purely natural causes. Lucretius, like Epicurus, felt that religion was born of fear and ignorance, and that understanding the natural world would free people of its shackles;[3] however, he did believe in gods.[4] He was not against religion in and of itself, but against traditional religion which he saw as superstition for teaching that gods interfered with the world.[5]
Niccolò Machiavelli, at the beginning of the 16th century said: "We Italians are irreligious and corrupt above others... because the church and her representatives have set us the worst example."[6] To Machiavelli, religion was merely a tool, useful for a ruler wishing to manipulate public opinion.[7]
In the 18th century Voltaire was a deist and was strongly critical of religious intolerance. Voltaire complained about Jews killed by other Jews for worshiping a golden calf and similar actions, he also condemned how Christians killed other Christians over religious differences and how Christians killed Native Americans for not being baptised. Voltaire claimed the real reason for these killings was that Christians wanted to plunder the wealth of those killed. Voltaire was also critical of Muslim intolerance.[8]
Also in the 18th century David Hume criticised teleological arguments for religion. Hume claimed that natural explanations for the order in the universe were reasonable, see Design argument. Demonstrating the unsoundness of the philosophical basis for religion was an important aim of Hume's writings.[9]
In the early 21st century the New Atheists, Sam Harris, Daniel Dennett, Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens, were prominent as critics of religion.[10][11]
Criticism of religious concepts[edit]
See also: Faith and rationality



 A sign that criticizes religion and draws attention to the September 11 attacks, by the Connecticut Valley Atheists in Rockville's Central Park, Vernon in December 2007. The group issued an explanatory press release, stating: "Clearly, 9/11 is the work of fanatics. However, we feel that religion even in moderation provides a foundation for fanatical groups to thrive."[12]
Some criticisms on monotheistic religions have been:
Sometimes conflict with science.[13]
Requiring behaviors that are not sensible (i.e. Old Testament prohibition against wearing garments of mixed fabrics, or punishing children of guilty parents).[14]
Revelations may conflict internally (i.e. discrepancies in the Bible among the four Gospels of the New Testament).[15][16][17]
Conflicting claims of "one true faith"[edit]
See also: Argument from inconsistent revelations
In the context of theistic belief, Stephen Roberts[18] has claimed that he dismisses all gods in the same way others dismiss all other gods.[19]
Lack of permanence[edit]
Opsopaus and Hitchens note obsolete religions — which no longer have active adherents — are evidence that religions are not everlasting.[20] Including Greek mythology, Millerism, Roman mythology, Sabbatai Sevi, and Norse mythology.[21]
Explanations as non-divine in origin[edit]
Social construct[edit]



Christopher Hitchens, journalist and author of God is not Great
See also: Development of religion
Dennett, Harris, and Hitchens have asserted that theist religions and their scriptures are not divinely inspired, but man made to fulfill social, biological, and political needs.[22][page needed][23][page needed][24][page needed] Dawkins balances the benefits of religious beliefs (mental solace, community-building, promotion of virtuous behavior) against the drawbacks.[25][page needed] Such criticisms treat religion as a social construct[26] and thus just another human ideology.
Narratives to provide comfort and meaning[edit]
Daniel Dennett has argued that, with the exception of more modern religions such as Raëlism, Mormonism, Scientology, and the Bahá'í Faith, most religions were formulated at a time when the origin of life, the workings of the body, and the nature of the stars and planets were poorly understood.[27]
These narratives were intended to give solace and a sense of relationship with larger forces. As such, they may have served several important functions in ancient societies. Examples include the views many religions traditionally had towards solar and lunar eclipses, and the appearance of comets (forms of astrology).[28][29] Given current understanding of the physical world, where human knowledge has increased dramatically; Hitchens, Dawkins, and French atheist philosopher Michel Onfray contend that continuing to hold on to these belief systems is irrational and no longer useful.[24][25][30]
Opium of the people[edit]



Karl Marx
Religious suffering is, at the same time, the expression of real suffering and a protest against real suffering. Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people.
—Karl Marx[31]
According to Karl Marx, the father of "scientific socialism", religion is a tool used by the ruling classes whereby the masses can shortly relieve their suffering via the act of experiencing religious emotions. It is in the interest of the ruling classes to instill in the masses the religious conviction that their current suffering will lead to eventual happiness. Therefore, as long as the public believes in religion, they will not attempt to make any genuine effort to understand and overcome the real source of their suffering, which in Marx's opinion was their capitalist economic system. In this perspective, Marx saw religion as escapism.[31]
Marx also viewed the Christian doctrine of original sin as being deeply anti-social in character. Original sin, he argued, convinces people that the source of their misery lies in the inherent and unchangeable "sinfulness" of humanity rather than in the forms of social organization and institutions, which, Marx argued, can be changed through the application of collective social planning.[32]
Viruses of the mind[edit]



Richard Dawkins, author of The God Delusion
In his 1976 book The Selfish Gene, Richard Dawkins coined the term memes to describe informational units that can be transmitted culturally, analogous to genes.[33] He later used this concept in the essay "Viruses of the Mind" to explain the persistence of religious ideas in human culture.[34]
John Bowker criticized the idea that "God" and "Faith" are viruses of the mind, suggesting that Dawkins' "account of religious motivation ... is ... far removed from evidence and data" and that, even if the God-meme approach were valid, "it does not give rise to one set of consequences ... Out of the many behaviours it produces, why are we required to isolate only those that might be regarded as diseased?"[35] Alister McGrath has responded by arguing that "memes have no place in serious scientific reflection",[36] that there is strong evidence that such ideas are not spread by random processes, but by deliberate intentional actions,[37] that "evolution" of ideas is more Lamarckian than Darwinian,[38] and that there is no evidence (and certainly none in the essay) that epidemiological models usefully explain the spread of religious ideas.[39] McGrath also cites a metareview of 100 studies[citation needed] and argues that "if religion is reported as having a positive effect on human well-being by 79% of recent studies in the field, then it cannot be conceivably regarded as analogous to a virus?"[40]
Mental illness or delusion[edit]



 Bodies recovered from the Jonestown massacre, in which members of a religious cult committed a mass murder/suicide
Richard Dawkins argues that religious belief often involves delusional behavior.[25] Others, such as Sam Harris, compare religion to mental illness, saying it "allows otherwise normal human beings to reap the fruits of madness and consider them holy."[41]
There are also psychological studies into the phenomenon of mysticism, and the links between disturbing aspects of certain mystic's experiences and their links to childhood abuse.[42][43][44] In another line of research, Clifford A. Pickover explores evidence suggesting that temporal lobe epilepsy may be linked to a variety of spiritual or ‘other worldly’ experiences, such as spiritual possession, originating from altered electrical activity in the brain.[45] Carl Sagan, in his last book The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark, presented his case for the miraculous sightings of religious figures in the past and the modern sightings of UFOs coming from the same mental disorder. According to Vilayanur S. Ramachandran, "It's possible that many great religious leaders had temporal lobe seizures and this predisposes them to having visions, having mystical experiences."[46] Michael Persinger stimulated the temporal lobes of the brain artificially with a magnetic field using a device nicknamed the "God helmet," and was able to artificially induce religious experiences along with near-death experiences and ghost sightings.[47] John Bradshaw has stated, "Some forms of temporal lobe tumours or epilepsy are associated with extreme religiosity. Recent brain imaging of devotees engaging in prayer or transcendental meditation has more precisely identified activation in such sites — God-spots, as Vilayanur Ramachandran calls them. Psilocybin from mushrooms contacts the serotonergic system, with terminals in these and other brain regions, generating a sense of cosmic unity, transcendental meaning and religious ecstasy. Certain physical rituals can generate both these feelings and corresponding serotonergic activity."[48]
Keith Ward in his book Is Religion Dangerous? addresses the claim that religious belief is a delusion. He quotes the definition in the Oxford Companion to Mind as "a fixed, idiosyncratic belief, unusual in the culture to which the person belongs," and notes that "[n]ot all false opinions are delusions." Ward then characterizes a delusion as a "clearly false opinion, especially as a symptom of a mental illness," an "irrational belief" that is "so obviously false that all reasonable people would see it as mistaken." He then says that belief in God is different, since "[m]ost great philosophers have believed in God, and they are rational people". He argues that "[a]ll that is needed to refute the claim that religious belief is a delusion is one clear example of someone who exhibits a high degree of rational ability, who functions well in the ordinary affairs of life ... and who can produce a reasonable and coherent defense of their beliefs" and claims that there are many such people, "including some of the most able philosophers and scientists in the world today."[49]
Immature stage of societal development[edit]



Philosophy and Christian Art. W. Ridgway, 1878
Philosopher Auguste Comte posited that many societal constructs pass through three stages, and that religion corresponds to the two earlier, or more primitive stages by stating: "From the study of the development of human intelligence, in all directions, and through all times, the discovery arises of a great fundamental law, to which it is necessarily subject, and which has a solid foundation of proof, both in the facts of our organization and in our historical experience. The law is this: that each of our leading conceptions – each branch of our knowledge – passes successively through three different theoretical conditions: the theological, or fictitious; the metaphysical, or abstract; and the scientific, or positive." [50]
Harm to individuals[edit]
Some have criticized the effects of adherence to dangerous practices such as self-sacrifice,[51] as well as unnatural restrictions on human behavior (such as teetotalism and sexual prohibitions) and claim that these result in mental and emotional trauma of fear and guilt.[52]
Inadequate medical care[edit]



Saint Francis Borgia performing an exorcism, by Goya
See also: Exorcism and Faith healing
A detailed study in 1998 found 140 instances of deaths of children due to religion-based medical neglect. Most of these cases involved religious parents relying on prayer to cure the child's disease, and withholding medical care.[53]
Jerusalem syndrome[edit]
Main article: Jerusalem syndrome
Jerusalem has lent its name to a unique psychological phenomenon where Jewish or Christian individuals who develop obsessive religious themed ideas or delusions (sometimes believing themselves to be Jesus Christ or another prophet) will feel compelled to travel to Jerusalem.[54][55]
During a period of 13 years (1980–1993) for which admissions to the Kfar Shaul Mental Health Centre in Jerusalem were analyzed, it was reported[56] that 1,200 tourists with severe, Jerusalem-themed mental problems, were referred to this clinic. Of these, 470 were admitted to hospital. On average, 100 such tourists have been seen annually, 40 of them requiring admission to hospital. About 2 million tourists visit Jerusalem each year. Kalian and Witztum note that as a proportion of the total numbers of tourists visiting the city, this is not significantly different from any other city.[57][58] The statements of these claims has however been disputed, with the arguments that experiencers of the Jerusalem syndrome already were mentally ill.[57][59]
Issues related to sexuality[edit]
See also: Religion and sexuality
According to Christopher Hitchens, religion has opposed certain practices such as masturbation, or certain consensual sexual acts between adults that they see as "unnatural" and asked for their legal prohibition (see sodomy laws).[52]
Honor killings and stoning[edit]
Main articles: Honor killings and stoning
Still occurring in some parts of the world, an honor killing is when a person is killed by family for bringing dishonor or shame upon the family.[60] While religions such as Islam are often blamed for such acts, Tahira Shaid Khan, a professor of women's issues at Aga Khan University, notes that there is nothing in the Qur'an that permits or sanctions honor killings.[61] Khan instead blames it on attitudes (across different classes, ethnic and religious groups) that view women as property with no rights of their own as the motivation for honor killings.[61] Khan also argues that this view results in violence against women and their being turned "into a commodity which can be exchanged, bought and sold".[62]
Stoning is a form of capital punishment whereby a group throws stones at a person until death ensues. As of September 2010, stoning is a punishment that is included in the laws in some countries including Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Yemen, the United Arab Emirates, and some states in Nigeria[63] as punishment for zina al-mohsena ("adultery of married persons").[64] While stoning may not be codified in the laws of Afghanistan and Somalia, both countries have seen several incidents of stoning to death.[65][66]
Until the early 2000s, stoning was a legal form of capital punishment in Iran. In 2002, the Iranian judiciary officially placed a moratorium on stoning.[67] In 2005, judiciary spokesman Jamal Karimirad stated, "in the Islamic republic, we do not see such punishments being carried out", further adding that if stoning sentences were passed by lower courts, they were overruled by higher courts and "no such verdicts have been carried out."[68] In 2008, the judiciary decided to fully scrap the punishment from the books in legislation submitted to parliament for approval.[69] In early 2013, Iranian parliament published official report about excluding stoning from penal code and it accused Western media for spreading "noisy propaganda" about the case.[70]
Blood sacrifice[edit]
See also: Blood sacrifice and Human sacrifice
Hitchens claims that many religions endorse blood sacrifice, wherein innocent victims are killed or harmed to appease deities,[71] specifically citing Judaism for its obsession with blood and sacrifice, particularly the goal of identifying and sacrificing of a pure red heifer (described in Numbers 19), the pursuit of which Hitchens characterizes as "absurd", singling out the goal of raising a human child in a "bubble" so as to "be privileged to cut that heifer's throat".[72]
Genital modification and mutilation[edit]
Hitchens claims that many religions endorse male circumcision and female genital cutting, which he views as genital mutilation, and as immoral, unhealthy, and unnecessary.[73]
Counterarguments[edit]
Responding in the book The Irrational Atheist to criticisms that religion is harmful, Theodore Beale argues that religious individuals tend to be happier and healthier, more likely to have children, and more sexually satisfied than non-religious individuals.[74] There is substantial research suggesting that religious people are happier and less stressed.[75][76] Surveys by Gallup, the National Opinion Research Center and the Pew Organization conclude that spiritually committed people are twice as likely to report being "very happy" than the least religiously committed people.[77] An analysis of over 200 social studies contends that "high religiousness predicts a rather lower risk of depression and drug abuse and fewer suicide attempts, and more reports of satisfaction with sex life and a sense of well-being,"[78] and a review of 498 studies published in peer-reviewed journals concluded that a large majority of them showed a positive correlation between religious commitment and higher levels of perceived well-being and self-esteem and lower levels of hypertension, depression, and clinical delinquency.[79][vague][80] Surveys suggest a strong link between faith and altruism.[81] Studies by Keith Ward show that overall religion is a positive contributor to mental health,[82] and a meta-analysis of 34 recent studies published between 1990 and 2001 also found that religiosity has a salutary relationship with psychological adjustment, being related to less psychological distress, more life satisfaction, and better self-actualization.[83] Andrew E. Clark and Orsolya Lelkes surveyed 90,000 people in 26 European countries and found that "[one's own] religious behaviour is positively correlated with individual life satisfaction.", greater overall "religiosity" in a region also correlates positively with "individual life satisfaction". The reverse was found to be true: a large "atheist" (non-religious) population "has negative spillover effects" for both the religious and non-religious members of the population.[84] Finally, a recent systematic review of 850 research papers on the topic concluded that "the majority of well-conducted studies found that higher levels of religious involvement are positively associated with indicators of psychological well-being (life satisfaction, happiness, positive affect, and higher morale) and with less depression, suicidal thoughts and behavior, drug/alcohol use/abuse."[85]
However, as of 2001, most of those studies were conducted within the United States.[86] There is no significant correlation between religiosity and individual happiness in Denmark and the Netherlands, countries that have lower rates of religion than the United States.[87] A cross-national investigation on subjective well-being has noted that, globally, religious people are usually happier than nonreligious people, though nonreligious people can also reach high levels of happiness.[88] The 2013 World Happiness Report mentions that once crude factors are taken into account, there are no differences in life satisfaction between religious and less religious countries, even though a meta analysis concludes that greater religiosity is mildly associated with fewer depressive symptoms and 75% of studies find at least some positive effect of religion on well-being.[89]
Harm to society[edit]
Some aspects of religion are criticized on the basis that they damage society as a whole. Steven Weinberg, for example, states it takes religion to make good people do evil.[90] Bertrand Russell and Richard Dawkins cite religiously inspired or justified violence, resistance to social change, attacks on science, repression of women, and homophobia.[91]
Hartung has claimed that major religious moral codes can lead to "us vs. them" group solidarity and mentality which can dehumanise or demonise individuals outside their group as "not fully human", or less worthy. Results can vary from mild discrimination to outright genocide.[92] A poll by The Guardian, a UK newspaper noted that 82% of the British people believe that religion is socially divisive and that this effect is harmful despite the observation that non-believers outnumber believers 2 to 1.[93]
Holy war and religious terrorism[edit]



 Entry of the Crusaders into Constantinople by Gustave Doré (1832–1883)
Main articles: Religious war, Religious terrorism and Religious violence
Hitchens and Dawkins say that religions do tremendous harm to society in three ways:[24][page needed][25][page needed]
Religions sometimes encourage war (Crusades, Jihad), violence, and terrorism to promote their religious goals
Religious leaders contribute to secular wars and terrorism by endorsing or supporting the violence
Religious fervor is exploited by secular leaders to support war and terrorism
Although the causes of terrorism are complex, it may be that terrorists are partially reassured by their religious views that God is on their side and will reward them in heaven for punishing unbelievers.[94][95]
These conflicts are among the most difficult to resolve, particularly where both sides believe that God is on their side and has endorsed the moral righteousness of their claims.[94] One of the most infamous quotes associated with religious fanaticism was made in 1209 during the siege of Béziers, a Crusader asked the Papal Legate Arnaud Amalric how to tell Catholics from Cathars when the city was taken, to which Amalric replied: "Tuez-les tous; Dieu reconnaitra les siens," or "Kill them all; God will recognize his own."[96]
Theoretical physicist Michio Kaku considers religious terrorism as one of the main threats in humanity's evolution from a Type 0 to Type 1 civilization.[97]
Arguments against religion being a significant cause of violence[edit]



Michel Onfray, French philosopher who wrote the Atheist Manifesto: The Case Against Christianity, Judaism, and Islam
Some argue that religious violence is mostly caused by misinterpretations of the relevant religions' ethical rules and a combination of non-religious factors.[98][99][100][101] This includes the claim that events like terrorist bombings are more politically motivated than religious.[100][102][103] Mark Juergensmeyer argues that religion "does not ordinarily lead to violence.That happens only with the coalescence of a peculiar set of circumstances—political, social, and ideological—when religion becomes fused with violent expressions of social aspirations, personal pride, and movements for political change."[104]:10 It is also argued that the same violence happens in non-religious countries or regimes such as in communist Soviet Union.[105][106][self-published source?][101][107]
Christopher Hitchens notes that "it is interesting to find that people of faith now seek defensively to say that they are no worse than fascists or Nazis or Stalinists."[108] Richard Dawkins, in response to Pope Benedict's accusations that atheism was responsible for "some 20th-century atrocities", has replied: "how dare Ratzinger suggest that atheism has any connection whatsoever with their horrific deeds? Any more than Hitler and Stalin's non-belief in leprechauns or unicorns.... There is no logical pathway from atheism to wickedness."[109]
Suppression of scientific progress[edit]



Galileo facing the Roman Inquisition
John William Draper and Andrew Dickson White, authors of the conflict thesis, have argued that when a religion offers a complete set of answers to the problems of purpose, morality, origins, or science, it often discourages exploration of those areas by suppressing curiosity, denies its followers a broader perspective, and can prevent social, moral and scientific progress. Examples cited in their writings include the trial of Galileo and Giordano Bruno's execution.
During the 19th century the conflict thesis developed. According to this model, any interaction between religion and science must inevitably lead to open hostility, with religion usually taking the part of the aggressor against new scientific ideas.[110] The historical conflict thesis was a popular historiographical approach in the history of science during the late 19th and early 20th centuries, but its original form is almost entirely discarded by scholars today.[111][112][113] Despite that, conflict theory remains a popular view among the general public,[114] and has been publicized by the success of books such as The God Delusion.
Historians of science including John Hedley Brooke and Ronald Numbers consider the "religion vs. science" concept an oversimplification, and prefer to take a more nuanced view of the subject.[114][115] These historians cite, for example, the Galileo affair[116] and the Scopes trial,[117] and assert that these were not purely instances of conflict between science and religion; personal and political factors also weighed heavily in the development of each. In addition, some historians contend[citation needed] that religious organizations figure prominently in the broader histories of many sciences, with many of the scientific minds until the professionalization of scientific enterprise (in the 19th century) being clergy and other religious thinkers.[118][119][120] Some historians contend that many scientific developments, such as Kepler's laws[121] and the 19th century reformulation of physics in terms of energy,[122] were explicitly driven by religious ideas.
Recent examples of tensions have been the creation-evolution controversy, controversies over the use of birth control, opposition to research into embryonic stem cells, or theological objections to vaccination, anesthesia, and blood transfusion.[123][124][125][126][127]
Counterarguments against assumed conflict between the sciences and religions have been offered. For example, C. S. Lewis, a Christian, suggested that all religions, by definition, involve faith, or a belief in concepts that cannot be proven or disproven by the sciences. However, some religious beliefs have not been in line with views of the scientific community, for instance Young Earth creationism.[128] Though some who criticize religions subscribe to the conflict thesis, others do not. For example, Stephen Jay Gould agrees with C. S. Lewis and suggested that religion and science were non-overlapping magisteria.[129] Scientist Richard Dawkins has said that religious practitioners often do not believe in the view of non-overlapping magisteria (NOMA).[130]
However, research on perceptions of science among the American public concludes that most religious groups see no general epistemological conflict with science or with the seeking out of scientific knowledge, although there may be epistemic or moral conflicts when scientists make counterclaims to religious tenets.[131][132] Even strict creationists tend to have very favorable views on science.[133] Also, cross-national studies, polled from 1981-2001, on views of science and religion have noted that countries with higher religiosity have stronger trust in science, whereas countries that are seen as more secular are more skeptical about the impact of science and technology.[134] Though the United States is a highly religious country compared to other advanced industrial countries, according to the National Science Foundation, public attitudes towards science are more favorable in the United States than Europe, Russia, and Japan.[133] A study on a national sample of US college students examined whether they viewed the science / religion relationship as reflecting primarily conflict, collaboration, or independence. The study concluded that the majority of undergraduates in both the natural and social sciences do not see conflict between science and religion. Another finding in the study was that it is more likely for students to move away from a conflict perspective to an independence or collaboration perspective than vice versa.[135]
Counterarguments to religion as harmful to society[edit]
One study notes that significant levels of social dysfunction are found in highly religious countries such as the US and that countries which have lower religiosity also tend to have lower levels of dysfunction though it is noted in a later edition that correlation does not necessarily imply causation.[136][137][138]
Other studies show positive links in the relationship between religiosity and moral behavior, artruism and crime.[139][140][141][142][143][144] Indeed, a meta-analysis of 60 studies on religion and crime concluded, "religious behaviors and beliefs exert a moderate deterrent effect on individuals' criminal behavior".[139] [140][141][145][146][147][148][149] One study revealed that, at least in the United States forty percent of worship service attenders volunteer regularly to help the poor and elderly as opposed to 15% of Americans who never attend services.[148] Moreover, religious individuals are more likely than non-religious individuals to volunteer for school and youth programs (36% vs. 15%), a neighborhood or civic group (26% vs. 13%), and for health care (21% vs. 13%).[148] Other research has shown similar correlations between religiosity and giving.[150][151][152][153][153][154][155] In similar surveys, those who attended church were also more likely to report that they were registered to vote, that they volunteered, that they personally helped someone who was homeless, and to describe themselves as "active in the community."[156]
Morality[edit]
See also: Human sacrifice, Morality and religion and Religious intolerance
Dawkins contends that theistic religions devalue human compassion and morality. In his view, the Bible contains many injunctions against following one's conscience over scripture, and positive actions are supposed to originate not from compassion, but from the fear of punishment.[25] Albert Einstein stated that no religious basis is needed in order to display ethical behavior.[157]
Survey research suggests that believers do tend to hold different views than non-believers on a variety of social, ethical and moral questions. According to a 2003 survey conducted in the United States by The Barna Group, those who described themselves as believers were less likely than those describing themselves as atheists or agnostics to consider the following behaviors morally acceptable: cohabitating with someone of the opposite sex outside of marriage, enjoying sexual fantasies, having an abortion, sexual relationships outside of marriage, gambling, looking at pictures of nudity or explicit sexual behavior, getting drunk, and "having a sexual relationship with someone of the same sex."[158]
Children[edit]
See also: Indoctrination, Mind control, Religion and children and Child marriage
In the 19th century, philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer argued that teaching some ideas to children at a young age could foster resistance to doubting those ideas later on.[159] Richard Dawkins maintains that the children of religious parents are often unfairly indoctrinated because they do not have yet sufficient maturity and knowledge to make their own conclusions.[160] Christopher Hitchens and Richard Dawkins use the term child abuse to describe what they see as the harm inflicted on children by some religious upbringings.[161][162]
Dawkins states that labeling children as "Muslim child" or "Catholic child" is unreasonable since children are not mature enough to decide major questions in life for themselves. In his view, no reasonable person would speak of a "Marxist child" or a "Tory child", for instance.[161] He suggests such labeling is not seen as controversial because of the "weirdly privileged status of religion".
Islam[163] has permitted the child marriage of older men to girls as young as 9 years of age. Baptist pastor Jerry Vines has cited the age of one of Muhammad's wives, Aisha, to denounce him for having had sex with a nine-year-old, referring to Muhammad as a pedophile.[164]
The Seyaj Organization for the Protection of Children describes cases of a 10-year-old girl being married and raped in Yemen (Nujood Ali),[165] a 13-year-old Yemeni girl dying of internal bleeding three days after marriage,[166][167] and a 12-year-old girl dying in childbirth after marriage.[163][168] Yemen currently does not have a minimum age for marriage.[169]
Latter Day Saint church founder Joseph Smith married girls as young as 13 and 14,[170] and other Latter Day Saints married girls as young as 10.[171] The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints eliminated underaged marriages in the 19th century, but several branches of Mormonism continue the practice.[172]
Homosexuals[edit]


A Westboro Baptist Church picket in Northlake, Illinois, US on November 29, 2005
Main article: Homosexuality and religion
Elton John has said that organized religion promotes the hatred of homosexuals.[173] Unlike many other religions, Hinduism does not view homosexuality as an issue.[174]
In the United States, conservative Christian groups such as the Christian Legal Society and the Alliance Defense Fund have filed numerous lawsuits against public universities, aimed at overturning policies that protect homosexuals from discrimination and hate speech. These groups argue that such policies infringe their right to freely exercise religion as guaranteed by the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment of the United States Constitution.[175]
Homosexuality is illegal in most Muslim countries, and several of these countries impose the death penalty for homosexual behavior. In July 2005, two Iranian men, aged sixteen and eighteen, were publicly hanged for homosexuality, causing an international outcry.[176]
Racism[edit]



 Burning cross often used by Ku Klux Klan to intimidate minorities
Religion has been used by some as justification for advocating racism. The Christian Identity movement has been associated with racism.[177] There are arguments, however, that these positions may be as much reflections of contemporary social views as of what has been called scientific racism.[178]
The LDS Church excluded blacks from the priesthood in the church, from 1860 to 1978.[179] Most Fundamentalist Mormon sects within the Latter Day Saint movement, rejected the LDS Church’s 1978 decision to allow African Americans to hold the priesthood, and continue to deny activity in the church due to race.[180] Due to these beliefs, in its Spring 2005 "Intelligence Report", the Southern Poverty Law Center named the FLDS Church to its "hate group" listing[181] because of the church's teachings on race, which include a fierce condemnation of interracial relationships.
On the other hand, many Christians have made efforts toward establishing racial equality, contributing to the Civil Rights Movement.[182] The African American Review sees as important the role Christian revivalism in the black church played in the Civil Rights Movement.[183] Martin Luther King, Jr., an ordained Baptist minister, was a leader of the American Civil Rights Movement and president of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, a Christian Civil Rights organization.[184]
Women[edit]
See also: Gender and religion, Christianity and domestic violence, Islam and domestic violence and Misogyny
Islamic laws have been criticized by human rights organizations for exposing women to mistreatment and violence, preventing women from reporting rape, and contributing to the discrimination of women.[185] Hitchens and the United Nations also say that Islam is used to justify unnecessary and harmful female genital mutilation (FGM), when the purposes range from deprivation of sexual satisfaction to discourage adultery, insuring virginity to their husbands, or generating appearance of virginity.[73][186] Maryam Namazie argues that women are victimized under Sharia law, both in criminal matters (such as punishment for improper veiling) and in civil matters, and also that women have judicial hurdles that are lenient or advantageous for men.[187]
According to Phyllis Chesler, Islam is connected to violence against women, especially in the form of honor killings. She rejects the argument that honor killings are not related to Islam, and claims that while fundamentalists of all religions place restrictions on women, in Islam not only are these restrictions harsher, but Islam also reacts more violently when these rules are broken.[188]
Christianity has been criticized for painting women as sinful, untrustful, deceiving, and desiring to seduce and incite men into sexual sin.[189] Katharine M. Rogers argues that Christianity is misogynistic, and that the "dread of female seduction" can be found in St. Paul's epistles.[190] K. K. Ruthven argues that the "legacy of Christian misogyny was consolidated by the so-called 'Fathers' of the Church, like Tertullian, who thought a woman was not only 'the gateway of the devil' but also 'a temple built over a sewer'."[191] Jack Holland argues the concept of fall of man is misogynistic as "a myth that blames woman for the ills and sufferings of mankind".[192]
According to Polly Toynbee, religion interferes with physical autonomy, and fosters negative attitudes towards women's bodies. Toynbee writes that "Women's bodies are always the issue - too unclean to be bishops, and dangerous enough to be covered up by Islam and mikvahed by Judaism".[193]
One criticism of religion is that it contributes to unequal relations in marriage, creating norms which subordinate the wife to the husband. The word בעל (ba`al), Hebrew for husband, used throughout the Bible, is synonymous with owner and master.[194] Hitchens argued that the commandment of Thou shalt not covet is sexist because it "throws in 'wife' along with the other property, animal, human, and material, of the neighbor" and considers the wife as "chattel".[195] Hitchens pointed out that divorce in Ireland was only legalized in 1996, and argued that the Roman Catholic Church in Ireland preferred for women to be trapped with violent husbands, rather than to change its dogma.[196]
Feminist Julie Bindel argues that religions encourage the domination of men over women, and that Islam promotes the submission of women to their husbands, and encourages practices such as child marriage. She wrote that religion "promotes inequality between men and women", that Islam's message for a woman includes that "she will be subservient to her husband and devote her life to pleasing him", and that "Islam's obsession with virginity and childbirth has led to gender segregation and early marriage.[197] Another feminist criticism of religion is the portrayal of God as an omnipotent, perfect power, where this power is one of domination, which is persistently associated with the characteristics of ideal masculinity.[198] Sheila Jeffreys argues that "Religion gives authority to traditional, patriarchal beliefs about the essentially subordinate nature of women and their naturally separate roles, such as the need for women to be confined to the private world of the home and family, that women should be obedient to their husbands, that women's sexuality should be modest and under the control of their menfolk, and that women should not use contraception or abortion to limit their childbearing. The practice of such ancient beliefs interferes profoundly with women's abilities to exercise their human rights".[199]
Christian religious figures have been involved in the Middle Ages and early modern period Witch trials, which were generally used to punish assertive or independent women, such as midwives, since witchcraft was often not in evidence,[200] or activists.[201]
Animals[edit]



Shechita
Kosher slaughter has historically attracted criticism from non-Jews as allegedly being inhumane and unsanitary,[202] in part as an antisemitic canard that eating ritually slaughtered meat caused degeneration,[203] and in part out of economic motivation to remove Jews from the meat industry.[202] Sometimes, however, these criticisms were directed at Judaism as a religion. In 1893, animal advocates campaigning against kosher slaughter in Aberdeen attempted to link cruelty with Jewish religious practice.[204] In the 1920s, Polish critics of kosher slaughter claimed that the practice actually had no basis in Scripture.[202] In contrast, Jewish authorities argue that the slaughter methods are based directly upon Genesis IX:3, and that "these laws are binding on Jews today."[205]
Supporters of kosher slaughter counter that Judaism requires the practice precisely because it is considered humane.[205] Research conducted by Temple Grandin and Joe M. Regenstein in 1994 concluded that, practiced correctly with proper restraint systems, kosher slaughter results in little pain and suffering, and notes that behavioral reactions to the incision made during kosher slaughter are less than those to noises such as clanging or hissing, inversion or pressure during restraint.[206] Those who practice and subscribe religiously and philosophically to Jewish vegetarianism disagree, stating that such slaughter is not required, while a number, including medieval scholars of Judaism such as Joseph Albo and Isaac Arama, regard vegetarianism as a moral ideal, not just out of a concern for animal welfare but also the slaughterer.[207]
Other forms of ritual slaughter, such as Islamic ritual slaughter, have also come under controversy. Logan Scherer, writing for PETA, said that animals sacrificed according to Islamic law can not be stunned before they are killed.[208] Muslims are only allowed to eat meat that has been killed according to Sharia law, and they say that Islamic law on ritual slaughter is designed to reduce the pain and distress that the animal suffers.[209]
According to the Farm Animal Welfare Council (FAWC), Halal and Kosher practices should be banned because when animals are not stunned before death, they suffer needles pain for up to 2 minutes, however, Muslims and Jews argue that loss of blood from slash to the throat renders the animals unconscious pretty quickly.[210]
Corrupt purposes of leaders[edit]
Corrupt or immoral leaders[edit]



 Caricature of Mormon leader Brigham Young's wives at his death
Hitchens has noted some leaders who have abused their positions for financial gains such as the Indian mystic Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh who owned 90 Rolls Royce cars, cult leader David Koresh, Joseph Smith who had about 27 wives, and Brigham Young who had about 57 wives.[211]
Dominionism[edit]
Main article: Dominionism
See also: Dominion Theology and Christian Reconstructionism
The term dominionism is often used to describe a political movement among fundamentalist Christians. Critics view dominionism as an attempt to improperly impose Christianity as the national faith of the United States. It emerged in the late 1980s inspired by the book, film and lecture series, "Whatever Happened to the Human Race?" by Francis A. Schaeffer and C. Everett Koop.[212] Schaeffer's views influenced conservatives like Jerry Falwell, Tim LaHaye, John W. Whitehead, and although they represent different theological and political ideas, dominionists believe they have a Christian duty to take "control of a sinful secular society", either by putting fundamentalist Christians in office, or by introducing biblical law into the secular sphere.[123][213][214] Social scientists have used the word "dominionism" to refer to adherence to Dominion Theology[215][216][217] as well as to the influence in the broader Christian Right of ideas inspired by Dominion Theology.[215]
In the early 1990s, sociologist Sara Diamond[218][219] and journalist Frederick Clarkson[220][221] defined dominionism as a movement that, while including Dominion Theology and Christian Reconstructionism as subsets, is much broader in scope, extending to much of the Christian Right.[222] Beginning in 2004 with essayist Katherine Yurica,[223][224][225] a group of authors including journalist Chris Hedges[226][227][228] Marion Maddox,[229] James Rudin,[230] Sam Harris,[231] and the group TheocracyWatch[232] began applying the term to a broader spectrum of people than have sociologists such as Diamond.
Full adherents to reconstructionism are few and marginalized among conservative Christians.[233][page needed][234][235] The terms "dominionist" and "dominionism" are rarely used for self-description, and their usage has been attacked from several quarters. Chip Berlet wrote that "some critics of the Christian Right have stretched the term dominionism past its breaking point."[236] Sara Diamond wrote that "[l]iberals' writing about the Christian Right's take-over plans has generally taken the form of conspiracy theory."[237] Journalist Anthony Williams charged that its purpose is "to smear the Republican Party as the party of domestic Theocracy, facts be damned."[238] Stanley Kurtz labeled it "conspiratorial nonsense," "political paranoia," and "guilt by association,"[239] and decried Hedges' "vague characterizations" that allow him to "paint a highly questionable picture of a virtually faceless and nameless 'Dominionist' Christian mass."[240] Kurtz also complained about a perceived link between average Christian evangelicals and extremism such as Christian Reconstructionism.[239]
See also[edit]
Anthropology of religion
Antireligion
Antitheism
Atheism
Biblical inerrancy
Christianity and violence
Civil religion
Cognitive dissonance
Conversational intolerance
Deism
Development of religion
Folk religion
God is dead
Metaethics
Morality without religion
Philosophy of religion
Problem of evil
Theodicy
Psychology of religion
Rationalism
Religion
Religiosity and intelligence
Religious belief
Religious paranoia
Religious satire
Russell's teapot
Social criticism
Sociology of religion
Supernatural
Superstition
Theism
Theology
True-believer syndrome
Criticism of specific religions[edit]
Controversies about Opus Dei
Criticism of Buddhism
Criticism of Christianity
Criticism of Hinduism
Criticism of Islam
Criticism of Jainism
Criticism of Jehovah's Witnesses
Criticism of Judaism
Criticism of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints
Criticism of Sikhism
Criticism of the Roman Catholic Church
Scientology controversy
Notable critics of religion[edit]
Douglas Adams
George Carlin
Daniel Dennett
Richard Dawkins
Sam Harris
Christopher Hitchens
Baron d'Holbach
David Hume
Lawrence Krauss
Friedrich Nietzsche
Thomas Paine
Bertrand Russell
Dayanand Saraswati
Mark Twain
Voltaire
References[edit]
1.Jump up ^ Beckford, James A. (2003). Social Theory and Religion. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. p. 2. ISBN 0-521-77431-4.
2.Jump up ^ Titus Lucretius Carus. "De Rerum Natura". Retrieved 2007-08-05.
3.Jump up ^ "Lucretius (c.99 – c.55 BCE)". Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved 2007-08-05.
4.Jump up ^ "Lucretius – Stanford Encyclopedia". Retrieved 19 April 2012.
5.Jump up ^ Lucretius (1992). On the Nature of Things Translated by W.H.D. Rouse. Harvard University Press. p. 8. ISBN 0-674-99200-8. "This (superstition) or "false religion", not "religion," is the meaning of "religio". The Epicureans were opposed, not to religion (cf. 6.68–79), but to traditional religion which taught that the gods govern the world. That Lucretius regarded "religio" as synonymous with "superstitio" is implied by "super....instans" in [line] 65."
6.Jump up ^ Middlemore, S. G. C.; Burckhardt, Jacob; Murray, Peter; Burke, Peter (1990). The Civilization of the Renaissance in Italy. Penguin Classics. ISBN 0-14-044534-X.
7.Jump up ^ Machiavelli, Nicolo (1532). "The Prince". Retrieved 2007-08-10.
8.Jump up ^ "Voltaire's Philosophical Dictionary". Retrieved 30 September 2014.
9.Jump up ^ "Hume on Religion". Retrieved 30 September 2014.
10.Jump up ^ Bailey, David. "What are the merits of recent claims by atheistic scholars that modern science proves religion to be false and vain?".
11.Jump up ^ "The New Atheists". Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
12.Jump up ^ "The Vernon Atheist Display," Press Release, CT Valley Atheists, December 17, 2007 . Retrieved October 1, 2008.
13.Jump up ^ White, Andrew D. (1993). A History of the Warfare of Science with Theology in Christendom : Two volumes. Prometheus Books. ISBN 0879758260.
14.Jump up ^ Hitchens, Christopher (2007). God is Not Great. Random House, Inc. p. 99. ISBN 0-7710-4142-X.
15.Jump up ^ Bart Ehrman; Misquoting Jesus, 166
16.Jump up ^ Bruce M. Metzger, The Text of the New Testament: its transmission, corruption, and restoration, pp. 199–200
17.Jump up ^ Brown, Raymond Edward (1999-05-18). The Birth of the Messiah: a commentary on the infancy narratives in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke. The Anchor Yale Bible Reference Library. Yale University Press. p. 36. ISBN 0-300-14008-8.
18.Jump up ^ "History of The Quote". Retrieved 30 September 2014.
19.Jump up ^ Narciso, Dianna (2003). Like Rolling Uphill: realizing the honesty of atheism. Coral Springs, FL: Llumina Press. p. 6. ISBN 1-932560-74-2.
20.Jump up ^ Opsopaus, John. The Art of Haruspicy.
21.Jump up ^ Hitchens, Christopher. God is Not Great. pp. 169–173.
22.Jump up ^ Dennett, Daniel (2006). Breaking the Spell. Allen Lane. ISBN 0-7139-9789-3.
23.Jump up ^ Harris, Sam (2005). The End of Faith. W. W. Norton. ISBN 0-393-32765-5.
24.^ Jump up to: a b c Hitchens, Christopher (2007). God is not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything. New York: Twelve. ISBN 978-0-446-57980-3.
25.^ Jump up to: a b c d e Dawkins, Richard (2006). The God Delusion. Houghton Mifflin. ISBN 0-618-68000-4.
26.Jump up ^ Lim, Chaeyoon; Puntam, Robert (2010). "Religion, Social Networks, and Life Satisfaction". American Sociological Review 75 (6): 914–933. doi:10.1177/0003122410386686.
27.Jump up ^ Dennett, Daniel Clement (2006). Breaking the Spell : Religion as a Natural Phenomenon. Viking Adult. ISBN 0-670-03472-X.
28.Jump up ^ "When solar fears eclipse reason". BBC News. 2006-03-28. Retrieved 2010-01-02.
29.Jump up ^ "Comets in Ancient Cultures". NASA.
30.Jump up ^ Onfray, Michel (2007). Atheist Manifesto: The Case Against Christianity, Judaism, and Islam. Arcade Publishing. ISBN 1-55970-820-4.
31.^ Jump up to: a b Marx, Karl (February 1844). "Introduction". A Contribution to the Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right. Deutsch-Französische Jahrbücher.
32.Jump up ^ Marx, Karl (1867). Das Kapital. Volume 1, Part VIII.
33.Jump up ^ Dawkins, Richard (2006). The Selfish Gene, 30th Anniversary edition.
34.Jump up ^ Dawkins, Richard (1991). "Viruses of the Mind".
35.Jump up ^ In his 1992–93 Gresham College lectures, written in collaboration with the psychiatrist Quinton Deeley and published as Is God a Virus?, SPCK, 1995, 274 pp. The quotes here come from p.73.
36.Jump up ^ Dawkins's God: Genes, Memes and the Meaning of Life, p.125, quoting Simon Conway Morris in support
37.Jump up ^ Dawkins's God: Genes, Memes and the Meaning of Life, p.126
38.Jump up ^ Dawkins's God: Genes, Memes and the Meaning of Life, p.127
39.Jump up ^ Dawkins's God: Genes, Memes and the Meaning of Life pp.137–138
40.Jump up ^ Dawkins's God: Genes, Memes and the Meaning of Life, p.136, citing Koenig and Cohen, The Link between Religion and Health, OUP, 2002.
41.Jump up ^ Harris, Sam (2005). The End of Faith. W.W. Norton. p. 73. ISBN 978-0-393-03515-5.
42.Jump up ^ "The Psychology of Mysticism". The Primal page.
43.Jump up ^ "Mysticism and Psychopathology". The Primal page.
44.Jump up ^ Atlas, Jerrold (2003). "Medieval Mystics' Lives As Self-Medication for Childhood Abuse".
45.Jump up ^ Pickover, Clifford (September–October 1999). The Vision of the Chariot: Transcendent Experience and Temporal Lobe Epilepsy. Science & Spirit.
46.Jump up ^ "God on the Brain". BBC Science & Nature.
47.Jump up ^ Shermer, Michael (1999-11-01). "Why People Believe in God: An Empirical Study on a Deep Question". American Humanist Association. p. 2. Retrieved 2006-04-05.
48.Jump up ^ Bradshaw, John (18 June 2006). "A God of the Gaps?". Ockham’s Razor (ABC).
49.Jump up ^ Ward, Keith (2006). Is Religion Dangerous?. London:Lion Hudson Plc: Lion. p. 172. ISBN 978-0-7459-5262-8.
50.Jump up ^ Comte, Auguste. "Course of Positive Philosophy (1830)".
51.Jump up ^ Branden, N. (1963), "Mental Health versus Mysticism and Self-Sacrifice," Ayn Rand – The Virtue of Selfishness: A New Concept of Egoism.
52.^ Jump up to: a b Hitchens, Christopher. God is Not Great. pp. 205–217.
53.Jump up ^ Asser, S. M.; Swan, R (1998-Apr; vol 101 (issue 4 Pt 1)). "Child fatalities from religion-motivated medical neglect". Pediatrics 101 (4 Pt 1): pp 625–9. doi:10.1542/peds.101.4.625. PMID 9521945. Check date values in: |date= (help)
54.Jump up ^ "Jerusalem Syndrome: Jewish Virtual Library".
55.Jump up ^ "Jerusalem Syndrome".
56.Jump up ^ Bar-el, Y; Durst, R; Katz, G; Zislin, J; Strauss, Z; Knobler, HY. (2000). "Jerusalem syndrome". British Journal of Psychiatry 176 (1): 86–90. doi:10.1192/bjp.176.1.86.
57.^ Jump up to: a b Kalian, M; Witztum, E. (2000). "Comments on Jerusalem syndrome". British Journal of Psychiatry 176 (5): 492. doi:10.1192/bjp.176.5.492-a.
58.Jump up ^ Tannock C, Turner T. (1995) Psychiatric tourism is overloading London beds. BMJ 1995;311:806 Full Text
59.Jump up ^ Kalian, M; Witztum, E. (1999). "The Jerusalem syndrome"—fantasy and reality a survey of accounts from the 19th and 20th centuries". Isr. J. Psychiatry Relat Sci. 36 (4): 260–71. PMID 10687302.
60.Jump up ^ "Ethics - Honour crimes". BBC. 1970-01-01. Retrieved 2013-08-16.
61.^ Jump up to: a b Hilary Mantell Thousands of Women Killed for Family "Honor". National Geographic News. February 12, 2002
62.Jump up ^ "International Domestic Violence Issues". Sanctuary For Families. Retrieved 2011-12-05.
63.Jump up ^ Handley, Paul (11 Sep 2010). "Islamic countries under pressure over stoning". AFP. Retrieved 22 April 2011.
64.Jump up ^ "Frequently Asked Questions about Stoning". violence is not our culture. Retrieved 14 May 2013.
65.Jump up ^ Sommerville, Quentin (26 Jan 2011). "Afghan police pledge justice for Taliban stoning". BBC. Retrieved 22 April 2011.
66.Jump up ^ Nebehay, Stephanie (10 Jul 2009). "Pillay accuses Somali rebels of possible war crimes". Times of India. Retrieved 22 April 2011.
67.Jump up ^ "Iran 'adulterer' stoned to death". BBC News. 10 July 2007. Archived from the original on 3 December 2012. Retrieved 3 December 2012.
68.Jump up ^ "Iran denies execution by stoning". BBC News. 11 January 2005. Retrieved 2010-09-23.
69.Jump up ^ "Iran to scrap death by stoning". AFP. August 6, 2008. Retrieved September 23, 2010.
70.Jump up ^ «سنگسار» در شرع حذف شدنی نیست
71.Jump up ^ Hitchens, Christopher. God is Not Great. pp. 205–217.
72.Jump up ^ Hitchens, Christopher. God is Not Great. p. 206.
73.^ Jump up to: a b Hitchens, Christopher. God is Not Great. pp. 223–226.
74.Jump up ^ Beale, Theodore as Vox Day, The Irrational Atheist, Benbella Books, 2008. ISBN 978-1-933771-36-6
75.Jump up ^ Rudin, Mike (30 April 2006). "The science of happiness". BBC. Retrieved 2010-01-02.
76.Jump up ^ Paul, Pamela (9 January 2005). "The New Science of Happiness". Time.
77.Jump up ^ Ward, Keith. Is Religion Dangerous?, p.156, citing David Myers The Science of Subjective Well-Being, Guilford Press, 2007.
78.Jump up ^ Smith, Timothy; McCullough, Michael; Poll, Justin (2003). "Religiousness and Depression: Evidence for a Main Effect and Moderating Influence of Stressful Life Events". Psychological Bulletin 129 (4): 614–36. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.129.4.614. PMID 12848223.
79.Jump up ^ Bryan Johnson & colleagues at the University of Pennsylvania (2002)
80.Jump up ^ Is Religion Dangerous? cites similar results from the Handbook of Religion and Mental Health, Harold Koenig (ed.) ISBN 978-0-12-417645-4
81.Jump up ^ e.g. a survey by Robert Putnam showing that membership of religious groups was positively correlated with membership of voluntary organizations
82.Jump up ^ Is Religion Dangerous?, Chapter 9.
83.Jump up ^ Hackney, Charles H.; Sanders, Glenn S. (2003). "Religiosity and Mental Health: A Meta–Analysis of Recent Studies". Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 42 (1): 43–55. doi:10.1111/1468-5906.t01-1-00160.
84.Jump up ^ Clark, A. E., & Lelkes, O. (January 2009). "Let us pray: religious interactions in life satisfaction", working paper no. 2009-01. Paris-Jourdan Sciences Economiques. Abstract retrieved July 2, 2009.
85.Jump up ^ Moreira-Almeida, Alexander; Neto, Francisco Lotufo; Koenig, Harold G. (September 2006). "Religiousness and mental health: a review". Rev. Bras. Psiquiatr. 28 (3): 242–250. doi:10.1590/S1516-44462006005000006. PMID 16924349.
86.Jump up ^ Koenig HG, McCullough M, Larson DB (2001). Handbook of Religion and Health. New York: Oxford University Press. p. 18.
87.Jump up ^ Snoep, Liesbeth (6 February 2007). "Religiousness and happiness in three nations: a research note". Journal of Happiness Studies.
88.Jump up ^ Ronald Inglehart (2010). "Faith and Freedom: Traditional and Modern Ways to Happiness". In Ed Diener, John F. Helliwell, Daniel Kahneman. International Differences in Well-Being. Oxford University Press. pp. 378–385. ISBN 978-0-19-973273-9.
89.Jump up ^ "World Happiness Report 2013" (PDF). Columbia University. pp. 71–72.
90.Jump up ^ Weinberg, Steven (April 1999). "A Designer Universe?". PhysLink.com. Washington, D.C. Retrieved 2010-02-22. "With or without religion, good people can behave well and bad people can do evil; but for good people to do evil — that takes religion."
91.Jump up ^ Russell, Bertrand. "Has Religion Made Useful Contributions to Civilization?". Retrieved 2009-10-23.
92.Jump up ^ Hartung, John (1995). "Love Thy Neighbour, The Evolution of In-Group Morality". Skeptic 3 (5).
93.Jump up ^ Julian Glover. "Religion does more harm than good - poll". the Guardian. Retrieved 30 September 2014.
94.^ Jump up to: a b Juergensmeyer, Mark (2001-09-21). Terror in the Mind of God: The Global Rise of Religious Violence. Updated edition. University of California Press.
95.Jump up ^ "Christian Jihad: The Crusades and Killing in the Name of Christ". Cbn.com. 1998-02-23. Retrieved 2011-10-08.
96.Jump up ^ "Kill Them All; For The Lord Knoweth Them That Are His Steve Locks (Reply) (9-00)". Retrieved 2007-08-18.
97.Jump up ^ "Cover Story – businesstoday – February 2007". Apexstuff.com. 1947-01-24. Retrieved 2009-10-24.
98.Jump up ^ Kabbani, Hisham; Seraj Hendricks; Ahmad Hendricks. "Jihad — A Misunderstood Concept from Islam".
99.Jump up ^ Esposito, John (2005), Islam: The Straight Path, p.93.
100.^ Jump up to: a b Pape, Robert (2005). Dying to Win: The Strategic Logic of Suicide Terrorism. New York, New York: Random House. ISBN 1-4000-6317-5.
101.^ Jump up to: a b Orr, H. Allen (1999). "Gould on God". bostonreview.net. Retrieved 24 January 2009.
102.Jump up ^ "Terrorism: The Current Threat", The Brookings Institution, Washington, DC, 10 February 2000.
103.Jump up ^ Nardin, Terry (May 2001). "Review of Terror in the Mind of God". The Journal of Politics (Southern Political Science Association) 64 (2): 683–684.
104.Jump up ^ Mark Juergensmeyer (2004). Terror in the Mind of God: The Global Rise of Religious Violence. University of California Press. ISBN 0-520-24011-1.
105.Jump up ^ Feinberg, John S.; Feinberg, Paul D. (2010-11-04). Ethics for a Brave New World. Crossway Books. ISBN 978-1-58134-712-8. Retrieved 2007-10-18. "Over a half century ago, while I was still a child, I recall hearing a number of old people offer the following explanation for the great disasters that had befallen Russia: 'Men have forgotten God; that's why all this has happened.' Since then I have spent well-nigh 50 years working on the history of our revolution; in the process I have read hundreds of books, collected hundreds of personal testimonies, and have already contributed eight volumes of my own toward the effort of clearing away the rubble left by that upheaval. But if I were asked today to formulate as concisely as possible the main cause of the ruinous revolution that swallowed up some 60 million of our people, I could not put it more accurately than to repeat: 'Men have forgotten God; that's why all this has happened.'"
106.Jump up ^ Koukl, Gregory. "The Real Murderers: Atheism or Christianity?". Stand To Reason. Retrieved 2007-10-18.
107.Jump up ^ D'Souza, Dinesh. "Answering Atheist’s Arguments". Catholic Education Resource Center. Retrieved 2007-10-18. "And who can deny that Stalin and Mao, not to mention Pol Pot and a host of others, all committed atrocities in the name of a Communist ideology that was explicitly atheistic? Who can dispute that they did their bloody deeds by claiming to be establishing a 'new man' and a religion-free utopia? These were mass murders performed with atheism as a central part of their ideological inspiration, they were not mass murders done by people who simply happened to be atheist."
108.Jump up ^ Hitchens, Christopher (2007). God is not Great. p. 230.
109.Jump up ^ "Richard Dawkins Responds to Papal Attack on Atheists", The Atlantic Wire, September 2010.
110.Jump up ^ Wilson, David B. (2002). "The Historiography of Science and Religion". In Gary Ferngren. Science & Religion: A Historical Introduction. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. ISBN 0-8018-7038-0.
111.Jump up ^ Russell, Colin A. (2002). "The Conflict Thesis". In Gary Ferngren. Science & Religion: A Historical Introduction. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. p. 7. ISBN 0-8018-7038-0. "The conflict thesis, at least in its simple form, is now widely perceived as a wholly inadequate intellectual framework within which to construct a sensible and realistic historiography of Western science"
112.Jump up ^ Shapin, S. (1996). The Scientific Revolution. Chicago, Illinois: University of Chicago Press. p. 195. "In the late Victorian period it was common to write about the ‘warfare between science and religion’ and to presume that the two bodies of culture must always have been in conflict. However, it is a very long time since these attitudes have been held by historians of science"
113.Jump up ^ Brooke, J.H. (1991). Science and Religion: Some Historical Perspectives. Cambridge University Press. p. 42. "In its traditional forms, the conflict thesis has been largely discredited."
114.^ Jump up to: a b Ferngren, Gary (2002). "Introduction". In Gary Ferngren. Science & Religion: A Historical Introduction. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. p. x. ISBN 0-8018-7038-0. "while [John] Brooke's view [of a complexity thesis rather than an historical conflict thesis] has gained widespread acceptance among professional historians of science, the traditional view remains strong elsewhere, not least in the popular mind"
115.Jump up ^ Russell, Colin A. (2002). "The Conflict Thesis". In Gary Ferngren. Science & Religion: A Historical Introduction. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. ISBN 0-8018-7038-0. "The conflict thesis, at least in its simple form, is perceived by some historians as a wholly inadequate intellectual framework within which to construct a sensible and realistic historiography of Western science."
116.Jump up ^ Blackwell, Richard J. (2002). "Galileo Galilei". In Gary Ferngren. Science & Religion: A Historical Introduction. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. ISBN 0-8018-7038-0.
117.Jump up ^ Larson, Edward J. (1997). Summer for the Gods: The Scopes Trial and America's Continuing Battle over Science and Religion. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.
118.Jump up ^ Rupke, Nicolaas A. (2002). "Geology and Paleontology". In Gary Ferngren. Science & Religion: A Historical Introduction. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. ISBN 0-8018-7038-0.
119.Jump up ^ Hess, Peter M. (2002). "Natural History". In Gary Ferngren. Science & Religion: A Historical Introduction. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. ISBN 0-8018-7038-0.
120.Jump up ^ Moore, James (2002). "Charles Darwin". In Gary Ferngren. Science & Religion: A Historical Introduction. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. ISBN 0-8018-7038-0.
121.Jump up ^ Barker, Peter; Goldstein, Bernard R. (2001). "Theological Foundations of Kepler's Astronomy". Osiris. Science in Theistic Contexts 16. University of Chicago Press. pp. 88–113.
122.Jump up ^ Smith, Crosbie (1998). The Science of Energy: A Cultural History of Energy Physics in Victorian Britain. London: The Athlone Press.
123.^ Jump up to: a b Berlet, Chip. "Following the Threads," in Ansell, Amy E. Unraveling the Right: The New Conservatism in American Thought and Politics, pp. 24, Westview Press, 1998, ISBN 0-8133-3147-1
124.Jump up ^ "Humanae Vitae: Encyclical of Pope Paul VI on the Regulation of Birth, July 25, 1968". The Vatican. Retrieved 2006-10-01.
125.Jump up ^ "MPs turn attack back on Cardinal Pell". Sydney Morning Herald. 2007-06-06.
126.Jump up ^ "Pope warns Bush on stem cells". BBC News. 2001-07-23.
127.Jump up ^ Andrew Dickson, White (1898). A History of the Warfare of Science with Theology in Christendom. p. X. Theological Opposition to Inoculation, Vaccination, and the Use of Anaesthetics.
128.Jump up ^ "IAP Statement on the teaching of evolution" (PDF). the Interacademy Panel on international issues. 2006. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2007-07-01. Retrieved 2007-07-03.
129.Jump up ^ Gould, Stephen Jay (2002). Rocks of Ages: Science and Religion in the Fullness of Life. New York: Ballantine Books. ISBN 0-345-45040-X.
130.Jump up ^ Dawkins, Richard (2007). The God Delusion (Paperback ed.). p. 77.
131.Jump up ^ Evans, John (2011). "Epistemological and Moral Conflict Between Religion and Science". Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 50 (4): 707–727. doi:10.1111/j.1468-5906.2011.01603.x.
132.Jump up ^ Baker, Joseph O.; Public Understanding of Science (April 2012). "Public Perceptions of Incompatibility Between "Science and Religion"" 21 (3). pp. 340–353.
133.^ Jump up to: a b Keeter, Scott; Smith, Gregory; Masci, David (2011). "Religious Belief and Attitudes about Science in the United States". The Culture of science: How the Public Relates to Science Across the Globe. New York: Routledge. p. 336,345–346. ISBN 978-0415873697. "The United States is perhaps the most religious out of the advanced industrial democracies." ; "In fact, large majorities of the traditionally religious American nevertheless hold very positive views of science and scientists. Even people who accept a strict creationist view, regarding the origins of life are mostly favorable towards science." ; "According to the National Science Foundation, public attitudes about science are more favorable in the United States than in Europe, Russia, and Japan, despite great differences across these cultures in level of religiosity (National Science Foundation, 2008)."
134.Jump up ^ Norris, Pippa; Ronald Inglehart (2011). Sacred and Secular: Religion and Politics Worldwide (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press. pp. 67–68. ISBN 978-1-107-64837-1.
135.Jump up ^ Christopher P. Scheitle (2011). "U.S. College students' perception of religion and science: Conflict, collaboration, or independence? A research note". Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion (Blackwell) 50 (1): 175–186. doi:10.1111/j.1468-5906.2010.01558.x. ISSN 1468-5906.
136.Jump up ^ "Cross-National Correlations of Quantifiable Societal Health with Popular Religiosity and Secularism in the Prosperous Democracies)". Retrieved 2007-10-30. "There is evidence that within the U.S. strong disparities in religious belief versus acceptance of evolution are correlated with similarly varying rates of societal dysfunction, the strongly theistic, anti-evolution south and mid-west having markedly worse homicide, mortality, STD, youth pregnancy, marital and related problems than the northeast where societal conditions, secularization, and acceptance of evolution approach European norms."
137.Jump up ^ Moreno-Riaño, Gerson; Smith, Mark Caleb; Mach, Thomas (2006). "Religiosity, Secularism, and Social Health" (PDF). Journal of Religion and Society (Cedarville University) 8.
138.Jump up ^ Jensen, Gary F. (2006) Religious Cosmologies and Homicide Rates among Nations: A Closer Look, Journal of Religion and Society, Department of Sociology, Vanderbilt University, Vol. 8, ISSN 1522-5658
139.^ Jump up to: a b Kerley, Kent R.; Matthews, Todd L.; Blanchard, Troy C. (2005). "Religiosity, Religious Participation, and Negative Prison Behaviors". Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 44 (4): 443–457. doi:10.1111/j.1468-5906.2005.00296.x.
140.^ Jump up to: a b Saroglou, Vassilis; Pichon, Isabelle; Trompette, Laurence; Verschueren, Marijke; Dernelle, Rebecca (2005). "Prosocial Behavior and Religion: New Evidence Based on Projective Measures and Peer Ratings". Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 44 (3): 323–348. doi:10.1111/j.1468-5906.2005.00289.x.
141.^ Jump up to: a b Regnerus, Mark D.; Burdette, Amy (2006). "Religious Change and Adolescent Family Dynamics". The Sociological Quarterly 47 (1): 175–194. doi:10.1111/j.1533-8525.2006.00042.x.
142.Jump up ^ for example, a survey by Robert Putnam showing that membership of religious groups was positively correlated with membership of voluntary organisations
143.Jump up ^ As is stated in: Doris C. Chu (2007). Religiosity and Desistance From Drug Use" Criminal Justice and Behavior 2007; 34; 661 originally published online Mar 7, 2007; doi:10.1177/0093854806293485
144.Jump up ^ For example: Albrecht, S. I.; Chadwick, B. A.; Alcorn, D. S. (1977). "Religiosity and deviance:Application of an attitude-behavior contingent consistency model". Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 16 (3): 263–274. doi:10.2307/1385697.
Burkett, S.; White, M. (1974). "Hellfire and delinquency:Another look". Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 13 (4): 455–462. doi:10.2307/1384608.
Chard-Wierschem, D. (1998). In pursuit of the "true" relationship: A longitudinal study of the effects of religiosity on delinquency and substance abuse. Ann Arbor, MI: UMI Dissertation.
Cochran, J. K.; Akers, R. L. (1989). "Beyond hellfire:An explanation of the variable effects of religiosity on adolescent marijuana and alcohol use". Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency 26 (3): 198–225. doi:10.1177/0022427889026003002.
Evans, T. D.; Cullen, F. T.; Burton, V. S.; Jr; Dunaway, R. G.; Payne, G. L.; Kethineni, S. R. (1996). "Religion, social bonds, and delinquency". Deviant Behavior 17: 43–70. doi:10.1080/01639625.1996.9968014.
Grasmick, H. G.; Bursik, R. J.; Cochran, J. K. (1991). "Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's": Religiosity and taxpayer's inclinations to cheat". The Sociological Quarterly 32: 251–266. doi:10.1111/j.1533-8525.1991.tb00356.x.
Higgins, P. C.; Albrecht, G. L. (1977). "Hellfire and delinquency revisited". Social Forces 55: 952–958. doi:10.1093/sf/55.4.952.
Johnson, B. R.; Larson, D. B.; DeLi, S.; Jang, S. J. (2000). "Escaping from the crime of inner cities:Church attendance and religious salience among disadvantaged youth". Justice Quarterly 17: 377–391. doi:10.1080/07418820000096371.
Johnson, R. E.; Marcos, A. C.; Bahr, S. J. (1987). "The role of peers in the complex etiology of adolescent drug use". Criminology 25: 323–340. doi:10.1111/j.1745-9125.1987.tb00800.x.
Powell, K. (1997). Correlates of violent and nonviolent behavior among vulnerable inner-city youths. Family and Community Health, 20, 38–47.
145.Jump up ^ Baier, C. J.; Wright, B. R. (2001). "If you love me, keep my commandments":A meta-analysis of the effect of religion on crime". Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency 38: 3–21. doi:10.1177/0022427801038001001.
146.Jump up ^ Conroy, S. J.; Emerson, T. L. N. (2004). "Business Ethics and Religion: Religiosity as a Predictor of Ethical Awareness Among Students". Journal of Business Ethics 50 (4): 383–396. doi:10.1023/B:BUSI.0000025040.41263.09.
147.Jump up ^ e.g. a survey by Robert Putnam showing that membership of religious groups was positively correlated with membership of voluntary organizations
148.^ Jump up to: a b c "Religious people make better citizens, study says". Pew Research Center. Retrieved 2007-10-18. "The scholars say their studies found that religious people are three to four times more likely to be involved in their community. They are more apt than nonreligious Americans to work on community projects, belong to voluntary associations, attend public meetings, vote in local elections, attend protest demonstrations and political rallies, and donate time and money to causes – including secular ones. At the same time, Putnam and Campbell say their data show that religious people are just "nicer": they carry packages for people, don't mind folks cutting ahead in line and give money to panhandlers."
149.Jump up ^ Campbell, David; Putnam, Robert (2010-11-14). "Religious people are 'better neighbors'". USA Today. Retrieved 2007-10-18. "However, on the other side of the ledger, religious people are also "better neighbors" than their secular counterparts. No matter the civic activity, being more religious means being more involved. Take, for example, volunteer work. Compared with people who never attend worship services, those who attend weekly are more likely to volunteer in religious activities (no surprise there), but also for secular causes. The differences between religious and secular Americans can be dramatic. Forty percent of worship-attending Americans volunteer regularly to help the poor and elderly, compared with 15% of Americans who never attend services. Frequent-attenders are also more likely than the never-attenders to volunteer for school and youth programs (36% vs. 15%), a neighborhood or civic group (26% vs. 13%), and for health care (21% vs. 13%). The same is true for philanthropic giving; religious Americans give more money to secular causes than do secular Americans. And the list goes on, as it is true for good deeds such as helping someone find a job, donating blood, and spending time with someone who is feeling blue. Furthermore, the "religious edge" holds up for organized forms of community involvement: membership in organizations, working to solve community problems, attending local meetings, voting in local elections, and working for social or political reform. On this last point, it is not just that religious people are advocating for right-leaning causes, although many are. Religious liberals are actually more likely to be community activists than are religious conservatives."
150.Jump up ^ Brooks, Arthur. "Religious Faith and Charitable Giving".
151.Jump up ^ Brooks, Arthur C. "Religious faith and charitable giving", Policy Review, Oct–Dec 2003.
152.Jump up ^ Will, George F. "Bleeding Hearts but Tight Fists", Washington Post, 27 March 2008; Page A17
153.^ Jump up to: a b Gose, Ben. "Charity's Political Divide", The Chronicle of Philanthropy, 23 November 2006.
154.Jump up ^ Brooks, Arthur C. Who Really Cares: The Surprising Truth about Compassionate Conservatism, Basic Books, 27 November 2006. ISBN 0-465-00821-6
155.Jump up ^ Stossel, John; Kendall, Kristina (28 November 2006). "Who Gives and Who Doesn't? Putting the Stereotypes to the Test". ABC News.
156.Jump up ^ "Atheists and Agnostics Take Aim at Christians", The Barna Update, The Barna Group, 11 June 2007.
157.Jump up ^ Einstein, Albert (1930-11-09). "Religion and Science". New York Times Magazine. "A man's ethical behavior should be based effectually on sympathy, education, and social ties; no religious basis is necessary. Man would indeed be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear of punishment and hope of reward after death."
158.Jump up ^ "The Barna Update: Morality Continues to Decay" (archive copy at the Internet Archive), The Barna Group, November 3, 2003 ("The Barna Update: Morality Continues to Decay" – Summary version posted on the Barna website)
159.Jump up ^ "And as the capacity for believing is strongest in childhood, special care is taken to make sure of this tender age. This has much more to do with the doctrines of belief taking root than threats and reports of miracles. If, in early childhood, certain fundamental views and doctrines are paraded with unusual solemnity, and an air of the greatest earnestness never before visible in anything else; if, at the same time, the possibility of a doubt about them be completely passed over, or touched upon only to indicate that doubt is the first step to eternal perdition, the resulting impression will be so deep that, as a rule, that is, in almost every case, doubt about them will be almost as impossible as doubt about one's own existence."- Arthur Schopenhauer -On Religion: A Dialogue
160.Jump up ^ Dawkins, Richard. The God Delusion. New York: Bantam Books, 2006. Print. Pp. 25, 28, 206, 367.
161.^ Jump up to: a b Richard Dawkins. "Childhood, abuse and the escape from religion". The God Delusion.
162.Jump up ^ Hitchens, Christopher. "Is Religion Child Abuse?". God is Not Great.
163.^ Jump up to: a b "Seyaj Organization for the Protection of Children.".[dead link]
164.Jump up ^ Cooperman, Alan (2002-06-20). "Anti-Muslim Remarks Stir Tempest". The Washington Post.
165.Jump up ^ Daragahi, Borzou (June 11, 2008). "Yemeni bride, 10, says I won't". Los Angeles Times. Retrieved 16 February 2010.
166.Jump up ^ "Dead Yemeni child bride tied up, raped, says mom". Fox News. 2010-04-10.
167.Jump up ^ "Yemeni child bride dies of internal bleeding". CNN. 2010-04-09.
168.Jump up ^ "CNN article on 12 year old bride death". 2009-09-14.
169.Jump up ^ "Yemeni minister seeks law to end child marriage". BBC News. 2013-09-13.
170.Jump up ^ Compton, Todd (1997). In Sacred Loneliness: The Plural Wives of Joseph Smith. Salt Lake City, UT: Signature Books. ISBN 1-56085-085-X.
171.Jump up ^ Hirshon, Stanley P. (1969). The Lion of the Lord. Alfred A. Knopf.
172.Jump up ^ D’Onofrio, Eve (2005). "Child Brides, Inegalitarianism, and the Fundamentalist Polygamous Family in the United States". International Journal of Law, Policy and the Family 19 (3): 373–394. doi:10.1093/lawfam/ebi028.
173.Jump up ^ "When Elton met Jake |". The Observer url=http://observer.guardian.co.uk/omm/story/0,,1942193,00.html (London). 13 November 2006.
174.Jump up ^ [1] quote - "Hinduism, unlike Christianity and Islam, does not view homosexuality as a religious sin."
175.Jump up ^ Simon, Stephanie (10 April 2006). "Christians Sue for Right Not to Tolerate Policies". Los Angeles Times.
176.Jump up ^ Eke, Steven (28 July 2005). "Iran 'must stop youth executions'". BBC News. Retrieved 2010-01-02.
177.Jump up ^ Berlet, Chip (2004). "A New Face for Racism & Fascism". White Supremacist, Antisemitic, and Race Hate Groups in the U.S.: A Geneaology. Political Research Associates. Retrieved 2007-02-18.
178.Jump up ^ "Ostensibly scientific": cf. Adam Kuper, Jessica Kuper (eds.), The social science encyclopedia (1996), "Racism", p. 716: "This [sc. scientific] racism entailed the use of 'scientific techniques', to sanction the belief in European and American racial superiority"; Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy: Questions to sociobiology (1998), "Race, theories of", p. 18: "Its exponents [sc. of scientific racism] tended to equate race with species and claimed that it constituted a scientific explanation of human history"; Terry Jay Ellingson, The myth of the noble savage (2001), 147ff. "In scientific racism, the racism was never very scientific; nor, it could at least be argued, was whatever met the qualifications of actual science ever very racist" (p. 151); Paul A. Erickson,Liam D. Murphy, A History of Anthropological Theory (2008), p. 152: "Scientific racism: Improper or incorrect science that actively or passively supports racism".
179.Jump up ^ Abanes, Richard (2002). One Nation Under Gods: A History of the Mormon Church. Four Walls Eight Windows. ISBN 1-56858-219-6.
180.Jump up ^ "The Primer, Helping Victims of Domestic Violence and Child Abuse in Polygamous Communities: Fundamentalist Mormon Communities" (PDF). Utah Attorney General’s Office and Arizona Attorney General's Office. June 2006. p. 41. Retrieved 29 June 2010
181.Jump up ^ "Hate Groups Map: Utah". Southern Poverty Law Center.
182.Jump up ^ "Civil Rights Movement in the United States". MSN Encyclopedia Encarta. Microsoft. Archived from the original on 2009-10-31. Retrieved 3 January 2007.
183.Jump up ^ "Religious Revivalism in the Civil Rights Movement". African American Review. Winter 2002. Retrieved 2007-01-03.
184.Jump up ^ "Martin Luther King: The Nobel Peace Prize 1964". The Nobel Foundation. Retrieved 2006-01-03.
185.Jump up ^ http://www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/reports/afghanistan0312webwcover_0.pdf
186.Jump up ^ Ahmed Obaid, Thoraya (6 February 2007). "Statement on the International Day Against Female Genital Mutilation". United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA). Retrieved 2008-02-08.
187.Jump up ^ http://www.onelawforall.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/New-Report-Sharia-Law-in-Britain_fixed.pdf
188.Jump up ^ "Are Honor Killings Simply Domestic Violence?". Middle East Forum. Retrieved 30 September 2014.
189.Jump up ^ "The Christian Men’s Oldest Prejudice: Misogyny, Hate Or Fear?". Retrieved 30 September 2014.
190.Jump up ^ Rogers, Katharine M. The Troublesome Helpmate: A History of Misogyny in Literature, 1966.
191.Jump up ^ Ruthven, K. K (1990). "Feminist literary studies: An introduction". ISBN 978-0-521-39852-7.
192.Jump up ^ Holland, Jack (2006). Misogyny: The World's Oldest Prejudice (1st ed.). New York: Carroll & Graf. ISBN 0-7867-1823-4.
193.Jump up ^ Polly Toynbee. "Polly Toynbee: A woman's supreme right over her own body and destiny is in jeopardy - Comment is free - The Guardian". the Guardian. Retrieved 30 September 2014.
194.Jump up ^ "Religion and Sexism: Images of Woman in the Jewish and Christian Traditions". Retrieved 30 September 2014.
195.Jump up ^ Hitchens, Christopher (2006). Thomas Paine's Rights of Man. Grove Press. p. 37. ISBN 0-8021-4383-0.
196.Jump up ^ http://www.newsweek.com/book-excerpt-hitchenss-god-not-great-99357
197.Jump up ^ "Why do Western Women Convert? - Standpoint". Retrieved 30 September 2014.
198.Jump up ^ "Feminist Philosophy of Religion". Retrieved 30 September 2014.
199.Jump up ^ "Man's Dominion: The Rise of Religion and the Eclipse of Women's Rights - Google Search". Retrieved 30 September 2014.
200.Jump up ^ Teijlingen, Edwin R. (2004). Midwifery and the medicalization of childbirth: comparative perspectives. Nova Publishers. p. 46.
201.Jump up ^ Eller, Cynthia (1995). Living in the lap of the Goddess: the feminist spirituality movement in America. Beacon Press. pp. 170–175.
202.^ Jump up to: a b c Melzer, Emanuel (1997). No way out: the politics of Polish Jewry, 1935–1939. Hebrew Union College Press. pp. 81–90. ISBN 0-87820-418-0.
203.Jump up ^ Poliakov, Léon (1968). The History of Anti-semitism: From Voltaire to Wagner. University of Pennsylvania Press. p. 153. ISBN 0-8122-3766-8.
204.Jump up ^ Collins, Kenneth (November 2010). "A Community on Trial: The Aberdeen Shechita Case, 1893". Journal of Scottish Historical Studies 30: 75. doi:10.3366/jshs.2010.0103.
205.^ Jump up to: a b Shechita UK. "Why Do Jews Practice Shechita?". Chabad.org. Chabad-Lubavitch Media Center. Retrieved 2012-02-26.
206.Jump up ^ Grandin, Temple; Regenstein, Joe M. (March 1994). "Religious slaughter and animal welfare: a discussion for meat scientists.". Meat Focus International (CAB International): 115–123.
207.Jump up ^ Bleich, J. David (1989). Contemporary Halakhic Problems 3. KTAV Publishing House. "A number of medieval scholars regard vegetarianism as a moral ideal, not because of a concern for the welfare of animals, but because of the fact that the slaughter of animals might cause the individual who performs such acts to develop negative character traits, viz., meanness and cruelty"
208.Jump up ^ Scherer, Logan (December 8, 2009). "The Cruelty Behind Muslim Ritual Slaughter". PETA. Retrieved July 25, 2012.
209.Jump up ^ "Treatment of animals: Islam and animals". BBC. August 13, 2009. Retrieved July 25, 2012.
210.Jump up ^ "Halal and Kosher slaughter 'must end'". BBC News. 2003-06-10.
211.Jump up ^ Hitchens, Christopher. God is not Great. pp. 155–169.
212.Jump up ^ Diamond, Sara (1989). Spiritual Warfare: The Politics of the Christian Right. Boston: South End Press.
213.Jump up ^ Ansell, Amy E (1998). Unraveling the Right: The New Conservatism in American Thought and Politics. Westview Press. ISBN 0-8133-3147-1.
214.Jump up ^ Schaeffer, Francis (1982). A Christian Manifesto. Crossway Books. ISBN 0-89107-233-0.
215.^ Jump up to: a b Barron, Bruce (1992). Heaven on Earth? The Social & Political Agendas of Dominion Theology. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan. ISBN 0-310-53611-1.
216.Jump up ^ Davis, Derek H.; Hankins, Barry (2003). New Religious Movements and Religious Liberty in America. Baylor University Press.
217.Jump up ^ Davidson, Carl; Harris, Jerry (2006). "Globalisation, theocracy and the new fascism: the US Right's rise to power". Race and Class 47 (3): 47–67. doi:10.1177/0306396806061086.
218.Jump up ^ Diamond, Sara. 1989. Spiritual Warfare: The Politics of the Christian Right. Boston: South End Press.
219.Jump up ^ Diamond, Sara. 1995. Roads to Dominion: Right-Wing Movements and Political Power in the United States. New York: Guilford Press. ISBN 0-89862-864-4.
220.Jump up ^ Clarkson, Frederick (March/June 1994.). "Christian Reconstructionism: Theocratic Dominionism Gains Influence". The Public Eye 8 (1 & 2). Check date values in: |date= (help)
221.Jump up ^ Clarkson, Frederick (1997). Eternal Hostility: The Struggle Between Theocracy and Democracy. Monroe, Maine: Common Courage. ISBN 1-56751-088-4.
222.Jump up ^ In her early work, Diamond sometimes used the term dominion theology to refer to this broader movement, rather than to the specific theological system of Reconstructionism.
223.Jump up ^ Yurica, Katherine (11 February 2004). "The Despoiling of America". Retrieved 3 October 2007.
224.Jump up ^ Yurica, Katherine 2004. Blood Guilty Churches, 19 January 2005. Retrieved 6 October 2007.
225.Jump up ^ Yurica, Katherine 2005. Yurica Responds to Stanley Kurtz Attack, 23 May 2005. Retrieved 6 October 2007.
226.Jump up ^ The Christian Right and the Rise of American Fascism By Chris Hedges, TheocracyWatch.
227.Jump up ^ Hedges, Chris (May 2005). "Feeling the hate with the National Religious Broadcasters". Harper's. Retrieved 2007-04-11.
228.Jump up ^ Hedges, Chris, American Fascists: The Christian Right and the War on America, Free Press, 2006.
229.Jump up ^ Maddox, Marion 2005. God under Howard: The Rise of the Religious Right in Australian Politics, Allen & Unwin.
230.Jump up ^ Rudin, James 2006. The Baptizing of America: The Religious Right's Plans for the Rest of Us, New York: Thunder's Mouth Press.
231.Jump up ^ Harris, Sam 2007. "God's dupes", Los Angeles Times, 15 March 2007. Retrieved 8 October 2007.
232.Jump up ^ "The Rise of the Religious Right in the Republican Party", TheocracyWatch, Last updated: December 2005; URL accessed May 8, 2006.
233.Jump up ^ Martin, William. 1996. With God on Our Side: The Rise of the Religious Right in America. New York: Broadway Books.
234.Jump up ^ Diamond, Sara, 1998. Not by Politics Alone: The Enduring Influence of the Christian Right, New York: Guilford Press, p.213.
235.Jump up ^ Ortiz, Chris 2007. "Gary North on D. James Kennedy", Chalcedon Blog, 6 September 2007.
236.Jump up ^ Berlet, Chip, 2005. The Christian Right, Dominionism, and Theocracy. Retrieved 25 September 2007.
237.Jump up ^ Diamond, Sara. 1995. "Dominion Theology." Z Magazine, February 1995
238.Jump up ^ Anthony Williams (2005-05-04). "Dominionist Fantasies". FrontPage Magazine. Retrieved 2007-05-04.
239.^ Jump up to: a b Kurtz, Stanley (2005-05-02). "Dominionist Domination: The Left runs with a wild theory". National Review Online. Retrieved 2007-10-06.
240.Jump up ^ Kurtz, Stanley (28 April 2005). "Scary Stuff". National Review Online. Retrieved 2007-10-06.
Further reading[edit]
Mencken, H. L. (1930). Treatise on the Gods. The Johns Hopkins University Press. ISBN 0-8018-8536-1.
Russell, Bertrand (1957). Why I am not a Christian. Barlow Press. ISBN 1-4097-2721-1.
Ellens, J. Harold (2002). The Destructive Power of Religion: Violence in Judaism, Christianity and Islam. Praeger Publishers. ISBN 0-275-99708-1.
External links[edit]
A Historical Outline of Modern Religious Criticism in Western Civilization
The Science of Religion by Gregory S. Paul
The Poverty of Theistic Morality by Adolf Grünbaum
Is there an Artificial God? by Douglas Adams


[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Criticism of religion


































































































































[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Philosophy of religion











































































































































































































































































Portal
Category




[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Religion























































































































































































































































































































































































































































































Atheism template.svgAtheism portal
 

  


Categories: Criticism of religion
Irreligion
Antireligion

















Navigation menu



Create account
Log in



Article

Talk









Read

Edit

View history

















Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store

Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page

Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page

Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version

Languages
العربية
Bosanski
Dansk
Deutsch
Español
فارسی
Français
Bahasa Indonesia
עברית
Kiswahili
Magyar
Bahasa Melayu
Norsk bokmål
Polski
Português
Română
Русский
Српски / srpski
Srpskohrvatski / српскохрватски
Suomi
Svenska
Українська
中文
Edit links
This page was last modified on 21 June 2015, at 15:11.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
  

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_religion










Antitheism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

Part of a series on
Irreligion
"αθεοι" (atheoi), Greek for "those without god", as it appears in the Epistle to the Ephesians on the third-century papyrus known as "Papyrus 46"

Irreligion[show]












Atheism[show]






























Agnosticism[show]










Nontheism[show]

















Naturalism[show]








People[show]








Books[show]











Secularist organizations[show]







Related topics[show]





Irreligion by country

v ·
 t ·
 e
   
See also: Antireligion and Religious discrimination
Antitheism (sometimes anti-theism) is active opposition to theism. The term has had a range of applications; in secular contexts, it typically refers to direct opposition to organized religion or to the belief in any deity, while in a theistic context, it sometimes refers to opposition to a specific god or gods.


Contents  [hide]
1 Opposition to theism
2 Opposition to the idea of God
3 Other uses
4 Etymology
5 See also
6 Notes
7 References

Opposition to theism[edit]
The Oxford English Dictionary defines antitheist as "One opposed to belief in the existence of a god". The earliest citation given for this meaning dates from 1833.[1] An antitheist may oppose belief in the existence of any god or gods, and not merely one in particular.
Antitheism has been adopted as a label by those who regard theism as dangerous or destructive. Christopher Hitchens offers an example of this approach in Letters to a Young Contrarian (2001), in which he writes: "I'm not even an atheist so much as I am an antitheist; I not only maintain that all religions are versions of the same untruth, but I hold that the influence of churches, and the effect of religious belief, is positively harmful."[2]
Opposition to the idea of God[edit]
The Chambers Dictionary defines antitheism in three different ways: "doctrine antagonistic to theism; 'denial' of the existence of a God; opposition to God." To be clear, "opposition to God" is not in most meanings a statement that an anti-theist believes in a deity but opposes the being in the manner of maltheism, but for various reasons the position that it would be bad/immoral for such a being to exist. All three match Hitchens' usage, not only a generally anti-religious belief and disbelief in a deity, but also opposition to a god's existence. The second is synonymous with strong atheism. The third and first, on the other hand, need not be atheistic at all.
Earlier definitions of antitheism include that of the French Catholic philosopher Jacques Maritain (1953), for whom it is "an active struggle against everything that reminds us of God" (p. 104), and that of Robert Flint (1877), Professor of Divinity at the University of Edinburgh. Flint's Baird Lecture for 1877 was entitled Anti-Theistic Theories.[3] He used it as a very general umbrella term for all opposition to his own form of theism, which he defined as the "belief that the heavens and the earth and all that they contain owe their existence and continuance to the wisdom and will of a supreme, self-existent, omnipotent, omniscient, righteous, and benevolent Being, who is distinct from, and independent of, what He has created."[4] He wrote:

In dealing with theories which have nothing in common except that they are antagonistic to theism, it is necessary to have a general term to designate them. Anti-theism appears to be the appropriate word. It is, of course, much more comprehensive in meaning than the term atheism. It applies to all systems which are opposed to theism. It includes, therefore, atheism... But short of atheism there are anti-theistic theories. Polytheism is not atheism, for it does not deny that there is a Deity; but it is anti-theistic, since it denies that there is only one. Pantheism is not atheism, for it admits that there is a God; but it is anti-theism, for it denies that God is a being distinct from creation and possessed of such attributes as wisdom, and holiness, and love. Every theory which refuses to ascribe to God an attribute which is essential to a worthy conception of His character is anti-theistic. Only those theories which refuse to acknowledge that there is evidence even for the existence of a God are atheistic.[5]
However, Flint also acknowledges that antitheism is typically understood differently from how he defines it. In particular, he notes that it has been used as a subdivision of atheism, descriptive of the view that theism has been disproven, rather than as the more general term that Flint prefers. He rejects non-theistic as an alternative, "not merely because of its hybrid origin and character, but also because it is far too comprehensive. Theories of physical and mental science are non-theistic, even when in no degree, directly or indirectly, antagonistic to theism."[6]
Opposition to God is frequently referred to as dystheism (which means "belief in a deity that is not benevolent") or misotheism (strictly speaking, this means "hatred of God"). Examples of belief systems founded on the principle of opposition to God include some forms of Atheistic or Theistic Satanism, and maltheism.
Other uses[edit]
See also: Misotheism § Terminology
Another use of the term antitheism was coined by Christopher New in a thought experiment published in 1993. In his article, he imagines what arguments for the existence of an evil God would look like: "Antitheists, like theists, would have believed in an omnipotent, omniscient, eternal creator; but whereas theists in fact believe that the supreme being is also perfectly good, antitheists would have believed that he was perfectly evil."[7] New's usage has reappeared in the work of Wallace A. Murphree.[8]
Etymology[edit]
The word "antitheism" (or the hyphenated "anti-theism") has been recorded in English since 1788.[9] The etymological roots of the word are the Greek anti and theos.
See also[edit]

Portal icon Atheism portal
Anti-clericalism
Antireligion
Atheism
Criticism of atheism
Criticism of religion
Evil God Challenge
Humanism
Misotheism
New atheism
Nontheistic religions
Post-theism
Religious intolerance
State atheism
Notes[edit]
1.Jump up ^ The Shorter OED (1970 reprint) page 78
2.Jump up ^ "Christopher Hitchens - Book Excerpt". Archived from the original on 2009-09-15.
3.Jump up ^ Flint, Robert (1894). Anti-Theistic Theories: Being the Baird Lecture for 1877 (5 ed.). London: William Blackwood and Sons.
4.Jump up ^ Flint, p. 1
5.Jump up ^ Flint, p. 23
6.Jump up ^ Flint, p. 444–445
7.Jump up ^ New, Christopher (June 1993). "Antitheism – A Reflection". Ratio 6 (1): 36–43. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9329.1993.tb00051.x.. See also: Daniels, Charles B. (1997). "God, demon, good, evil", The Journal of Value Inquiry, Vol. 31 (2), June, pp.177–181.
8.Jump up ^ Murphree, Wallace A. (1997). "Natural Theology: theism or antitheism", Sophia, Vol.36 (1), March, pp.75–83
9.Jump up ^ "antitheism". Online Etymology Dictionary.
References[edit]
Barker, Dan Evangelistic Atheism: Leading Believers Astray in Freethought Today, 1993 at the Wayback Machine (archived November 26, 2005)
Browne, Janet, The Power of Place, Volume 2 of the Biography of Charles Darwin.(Alfred Knopf, 2002)
Hitchens, Christopher (2001). Letters to a Young Contrarian (ISBN 0-465-03032-7). New York: Basic Books.
Maritain, Jacques (1953). The Range of Reason. London: Geoffrey Bles. Electronic Text Note: Chapter 8, The Meaning of Contemporary Atheism (p. 103–117, Electronic Text) is reprinted from Review of Politics, Vol. 11 (3) July 1949, p. 267–280 Electronic Text. A version also appears The Listener, Vol. 43 No.1102, 9 March 1950. pp. 427–429,432.
Segal, David, Atheist Evangelist, article in the Washington Post Thursday, October 26, 2006; Page C01
Witham, Larry, By Design (Encounter Books, 2003)
Wolff, Gary, in The New Atheism, The Church of the Non-Believers reprinted in Wired Magazine, November 2006
Wright, N. T., The Last Word (HarperSanFrancisco, 2005)


[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Irreligion


















































































































[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Theological thought






































Portal icon 




[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Criticism of religion
































































































































  


Categories: Antireligion
Antitheism
Atheism
Criticism of religion


Navigation menu



Create account
Log in



Article

Talk









Read

Edit

View history

















Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store

Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page

Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page

Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version

Languages
العربية
Català
Čeština
Dansk
Deutsch
Español
فارسی
Français
한국어
Hrvatski
Bahasa Indonesia
Italiano
ქართული
Lietuvių
Nederlands
Oʻzbekcha/ўзбекча
Polski
Português
Română
Русский
Shqip
Српски / srpski
Srpskohrvatski / српскохрватски
Suomi
Svenska
Türkçe
Українська
中文
Edit links
This page was last modified on 5 June 2015, at 11:51.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
  

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antitheism









Antitheism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

Part of a series on
Irreligion
"αθεοι" (atheoi), Greek for "those without god", as it appears in the Epistle to the Ephesians on the third-century papyrus known as "Papyrus 46"

Irreligion[show]












Atheism[show]






























Agnosticism[show]










Nontheism[show]

















Naturalism[show]








People[show]








Books[show]











Secularist organizations[show]







Related topics[show]





Irreligion by country

v ·
 t ·
 e
   
See also: Antireligion and Religious discrimination
Antitheism (sometimes anti-theism) is active opposition to theism. The term has had a range of applications; in secular contexts, it typically refers to direct opposition to organized religion or to the belief in any deity, while in a theistic context, it sometimes refers to opposition to a specific god or gods.


Contents  [hide]
1 Opposition to theism
2 Opposition to the idea of God
3 Other uses
4 Etymology
5 See also
6 Notes
7 References

Opposition to theism[edit]
The Oxford English Dictionary defines antitheist as "One opposed to belief in the existence of a god". The earliest citation given for this meaning dates from 1833.[1] An antitheist may oppose belief in the existence of any god or gods, and not merely one in particular.
Antitheism has been adopted as a label by those who regard theism as dangerous or destructive. Christopher Hitchens offers an example of this approach in Letters to a Young Contrarian (2001), in which he writes: "I'm not even an atheist so much as I am an antitheist; I not only maintain that all religions are versions of the same untruth, but I hold that the influence of churches, and the effect of religious belief, is positively harmful."[2]
Opposition to the idea of God[edit]
The Chambers Dictionary defines antitheism in three different ways: "doctrine antagonistic to theism; 'denial' of the existence of a God; opposition to God." To be clear, "opposition to God" is not in most meanings a statement that an anti-theist believes in a deity but opposes the being in the manner of maltheism, but for various reasons the position that it would be bad/immoral for such a being to exist. All three match Hitchens' usage, not only a generally anti-religious belief and disbelief in a deity, but also opposition to a god's existence. The second is synonymous with strong atheism. The third and first, on the other hand, need not be atheistic at all.
Earlier definitions of antitheism include that of the French Catholic philosopher Jacques Maritain (1953), for whom it is "an active struggle against everything that reminds us of God" (p. 104), and that of Robert Flint (1877), Professor of Divinity at the University of Edinburgh. Flint's Baird Lecture for 1877 was entitled Anti-Theistic Theories.[3] He used it as a very general umbrella term for all opposition to his own form of theism, which he defined as the "belief that the heavens and the earth and all that they contain owe their existence and continuance to the wisdom and will of a supreme, self-existent, omnipotent, omniscient, righteous, and benevolent Being, who is distinct from, and independent of, what He has created."[4] He wrote:

In dealing with theories which have nothing in common except that they are antagonistic to theism, it is necessary to have a general term to designate them. Anti-theism appears to be the appropriate word. It is, of course, much more comprehensive in meaning than the term atheism. It applies to all systems which are opposed to theism. It includes, therefore, atheism... But short of atheism there are anti-theistic theories. Polytheism is not atheism, for it does not deny that there is a Deity; but it is anti-theistic, since it denies that there is only one. Pantheism is not atheism, for it admits that there is a God; but it is anti-theism, for it denies that God is a being distinct from creation and possessed of such attributes as wisdom, and holiness, and love. Every theory which refuses to ascribe to God an attribute which is essential to a worthy conception of His character is anti-theistic. Only those theories which refuse to acknowledge that there is evidence even for the existence of a God are atheistic.[5]
However, Flint also acknowledges that antitheism is typically understood differently from how he defines it. In particular, he notes that it has been used as a subdivision of atheism, descriptive of the view that theism has been disproven, rather than as the more general term that Flint prefers. He rejects non-theistic as an alternative, "not merely because of its hybrid origin and character, but also because it is far too comprehensive. Theories of physical and mental science are non-theistic, even when in no degree, directly or indirectly, antagonistic to theism."[6]
Opposition to God is frequently referred to as dystheism (which means "belief in a deity that is not benevolent") or misotheism (strictly speaking, this means "hatred of God"). Examples of belief systems founded on the principle of opposition to God include some forms of Atheistic or Theistic Satanism, and maltheism.
Other uses[edit]
See also: Misotheism § Terminology
Another use of the term antitheism was coined by Christopher New in a thought experiment published in 1993. In his article, he imagines what arguments for the existence of an evil God would look like: "Antitheists, like theists, would have believed in an omnipotent, omniscient, eternal creator; but whereas theists in fact believe that the supreme being is also perfectly good, antitheists would have believed that he was perfectly evil."[7] New's usage has reappeared in the work of Wallace A. Murphree.[8]
Etymology[edit]
The word "antitheism" (or the hyphenated "anti-theism") has been recorded in English since 1788.[9] The etymological roots of the word are the Greek anti and theos.
See also[edit]

Portal icon Atheism portal
Anti-clericalism
Antireligion
Atheism
Criticism of atheism
Criticism of religion
Evil God Challenge
Humanism
Misotheism
New atheism
Nontheistic religions
Post-theism
Religious intolerance
State atheism
Notes[edit]
1.Jump up ^ The Shorter OED (1970 reprint) page 78
2.Jump up ^ "Christopher Hitchens - Book Excerpt". Archived from the original on 2009-09-15.
3.Jump up ^ Flint, Robert (1894). Anti-Theistic Theories: Being the Baird Lecture for 1877 (5 ed.). London: William Blackwood and Sons.
4.Jump up ^ Flint, p. 1
5.Jump up ^ Flint, p. 23
6.Jump up ^ Flint, p. 444–445
7.Jump up ^ New, Christopher (June 1993). "Antitheism – A Reflection". Ratio 6 (1): 36–43. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9329.1993.tb00051.x.. See also: Daniels, Charles B. (1997). "God, demon, good, evil", The Journal of Value Inquiry, Vol. 31 (2), June, pp.177–181.
8.Jump up ^ Murphree, Wallace A. (1997). "Natural Theology: theism or antitheism", Sophia, Vol.36 (1), March, pp.75–83
9.Jump up ^ "antitheism". Online Etymology Dictionary.
References[edit]
Barker, Dan Evangelistic Atheism: Leading Believers Astray in Freethought Today, 1993 at the Wayback Machine (archived November 26, 2005)
Browne, Janet, The Power of Place, Volume 2 of the Biography of Charles Darwin.(Alfred Knopf, 2002)
Hitchens, Christopher (2001). Letters to a Young Contrarian (ISBN 0-465-03032-7). New York: Basic Books.
Maritain, Jacques (1953). The Range of Reason. London: Geoffrey Bles. Electronic Text Note: Chapter 8, The Meaning of Contemporary Atheism (p. 103–117, Electronic Text) is reprinted from Review of Politics, Vol. 11 (3) July 1949, p. 267–280 Electronic Text. A version also appears The Listener, Vol. 43 No.1102, 9 March 1950. pp. 427–429,432.
Segal, David, Atheist Evangelist, article in the Washington Post Thursday, October 26, 2006; Page C01
Witham, Larry, By Design (Encounter Books, 2003)
Wolff, Gary, in The New Atheism, The Church of the Non-Believers reprinted in Wired Magazine, November 2006
Wright, N. T., The Last Word (HarperSanFrancisco, 2005)


[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Irreligion


















































































































[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Theological thought






































Portal icon 




[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Criticism of religion
































































































































  


Categories: Antireligion
Antitheism
Atheism
Criticism of religion


Navigation menu



Create account
Log in



Article

Talk









Read

Edit

View history

















Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store

Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page

Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page

Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version

Languages
العربية
Català
Čeština
Dansk
Deutsch
Español
فارسی
Français
한국어
Hrvatski
Bahasa Indonesia
Italiano
ქართული
Lietuvių
Nederlands
Oʻzbekcha/ўзбекча
Polski
Português
Română
Русский
Shqip
Српски / srpski
Srpskohrvatski / српскохрватски
Suomi
Svenska
Türkçe
Українська
中文
Edit links
This page was last modified on 5 June 2015, at 11:51.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
  

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antitheism









Antireligion

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

See also: Religious discrimination and Antitheism
Part of a series on
Irreligion
"αθεοι" (atheoi), Greek for "those without god", as it appears in the Epistle to the Ephesians on the third-century papyrus known as "Papyrus 46"

Irreligion[show]












Atheism[show]






























Agnosticism[show]










Nontheism[show]

















Naturalism[show]








People[show]








Books[show]











Secularist organizations[show]







Related topics[show]





Irreligion by country

v ·
 t ·
 e
   
Antireligion is opposition to religion. Antireligion is distinct from atheism (the absence of a belief in deities) and antitheism (an opposition to belief in deities), although antireligionists may be atheists or antitheists. The term may be used to describe opposition to organized religion, or to describe a broader opposition to any form of belief in the supernatural or the divine.


Contents  [hide]
1 History
2 Notable anti-religious people
3 See also
4 References

History[edit]

Unbalanced scales.svg
 The neutrality of this section is disputed. Relevant discussion may be found on the talk page. Please do not remove this message until the dispute is resolved. (December 2013)
According to historian Michael Burleigh, antireligion found its first mass expression in revolutionary France in response to organised resistance to "organised ... irreligion...an 'anti-clerical' and self-styled 'non-religious' state."[1]
The Soviet Union directed antireligious campaigns at all faiths,[2] including Christian, Islamic, Buddhist and Shamanist religions. In the 1930s, during the Stalinist period, the government destroyed church buildings or put them into secular use (as museums of religion and atheism, clubs or storage facilities), executed clergy, prohibited the publication of most religious material and persecuted some members of religious groups.[2][3] Less violent attempts to reduce or eliminate the influence of religion in society were also carried out at other times in Soviet history. For instance, it was usually necessary to be an atheist in order to acquire any important political position or any prestigious scientific job; thus many people became atheists in order to advance their careers. Different sources disagree on the results of all this, with some claiming the death of 21 million Russian Orthodox Christians by the Soviet government, not including other religious groups or persecutions without killings,[4] and other sources stating that only up to 500,000 Russian Orthodox Christians were persecuted by the Soviet government, not including other religious groups.[5]
The atheist state of the People's Republic of Albania had an objective for the eventual destruction of all religion in Albania, including a constitutional ban on religious activity and propaganda.[6] The government nationalised most property of religious institutions and used it for non-religious purposes. Religious literature was banned. Many clergy and theists were tried, tortured, and executed. All foreign Roman Catholic clergy were expelled in 1946.[6][7] Albania was the only country that ever officially banned religion.
The Khmer Rouge attempted to eliminate Cambodia's cultural heritage, including its religions. In the process, its acolytes killed nearly 1.7 million people.[8]
Notable anti-religious people[edit]
This list is incomplete; you can help by expanding it.
IntellectualsDavid Hume (1711-1776), Scottish agnostic philosopher, known for his skepticism, who wrote that human reason is wholly inadequate to make any assumptions about the divine, whether through a priori reasoning or observation of nature.[9]
Thomas Paine (1737–1809), English-American author and deist who wrote a scathing critique on religion in the The Age of Reason (1793-4). "All national institutions of churches, whether Jewish, Christian, or Turkish [i.e. Muslim], appear to me no other than human inventions set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power and profit".[10]
Karl Marx (1818–1883), German philosopher, social scientist, socialist. He is well known for his anti-religious views. He called religion "the opium of the people".[11]
John Dewey (1859–1952), an American pragmatist philosopher, who believed neither religion nor metaphysics could provide legitimate moral or social values, though scientific empiricism could (see science of morality).[12]
Bertrand Russell (1872–1970), British logician and philosopher who believed that authentic philosophy could only be pursued given an atheistic foundation of "unyielding despair". In 1948, he famously debated the Jesuit priest and philosophical historian Father Frederick Copleston on the existence of God.[13]
Richard Dawkins (born 1941), English biologist, one of the "four horsemen" of New Atheism. He wrote The God Delusion, criticizing belief in the divine, in 2006.[14]
Christopher Hitchens (1949-2011), British-American author and journalist, wrote God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything in 2007[15]
Steven Pinker (born 1954), Canadian-American cognitive scientist who believes religion incites violence.[16]
Sam Harris (born 1967), American author and neuroscientist, who argues that religious moderation provides cover for dangerous fundamentalism.[17]
PZ Myers (born 1957), American biologist.
Phil Zuckerman (born 1969), American sociologist.
PoliticiansVladimir Lenin, Soviet leader from 1917 until 1924, who, like most Marxists, believed all religions to be "the organs of bourgeois reaction, used for the protection of the exploitation and the stupefaction of the working class"[18]
Joseph Stalin, Soviet leader between 1924 to 1953
Periyar E. V. Ramasamy, Tamil politician, between 1938-73, who propagated the principles of rationalism, self-respect, women’s rights and eradication of caste in South India.
Enver Hoxha, Albanian communist leader between 1944 and 1985
Nikita Khrushchev, Soviet leader in 1953-64, who initiated, among other measures,[19][20] the 1958-1964 Soviet anti-religious campaign.
OthersBill Maher, who wrote and starred in Religulous, a 2008 documentary criticizing and mocking religion.
Jim Jefferies, Australian comedian
Marcus Brigstocke, British comedian
George Carlin, American comedian
James Randi, former magician, professional "debunker" of psychics, outspoken atheist and founder of the James Randi Educational Foundation.[21][22]
Philip Roth, contemporary Jewish-American novelist.[23]
Jay Kay (born 1969), born Jason Luís Cheetham; is an English musician, best known as the lead singer of the British acid jazz band Jamiroquai, and anti-religious follower.[24]
See also[edit]
Anti-Catholicism
Anti-Christian sentiment
Anti-clericalism
Anti-Islamism, as distinct from Islamophobia
Anti-Judaism
Anti-Mormonism
Anti-Protestantism
Anti-Buddhism
Antitheism
Conflict thesis
Criticism of Islam
Discrimination against atheists
Evidentialism
Faith and rationality
Freethought
New Atheism
Objectivism (Ayn Rand)
Persecution of Christians
Relationship between religion and science
Religious discrimination against Neopagans
Religious intolerance
Religious persecution
Religious segregation
State atheism
References[edit]
1.Jump up ^ Michael Burleigh Earthly Powers p 96-97 ISBN 0-00-719572-9
2.^ Jump up to: a b http://countrystudies.us/russia/38.htm
3.Jump up ^ Timasheff, N. S. (1941). "The Church in the Soviet Union 1917 - 1941". Russian Review 1 (1): 20–30. doi:10.2307/125428. JSTOR 125428.
4.Jump up ^ World Christian trends, AD 30-AD 2200, p.230-246 Tables 4-5 & 4-10 By David B. Barrett, Todd M. Johnson, Christopher R. Guidry, Peter F. Crossing NOTE: They define 'martyr' on p235 as only including christians killed for faith and excluding other christians killed
5.Jump up ^ Емельянов Н.Е. Сколько репрессированных в России пострадали за Христа?
6.^ Jump up to: a b http://countrystudies.us/albania/56.htm
7.Jump up ^ World Christian trends, AD 30-AD 2200, p.230-246 Tables 4-10 By David B. Barrett, Todd M. Johnson, Christopher R. Guidry, Peter F. Crossing
8.Jump up ^ Khmer Rouge: Christian baptism after massacres
9.Jump up ^ D. Hume, Dialogues concerning Natural Religion, 1779.
10.Jump up ^ https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Thomas_Paine
11.Jump up ^ Marx, K. 1976. Introduction to A Contribution to the Critique of Hegel’s Philosophy of Right. Collected Works, v. 3. New York.
12.Jump up ^ "Dewey felt that science alone contributed to 'human good,' which he defined exclusively in naturalistic terms. He rejected religion and metaphysics as valid supports for moral and social values, and felt that success of the scientific method presupposed the destruction of old knowledge before the new could be created. ... (Dewey, 1929, pp. 95, 145) "William Adrian, TRUTH, FREEDOM AND (DIS)ORDER IN THE AMERICAN UNIVERSITY, Christian Higher Education', 4:2, 145-154
13.Jump up ^ "I think all the great religions of the world – Buddhism, Hinduism, Christianity, Islam and Communism – both untrue and harmful. It is evident as a matter of logic that, since they disagree, not more than one of them can be true. ... I am as firmly convinced that religions do harm as I am that they are untrue." Bertrand Russell in "My Religious Reminiscences" (1957), reprinted in The Basic Writings of Bertrand Russell [1]
14.Jump up ^ Many of us saw religion as harmless nonsense. Beliefs might lack all supporting evidence but, we thought, if people needed a crutch for consolation, where's the harm? September 11th changed all that. Revealed faith is not harmless nonsense, it can be lethally dangerous nonsense. Dangerous because it gives people unshakeable confidence in their own righteousness. Dangerous because it gives them false courage to kill themselves, which automatically removes normal barriers to killing others. Dangerous because it teaches enmity to others labelled only by a difference of inherited tradition. And dangerous because we have all bought into a weird respect, which uniquely protects religion from normal criticism. Let's now stop being so damned respectful! The Guardian, 2001-10-11 "Has the world changed?." The Guardian. Accessed 2006-01-29.
15.Jump up ^ Grimes, William (16 December 2011). "Christopher Hitchens, Polemicist Who Slashed All, Freely, Dies at 62". New York Times. Retrieved 15 February 2015.
16.Jump up ^ "[T]he Bible, contrary to what a majority of Americans apparently believe, is far from a source of higher moral values. Religions have given us stonings, witch-burnings, crusades, inquisitions, jihads, fatwas, suicide bombers, gay-bashers, abortion-clinic gunmen, and mothers who drown their sons so they can happily be united in heaven." The Evolutionary Psychology of Religion, presentation by Steven Pinker to the annual meeting of the Freedom from Religion Foundation, Madison, Wisconsin, October 29, 2004, on receipt of “The Emperor’s New Clothes Award.”
17.Jump up ^ "We desperately need a public discourse that encourages critical thinking and intellectual honesty. Nothing stands in the way of this project more than the respect we accord religious faith.", S. Harris, Letter to a Christian Nation, 2006.
18.Jump up ^ "Religion is the opium of the people: this saying of Marx is the cornerstone of the entire ideology of Marxism about the religion. All modern religions and churches, all and of every kind of religious organizations are always considered by Marxism as the organs of bourgeois reaction, used for the protection of the exploitation and the stupefaction of the working class."Lenin, V. I. "About the attitude of the working party toward the religion". Collected works, v. 17, p.41. Retrieved 2006-09-09.
19.Jump up ^ http://www.ibiblio.org/expo/soviet.exhibit/anti_rel.html
20.Jump up ^ Grossman, J. D. (1973). "Khrushchev's Anti-Religious Policy and the Campaign of 1954". Soviet Studies 24 (3): 374–386. doi:10.1080/09668137308410870. JSTOR 150643.
21.Jump up ^ http://www.randi.org/
22.Jump up ^ http://www.randi.org/jr/072503.html
23.Jump up ^ "I'm anti-religious ... It's all a big lie ... I have such a huge dislike [of] the miserable record of religion." The Guardian, 2005-12-14 " The Guardian. 'It no longer feels a great injustice that I have to die'
24.Jump up ^ https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jay_Kay


[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Religion























































































































































































































































































































































































































































































[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Philosophy of religion











































































































































































































































































Portal
Category




[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Theology






































































































































































































































































































































































































































































Atheism template.svgAtheism portal
 

  


Categories: Antireligion
Irreligion






Navigation menu



Create account
Log in



Article

Talk









Read

Edit

View history

















Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store

Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page

Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page

Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version

Languages
Български
Español
فارسی
Français
한국어
Hrvatski
Bahasa Indonesia
日本語
Polski
Português
Română
Scots
Српски / srpski
Srpskohrvatski / српскохрватски
中文
Edit links
This page was last modified on 22 June 2015, at 03:31.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
  

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antireligion









Antireligion

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

See also: Religious discrimination and Antitheism
Part of a series on
Irreligion
"αθεοι" (atheoi), Greek for "those without god", as it appears in the Epistle to the Ephesians on the third-century papyrus known as "Papyrus 46"

Irreligion[show]












Atheism[show]






























Agnosticism[show]










Nontheism[show]

















Naturalism[show]








People[show]








Books[show]











Secularist organizations[show]







Related topics[show]





Irreligion by country

v ·
 t ·
 e
   
Antireligion is opposition to religion. Antireligion is distinct from atheism (the absence of a belief in deities) and antitheism (an opposition to belief in deities), although antireligionists may be atheists or antitheists. The term may be used to describe opposition to organized religion, or to describe a broader opposition to any form of belief in the supernatural or the divine.


Contents  [hide]
1 History
2 Notable anti-religious people
3 See also
4 References

History[edit]

Unbalanced scales.svg
 The neutrality of this section is disputed. Relevant discussion may be found on the talk page. Please do not remove this message until the dispute is resolved. (December 2013)
According to historian Michael Burleigh, antireligion found its first mass expression in revolutionary France in response to organised resistance to "organised ... irreligion...an 'anti-clerical' and self-styled 'non-religious' state."[1]
The Soviet Union directed antireligious campaigns at all faiths,[2] including Christian, Islamic, Buddhist and Shamanist religions. In the 1930s, during the Stalinist period, the government destroyed church buildings or put them into secular use (as museums of religion and atheism, clubs or storage facilities), executed clergy, prohibited the publication of most religious material and persecuted some members of religious groups.[2][3] Less violent attempts to reduce or eliminate the influence of religion in society were also carried out at other times in Soviet history. For instance, it was usually necessary to be an atheist in order to acquire any important political position or any prestigious scientific job; thus many people became atheists in order to advance their careers. Different sources disagree on the results of all this, with some claiming the death of 21 million Russian Orthodox Christians by the Soviet government, not including other religious groups or persecutions without killings,[4] and other sources stating that only up to 500,000 Russian Orthodox Christians were persecuted by the Soviet government, not including other religious groups.[5]
The atheist state of the People's Republic of Albania had an objective for the eventual destruction of all religion in Albania, including a constitutional ban on religious activity and propaganda.[6] The government nationalised most property of religious institutions and used it for non-religious purposes. Religious literature was banned. Many clergy and theists were tried, tortured, and executed. All foreign Roman Catholic clergy were expelled in 1946.[6][7] Albania was the only country that ever officially banned religion.
The Khmer Rouge attempted to eliminate Cambodia's cultural heritage, including its religions. In the process, its acolytes killed nearly 1.7 million people.[8]
Notable anti-religious people[edit]
This list is incomplete; you can help by expanding it.
IntellectualsDavid Hume (1711-1776), Scottish agnostic philosopher, known for his skepticism, who wrote that human reason is wholly inadequate to make any assumptions about the divine, whether through a priori reasoning or observation of nature.[9]
Thomas Paine (1737–1809), English-American author and deist who wrote a scathing critique on religion in the The Age of Reason (1793-4). "All national institutions of churches, whether Jewish, Christian, or Turkish [i.e. Muslim], appear to me no other than human inventions set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power and profit".[10]
Karl Marx (1818–1883), German philosopher, social scientist, socialist. He is well known for his anti-religious views. He called religion "the opium of the people".[11]
John Dewey (1859–1952), an American pragmatist philosopher, who believed neither religion nor metaphysics could provide legitimate moral or social values, though scientific empiricism could (see science of morality).[12]
Bertrand Russell (1872–1970), British logician and philosopher who believed that authentic philosophy could only be pursued given an atheistic foundation of "unyielding despair". In 1948, he famously debated the Jesuit priest and philosophical historian Father Frederick Copleston on the existence of God.[13]
Richard Dawkins (born 1941), English biologist, one of the "four horsemen" of New Atheism. He wrote The God Delusion, criticizing belief in the divine, in 2006.[14]
Christopher Hitchens (1949-2011), British-American author and journalist, wrote God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything in 2007[15]
Steven Pinker (born 1954), Canadian-American cognitive scientist who believes religion incites violence.[16]
Sam Harris (born 1967), American author and neuroscientist, who argues that religious moderation provides cover for dangerous fundamentalism.[17]
PZ Myers (born 1957), American biologist.
Phil Zuckerman (born 1969), American sociologist.
PoliticiansVladimir Lenin, Soviet leader from 1917 until 1924, who, like most Marxists, believed all religions to be "the organs of bourgeois reaction, used for the protection of the exploitation and the stupefaction of the working class"[18]
Joseph Stalin, Soviet leader between 1924 to 1953
Periyar E. V. Ramasamy, Tamil politician, between 1938-73, who propagated the principles of rationalism, self-respect, women’s rights and eradication of caste in South India.
Enver Hoxha, Albanian communist leader between 1944 and 1985
Nikita Khrushchev, Soviet leader in 1953-64, who initiated, among other measures,[19][20] the 1958-1964 Soviet anti-religious campaign.
OthersBill Maher, who wrote and starred in Religulous, a 2008 documentary criticizing and mocking religion.
Jim Jefferies, Australian comedian
Marcus Brigstocke, British comedian
George Carlin, American comedian
James Randi, former magician, professional "debunker" of psychics, outspoken atheist and founder of the James Randi Educational Foundation.[21][22]
Philip Roth, contemporary Jewish-American novelist.[23]
Jay Kay (born 1969), born Jason Luís Cheetham; is an English musician, best known as the lead singer of the British acid jazz band Jamiroquai, and anti-religious follower.[24]
See also[edit]
Anti-Catholicism
Anti-Christian sentiment
Anti-clericalism
Anti-Islamism, as distinct from Islamophobia
Anti-Judaism
Anti-Mormonism
Anti-Protestantism
Anti-Buddhism
Antitheism
Conflict thesis
Criticism of Islam
Discrimination against atheists
Evidentialism
Faith and rationality
Freethought
New Atheism
Objectivism (Ayn Rand)
Persecution of Christians
Relationship between religion and science
Religious discrimination against Neopagans
Religious intolerance
Religious persecution
Religious segregation
State atheism
References[edit]
1.Jump up ^ Michael Burleigh Earthly Powers p 96-97 ISBN 0-00-719572-9
2.^ Jump up to: a b http://countrystudies.us/russia/38.htm
3.Jump up ^ Timasheff, N. S. (1941). "The Church in the Soviet Union 1917 - 1941". Russian Review 1 (1): 20–30. doi:10.2307/125428. JSTOR 125428.
4.Jump up ^ World Christian trends, AD 30-AD 2200, p.230-246 Tables 4-5 & 4-10 By David B. Barrett, Todd M. Johnson, Christopher R. Guidry, Peter F. Crossing NOTE: They define 'martyr' on p235 as only including christians killed for faith and excluding other christians killed
5.Jump up ^ Емельянов Н.Е. Сколько репрессированных в России пострадали за Христа?
6.^ Jump up to: a b http://countrystudies.us/albania/56.htm
7.Jump up ^ World Christian trends, AD 30-AD 2200, p.230-246 Tables 4-10 By David B. Barrett, Todd M. Johnson, Christopher R. Guidry, Peter F. Crossing
8.Jump up ^ Khmer Rouge: Christian baptism after massacres
9.Jump up ^ D. Hume, Dialogues concerning Natural Religion, 1779.
10.Jump up ^ https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Thomas_Paine
11.Jump up ^ Marx, K. 1976. Introduction to A Contribution to the Critique of Hegel’s Philosophy of Right. Collected Works, v. 3. New York.
12.Jump up ^ "Dewey felt that science alone contributed to 'human good,' which he defined exclusively in naturalistic terms. He rejected religion and metaphysics as valid supports for moral and social values, and felt that success of the scientific method presupposed the destruction of old knowledge before the new could be created. ... (Dewey, 1929, pp. 95, 145) "William Adrian, TRUTH, FREEDOM AND (DIS)ORDER IN THE AMERICAN UNIVERSITY, Christian Higher Education', 4:2, 145-154
13.Jump up ^ "I think all the great religions of the world – Buddhism, Hinduism, Christianity, Islam and Communism – both untrue and harmful. It is evident as a matter of logic that, since they disagree, not more than one of them can be true. ... I am as firmly convinced that religions do harm as I am that they are untrue." Bertrand Russell in "My Religious Reminiscences" (1957), reprinted in The Basic Writings of Bertrand Russell [1]
14.Jump up ^ Many of us saw religion as harmless nonsense. Beliefs might lack all supporting evidence but, we thought, if people needed a crutch for consolation, where's the harm? September 11th changed all that. Revealed faith is not harmless nonsense, it can be lethally dangerous nonsense. Dangerous because it gives people unshakeable confidence in their own righteousness. Dangerous because it gives them false courage to kill themselves, which automatically removes normal barriers to killing others. Dangerous because it teaches enmity to others labelled only by a difference of inherited tradition. And dangerous because we have all bought into a weird respect, which uniquely protects religion from normal criticism. Let's now stop being so damned respectful! The Guardian, 2001-10-11 "Has the world changed?." The Guardian. Accessed 2006-01-29.
15.Jump up ^ Grimes, William (16 December 2011). "Christopher Hitchens, Polemicist Who Slashed All, Freely, Dies at 62". New York Times. Retrieved 15 February 2015.
16.Jump up ^ "[T]he Bible, contrary to what a majority of Americans apparently believe, is far from a source of higher moral values. Religions have given us stonings, witch-burnings, crusades, inquisitions, jihads, fatwas, suicide bombers, gay-bashers, abortion-clinic gunmen, and mothers who drown their sons so they can happily be united in heaven." The Evolutionary Psychology of Religion, presentation by Steven Pinker to the annual meeting of the Freedom from Religion Foundation, Madison, Wisconsin, October 29, 2004, on receipt of “The Emperor’s New Clothes Award.”
17.Jump up ^ "We desperately need a public discourse that encourages critical thinking and intellectual honesty. Nothing stands in the way of this project more than the respect we accord religious faith.", S. Harris, Letter to a Christian Nation, 2006.
18.Jump up ^ "Religion is the opium of the people: this saying of Marx is the cornerstone of the entire ideology of Marxism about the religion. All modern religions and churches, all and of every kind of religious organizations are always considered by Marxism as the organs of bourgeois reaction, used for the protection of the exploitation and the stupefaction of the working class."Lenin, V. I. "About the attitude of the working party toward the religion". Collected works, v. 17, p.41. Retrieved 2006-09-09.
19.Jump up ^ http://www.ibiblio.org/expo/soviet.exhibit/anti_rel.html
20.Jump up ^ Grossman, J. D. (1973). "Khrushchev's Anti-Religious Policy and the Campaign of 1954". Soviet Studies 24 (3): 374–386. doi:10.1080/09668137308410870. JSTOR 150643.
21.Jump up ^ http://www.randi.org/
22.Jump up ^ http://www.randi.org/jr/072503.html
23.Jump up ^ "I'm anti-religious ... It's all a big lie ... I have such a huge dislike [of] the miserable record of religion." The Guardian, 2005-12-14 " The Guardian. 'It no longer feels a great injustice that I have to die'
24.Jump up ^ https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jay_Kay


[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Religion























































































































































































































































































































































































































































































[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Philosophy of religion











































































































































































































































































Portal
Category




[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Theology






































































































































































































































































































































































































































































Atheism template.svgAtheism portal
 

  


Categories: Antireligion
Irreligion






Navigation menu



Create account
Log in



Article

Talk









Read

Edit

View history

















Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store

Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page

Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page

Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version

Languages
Български
Español
فارسی
Français
한국어
Hrvatski
Bahasa Indonesia
日本語
Polski
Português
Română
Scots
Српски / srpski
Srpskohrvatski / српскохрватски
中文
Edit links
This page was last modified on 22 June 2015, at 03:31.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
  

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antireligion









Criticism of monotheism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

Part of a series on
Criticism of religion

By religion
Buddhism ·
 Christianity  (Catholicism ·
 Jehovah's Witnesses ·
 Seventh-day Adventist)
   ·
 Protestantism ·
 Hinduism ·
 Islam  (Twelver Islam)
   ·
 Jainism ·
 Judaism ·
 Mormonism ·
 Sikhism
 
By religious figure
Jesus ·
 Moses ·
 Muhammad ·
 Ellen G. White
 
By text
Bible ·
 Book of Mormon ·
 Quran ·
 Talmud
 
Critics
Mikhail Bakunin ·
 Giordano Bruno ·
 Richard Dawkins ·
 Denis Diderot ·
 Epicurus ·
 Ludwig Feuerbach ·
 Stephen Fry ·
 Sita Ram Goel ·
 Emma Goldman ·
 Sam Harris ·
 Ayaan Hirsi Ali ·
 Christopher Hitchens ·
 Baron d'Holbach ·
 David Hume ·
 Robert G. Ingersoll ·
 Karl Marx ·
 Friedrich Nietzsche ·
 Michel Onfray ·
 Thomas Paine ·
 Pierre-Joseph Proudhon ·
 Ayn Rand ·
 André Servier ·
 David Silverman ·
 Max Stirner ·
 Bertrand Russell ·
 Dayananda Saraswati ·
 Victor J. Stenger ·
 Voltaire
 
Religious violence
Terrorism ·
 War ·
 Buddhism ·
 Christianity ·
 Islam ·
 Judaism ·
 Mormonism
 
Related topics
Abuse ·
 Apostasy ·
 Crisis of faith ·
 Criticism of atheism ·
 Criticism of monotheism ·
 Persecution ·
 Sexuality ·
 Slavery
 
v ·
 t ·
 e
   
Criticism of monotheism remains prevalent throughout the history, monotheism has been criticized as total discourse.[1] Monotheism has been criticised as a cause of ignorance, oppression and violence.


Contents  [hide]
1 Contradictions
2 Forcing one belief 2.1 Violence in monotheism
3 Success of monotheistic religions
4 See also
5 References

Contradictions[edit]
Through the means of defining, it is traditionally agreed among the major monotheistic religions that the one God is, inter alia, omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent. However, one scholar argues that "this definition of God [is] contradictory to what has been perceived by us in the empirical world."[2]
Feminist thinkers have criticized the monotheistic concept as the model of highest form of patriarchal power, they argues that the one god is regarded to be male and opposed to everything related to change, sensuality, nature, feeling, and femininity.[3]
Forcing one belief[edit]



David Hume.
David Hume has argued that monotheism is less pluralistic and thus less tolerant than polytheism because the former stipulates that people pigeonhole their beliefs into one.[4] In the same vein, Auguste Comte argues, "Monotheism is irreconcilable with the existence in our nature of the instincts of benevolence" because it compels followers to devote themselves to a single Creator.[5]
James Lovelock criticized monotheism, due to its idea of a transcendent almighty father, he says about monotheism, "seems to anesthetize the sense of wonder as if one were committed to a single line of thought by a cosmic legal contract."[6]
Violence in monotheism[edit]
In the ancient times, monotheism is blamed as the instigator of violence in its early days as it inspired the Israelites to wage war upon the Canaanites who believed in multiple gods.[7]
Highly acclaimed Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan regarded monotheism to be one reason of violence, he said:

The intolerance of narrow monotheism is written in letters of blood across the history of man from the time when first the tribes of Israel burst into the land of Canaan. The worshippers of the one jealous God are egged on to aggressive wars against people of alien cults. They invoke divine sanction for the cruelties inflicted on the conquered. The spirit of old Israel is inherited by Christianity and Islam, and it might not be unreasonable to suggest that it would have been better for Western civilization if Greece had moulded it on this question rather than Palestine.[8]
Success of monotheistic religions[edit]
Bertrand Russell has stated that in recent history William James popularized the idea that the belief in one god causes people to not behave improperly. Furthermore, Russell expostulates through examples that whether "politicians and educators ought to try to make people think there is one [god]" is "a political one" since one cannot prove the moralistic argument of William James.[9]
See also[edit]
Paganism
References[edit]
1.Jump up ^ "The Origins of Biblical Monotheism: Israel's Polytheistic Background and the Ugaritic Texts", p. 11
2.Jump up ^ Worship as a Hindrance to Self
3.Jump up ^ Encyclopedia of religion - Volume 9 - Page 6161, by Lindsay Jones
4.Jump up ^ "David Hume argued that unlike monotheism, polytheism is pluralistic in nature, unbound by doctrine, and therefore far more tolerant than monotheism, which tends to force people to believe in one faith." [1]
5.Jump up ^ The Catechism of Positive Religion, page 251
6.Jump up ^ "A Reenchanted World: The Quest for a New Kinship with Nature", by James William Gibson, p. 98, Publisher = Macmillan, Year = 2009
7.Jump up ^ The Curse of Cain: The Violent Legacy of Monotheism ISBN 978-0-226-74199-4
8.Jump up ^ "A Primal Perspective on the Philosophy of Religion", by Arvind Sharma, page 29
9.Jump up ^ Is There a God?,(Commissioned by Bertrand Russell, but never published in, Illustrated Magazine, in 1952) [2]


[hide]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Criticism of religion


By religion
Buddhism ·
 Christianity ·
 Hinduism ·
 Islam ·
 Jainism ·
 Jehovah's Witnesses ·
 Judaism ·
 Latter Day Saint movement ·
 Monotheism ·
 Catholic ·
 Scientology ·
 Seventh-day Adventist ·
 Sikhism ·
 Twelver Shi’ism ·
 Unification Church
 

Religious texts
Bible ·
 Book of Mormon ·
 Quran ·
 Talmud
 

Religious figures
Jesus ·
 Moses ·
 Muhammad ·
 Charles Taze Russell ·
 Ellen White
 

Religion and violence
Violence ·
 Terrorism ·
 Persecution ·
 War ·
 Sectarian violence ·
 Christianity ·
 Mormonism ·
 Judaism ·
 Islam ·
 India
 

Books
Atheist Manifesto ·
 Christianity Unveiled ·
 God in the Age of Science? ·
 God Is Not Great ·
 Letter to a Christian Nation ·
 The Age of Reason ·
 The End of Faith ·
 The God Delusion ·
 The Rage Against God ·
 Why I Am Not a Christian ·
 Why I Am Not a Muslim
 

Movements
Antitheism ·
 Atheism ·
 Criticism of atheism ·
 Cārvāka ·
 Church of the SubGenius ·
 Flying Spaghetti Monster ·
 Invisible Pink Unicorn ·
 Nontheistic religions
 

People
Dan Barker ·
 George Carlin ·
 Pat Condell ·
 Richard Dawkins ·
 Daniel Dennett ·
 Denis Diderot ·
 Epicurus ·
 Ludwig Feuerbach ·
 Sigmund Freud ·
 Annie Laurie Gaylor ·
 Sita Ram Goel ·
 Sam Harris ·
 Ayaan Hirsi Ali ·
 Christopher Hitchens ·
 Baron d'Holbach ·
 David Hume ·
 Walter Kaufman ·
 Bill Maher ·
 Karl Marx ·
 PZ Myers ·
 Taslima Nasrin ·
 Friedrich Nietzsche ·
 Madalyn Murray O'Hair ·
 Michel Onfray ·
 Thomas Paine ·
 Penn & Teller ·
 Periyar E. V. Ramasamy ·
 Herman Philipse ·
 Ayn Rand ·
 James Randi ·
 Bertrand Russell ·
 Carl Sagan ·
 André Servier ·
 Dayananda Saraswati ·
 Michael Shermer ·
 David Silverman ·
 Robert Spencer ·
 Greydon Square ·
 Victor J. Stenger ·
 Max Stirner ·
 Socrates ·
 Mark Twain ·
 Voltaire ·
 Ibn Warraq ·
 Frank Zappa
 

  


Categories: Criticism of monotheism


Navigation menu



Create account
Log in



Article

Talk









Read

Edit

View history

















Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store

Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page

Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page

Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version

Languages

Edit links
This page was last modified on 17 March 2015, at 03:36.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
  

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_monotheism









Criticism of monotheism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

Part of a series on
Criticism of religion

By religion
Buddhism ·
 Christianity  (Catholicism ·
 Jehovah's Witnesses ·
 Seventh-day Adventist)
   ·
 Protestantism ·
 Hinduism ·
 Islam  (Twelver Islam)
   ·
 Jainism ·
 Judaism ·
 Mormonism ·
 Sikhism
 
By religious figure
Jesus ·
 Moses ·
 Muhammad ·
 Ellen G. White
 
By text
Bible ·
 Book of Mormon ·
 Quran ·
 Talmud
 
Critics
Mikhail Bakunin ·
 Giordano Bruno ·
 Richard Dawkins ·
 Denis Diderot ·
 Epicurus ·
 Ludwig Feuerbach ·
 Stephen Fry ·
 Sita Ram Goel ·
 Emma Goldman ·
 Sam Harris ·
 Ayaan Hirsi Ali ·
 Christopher Hitchens ·
 Baron d'Holbach ·
 David Hume ·
 Robert G. Ingersoll ·
 Karl Marx ·
 Friedrich Nietzsche ·
 Michel Onfray ·
 Thomas Paine ·
 Pierre-Joseph Proudhon ·
 Ayn Rand ·
 André Servier ·
 David Silverman ·
 Max Stirner ·
 Bertrand Russell ·
 Dayananda Saraswati ·
 Victor J. Stenger ·
 Voltaire
 
Religious violence
Terrorism ·
 War ·
 Buddhism ·
 Christianity ·
 Islam ·
 Judaism ·
 Mormonism
 
Related topics
Abuse ·
 Apostasy ·
 Crisis of faith ·
 Criticism of atheism ·
 Criticism of monotheism ·
 Persecution ·
 Sexuality ·
 Slavery
 
v ·
 t ·
 e
   
Criticism of monotheism remains prevalent throughout the history, monotheism has been criticized as total discourse.[1] Monotheism has been criticised as a cause of ignorance, oppression and violence.


Contents  [hide]
1 Contradictions
2 Forcing one belief 2.1 Violence in monotheism
3 Success of monotheistic religions
4 See also
5 References

Contradictions[edit]
Through the means of defining, it is traditionally agreed among the major monotheistic religions that the one God is, inter alia, omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent. However, one scholar argues that "this definition of God [is] contradictory to what has been perceived by us in the empirical world."[2]
Feminist thinkers have criticized the monotheistic concept as the model of highest form of patriarchal power, they argues that the one god is regarded to be male and opposed to everything related to change, sensuality, nature, feeling, and femininity.[3]
Forcing one belief[edit]



David Hume.
David Hume has argued that monotheism is less pluralistic and thus less tolerant than polytheism because the former stipulates that people pigeonhole their beliefs into one.[4] In the same vein, Auguste Comte argues, "Monotheism is irreconcilable with the existence in our nature of the instincts of benevolence" because it compels followers to devote themselves to a single Creator.[5]
James Lovelock criticized monotheism, due to its idea of a transcendent almighty father, he says about monotheism, "seems to anesthetize the sense of wonder as if one were committed to a single line of thought by a cosmic legal contract."[6]
Violence in monotheism[edit]
In the ancient times, monotheism is blamed as the instigator of violence in its early days as it inspired the Israelites to wage war upon the Canaanites who believed in multiple gods.[7]
Highly acclaimed Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan regarded monotheism to be one reason of violence, he said:

The intolerance of narrow monotheism is written in letters of blood across the history of man from the time when first the tribes of Israel burst into the land of Canaan. The worshippers of the one jealous God are egged on to aggressive wars against people of alien cults. They invoke divine sanction for the cruelties inflicted on the conquered. The spirit of old Israel is inherited by Christianity and Islam, and it might not be unreasonable to suggest that it would have been better for Western civilization if Greece had moulded it on this question rather than Palestine.[8]
Success of monotheistic religions[edit]
Bertrand Russell has stated that in recent history William James popularized the idea that the belief in one god causes people to not behave improperly. Furthermore, Russell expostulates through examples that whether "politicians and educators ought to try to make people think there is one [god]" is "a political one" since one cannot prove the moralistic argument of William James.[9]
See also[edit]
Paganism
References[edit]
1.Jump up ^ "The Origins of Biblical Monotheism: Israel's Polytheistic Background and the Ugaritic Texts", p. 11
2.Jump up ^ Worship as a Hindrance to Self
3.Jump up ^ Encyclopedia of religion - Volume 9 - Page 6161, by Lindsay Jones
4.Jump up ^ "David Hume argued that unlike monotheism, polytheism is pluralistic in nature, unbound by doctrine, and therefore far more tolerant than monotheism, which tends to force people to believe in one faith." [1]
5.Jump up ^ The Catechism of Positive Religion, page 251
6.Jump up ^ "A Reenchanted World: The Quest for a New Kinship with Nature", by James William Gibson, p. 98, Publisher = Macmillan, Year = 2009
7.Jump up ^ The Curse of Cain: The Violent Legacy of Monotheism ISBN 978-0-226-74199-4
8.Jump up ^ "A Primal Perspective on the Philosophy of Religion", by Arvind Sharma, page 29
9.Jump up ^ Is There a God?,(Commissioned by Bertrand Russell, but never published in, Illustrated Magazine, in 1952) [2]


[hide]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Criticism of religion


By religion
Buddhism ·
 Christianity ·
 Hinduism ·
 Islam ·
 Jainism ·
 Jehovah's Witnesses ·
 Judaism ·
 Latter Day Saint movement ·
 Monotheism ·
 Catholic ·
 Scientology ·
 Seventh-day Adventist ·
 Sikhism ·
 Twelver Shi’ism ·
 Unification Church
 

Religious texts
Bible ·
 Book of Mormon ·
 Quran ·
 Talmud
 

Religious figures
Jesus ·
 Moses ·
 Muhammad ·
 Charles Taze Russell ·
 Ellen White
 

Religion and violence
Violence ·
 Terrorism ·
 Persecution ·
 War ·
 Sectarian violence ·
 Christianity ·
 Mormonism ·
 Judaism ·
 Islam ·
 India
 

Books
Atheist Manifesto ·
 Christianity Unveiled ·
 God in the Age of Science? ·
 God Is Not Great ·
 Letter to a Christian Nation ·
 The Age of Reason ·
 The End of Faith ·
 The God Delusion ·
 The Rage Against God ·
 Why I Am Not a Christian ·
 Why I Am Not a Muslim
 

Movements
Antitheism ·
 Atheism ·
 Criticism of atheism ·
 Cārvāka ·
 Church of the SubGenius ·
 Flying Spaghetti Monster ·
 Invisible Pink Unicorn ·
 Nontheistic religions
 

People
Dan Barker ·
 George Carlin ·
 Pat Condell ·
 Richard Dawkins ·
 Daniel Dennett ·
 Denis Diderot ·
 Epicurus ·
 Ludwig Feuerbach ·
 Sigmund Freud ·
 Annie Laurie Gaylor ·
 Sita Ram Goel ·
 Sam Harris ·
 Ayaan Hirsi Ali ·
 Christopher Hitchens ·
 Baron d'Holbach ·
 David Hume ·
 Walter Kaufman ·
 Bill Maher ·
 Karl Marx ·
 PZ Myers ·
 Taslima Nasrin ·
 Friedrich Nietzsche ·
 Madalyn Murray O'Hair ·
 Michel Onfray ·
 Thomas Paine ·
 Penn & Teller ·
 Periyar E. V. Ramasamy ·
 Herman Philipse ·
 Ayn Rand ·
 James Randi ·
 Bertrand Russell ·
 Carl Sagan ·
 André Servier ·
 Dayananda Saraswati ·
 Michael Shermer ·
 David Silverman ·
 Robert Spencer ·
 Greydon Square ·
 Victor J. Stenger ·
 Max Stirner ·
 Socrates ·
 Mark Twain ·
 Voltaire ·
 Ibn Warraq ·
 Frank Zappa
 

  


Categories: Criticism of monotheism


Navigation menu



Create account
Log in



Article

Talk









Read

Edit

View history

















Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store

Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page

Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page

Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version

Languages

Edit links
This page was last modified on 17 March 2015, at 03:36.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
  

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_monotheism









Persecution

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

"Persecuted" redirects here. For the film, see Persecuted (film).
Not to be confused with prosecution or Persécution.


 This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (June 2013)
Persecution is the systematic mistreatment of an individual or group by another individual or group. The most common forms are religious persecution, ethnic persecution and political persecution, though there is naturally some overlap between these terms. The inflicting of suffering, harassment, isolation, imprisonment, internment, fear, or pain are all factors that may establish persecution. Even so, not all suffering will necessarily establish persecution. The suffering experienced by the victim must be sufficiently severe. The threshold level of severity has been a source of much debate.[1]


Contents  [hide]
1 International law
2 Religious persecution 2.1 Atheists
2.2 Bahá'ís
2.3 Christians
2.4 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormonism)
2.5 Jehovah's Witnesses
2.6 Jews
2.7 Muslims
2.8 Hindus
2.9 Sikhs
2.10 Falun Gong
3 Ethnic persecution 3.1 Hazara people
3.2 Roma
3.3 Germans
4 Persecution based on genetics 4.1 People with albinism
4.2 People with autism spectrum disorders
5 LGBT persecution
6 Persecution based on army service
7 See also
8 References
9 External links

International law[edit]
As part of the Nuremberg Principles, crimes against humanity are part of international law. Principle VI of the Nuremberg Principles states that

The crimes hereinafter set out are punishable as crimes under international law:...
(c)Crimes against humanity:
Murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation and other inhumane acts done against any civilian population, or persecutions on political, racial, or religious grounds, when such acts are done or such persecutions are carried on in execution of or in connection with any crime against peace or any war crime.
Telford Taylor, who was Counsel for the Prosecution at the Nuremberg Trials wrote "[at] the Nuremberg war crimes trials, the tribunals rebuffed several efforts by the prosecution to bring such 'domestic' atrocities within the scope of international law as 'crimes against humanity'".[2] Several subsequent international treaties incorporate this principle, but some have dropped the restriction "in connection with any crime against peace or any war crime" that is in Nuremberg Principles.
The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, which is binding on 111 states, defines crimes against humanity in Article 7.1. The article criminalises certain acts "committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed against any civilian population, with knowledge of the attack". These include:

(h) Persecution against any identifiable group or collectivity on political, racial, national, ethnic, cultural, religious, gender[3]...or other grounds that are universally recognized as impermissible under international law, in connection with any act referred to in this paragraph [e.g. murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation, imprisonment, torture, sexual violence, apartheid, and other inhumane acts] or any crime within the jurisdiction of the Court
Religious persecution[edit]
Main article: Religious persecution
Religious persecution is systematic mistreatment of an individual or group due to their religious affiliation. Not only theorists of secularization (who presume a decline of religiosity in general) would willingly assume that religious persecution is a thing of the past[citation needed]. However, with the rise of fundamentalism and religiously related terrorism, this assumption has become even more controversial[citation needed]. Indeed, in many countries of the world today, religious persecution is a Human Rights problem.
Atheists[edit]
Main article: Persecution of atheists
Atheists have experienced persecution throughout history. Persecution may refer to unwarranted arrest, imprisonment, beating, torture, or execution. It also may refer to the confiscation or destruction of property.
Bahá'ís[edit]
Main article: Persecution of Bahá'ís
The persecution of Bahá'ís refers to the religious persecution of Bahá'ís in various countries, especially in Iran,[4] which has one of the largest Bahá'í populations in the world. The Bahá'í Faith originated in Iran, and represents the largest religious minority in that country.
Christians[edit]
Main article: Persecution of Christians



A Christian Dirce, by Henryk Siemiradzki. A Christian woman is martyred under Nero in this re-enactment of the myth of Dirce (painting by Henryk Siemiradzki, 1897, National Museum, Warsaw).
The persecution of Christians is religious persecution that Christians may undergo as a consequence of professing their faith, both historically and in the current era. Early Christians were persecuted for their faith at the hands of both Jews from whose religion Christianity arose and the Roman Empire which controlled much of the land across which early Christianity was distributed. Early in the fourth century, the religion was legalized by the Edict of Milan, and it eventually became the State church of the Roman Empire.
Christian missionaries, as well as the people that they converted to Christianity, have been the target of persecution, many times to the point of being martyred for their faith.
There is also a history of individual Christian denominations suffering persecution at the hands of other Christians under the charge of heresy, particularly during the 16th century Protestant Reformation as well as throughout the Middle Ages when various Christian groups deemed heretical were persecuted by the Papacy.
In the 20th century, Christians have been persecuted by various groups, and by atheistic states such as the USSR and North Korea. During the Second World War members of many Christian churches were persecuted in Germany for resisting the Nazi ideology.
In more recent times the Christian missionary organization Open Doors (UK) estimates 100 million Christians face persecution, particularly in Muslim-dominated countries such as Pakistan and Saudi Arabia.[5][6] According to the International Society for Human Rights, up to 80% of acts of persecution are directed at people of the Christian faith.[7]
Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormonism)[edit]
Main article: Anti-Mormonism
With the Missouri extermination order Mormons became the only religious group to have a state of the United States legalize the extermination of their religion. This was after a speech given by Sideny Rigdon called the July 4th Oration which while meant to state that Mormons would defend their lives and property was taken as inflammatory. Their forcible expulsion from the state caused the death of over a hundred due to exposure, starvation, and resulting illnesses. The Mormons suffered through tarring and feathering, their lands and possessions being repeatedly taken from them, mob attacks, false imprisonments, and the US sending an army to Utah to deal with the "Mormon problem" in the Utah War which resulted in the Mormons massacring settlers at the Mountain Meadows Massacre. A government militia slaughtered Mormons in what is now known as the Haun's Mill massacre. The founder of the church, Joseph Smith, was killed in Carthage, Illinois by a mob of about 200 men, almost all of whom were members of the Illinois state militia including some of the militia assigned to guard him.
Jehovah's Witnesses[edit]
Main article: Persecution of Jehovah's Witnesses
Throughout the history of Jehovah's Witnesses, their beliefs, doctrines and practices have engendered controversy and opposition from the local governments, communities, or mainstream Christian groups.
Jews[edit]
Main article: Persecution of Jews
Persecution of Jews is a recurring phenomenon throughout history. It has occurred on numerous occasions and at widely different geographical locations. It may include pogroms, looting and demolishing of private and public Jewish property (e.g., Kristallnacht), unwarranted arrest, imprisonment, torture, killing, or even mass execution (in World War II alone, approximately 6 million people were deliberately killed for the sole reason of being a Jew). They have been expelled from their hometowns/countries, hoping to find havens in other polities. In recent times antisemitism has often been manifested as Anti-Zionism,[8][9][10] despite the fact that there are various Jewish groups who themselves oppose the idea of Zionism.[11]
Muslims[edit]



 Mass grave where events of the Srebrenica massacre of Bosnian Muslims unfolded
Main articles: Persecution of Muslims and Persecution of Ahmadis
Persecution of Muslims is a recurring phenomenon from the beginning and throughout the history of Islam. Persecution may refer to unwarranted arrest, imprisonment, beating, torture, or execution. It also may refer to the confiscation or destruction of property, or incitement to hate Muslims.
Persecution can extend beyond those who perceive themselves as Muslims to include those who are perceived by others as Muslims, or to Muslims which are considered by fellow Muslims as non-Muslims. The Ahmadiyya regard themselves as Muslims, but are seen by many other Muslims as non-Muslims and "heretics". In 1984, the Government of Pakistan, under General Zia-ul-Haq, passed Ordinance XX,[12] which banned proselytizing by Ahmadis and also banned Ahmadis from referring to themselves as Muslims. According to this ordinance, any Ahmadi who refers to oneself as a Muslim by words, either spoken or written, or by visible representation, directly or indirectly, or makes the call for prayer as other Muslims do, is punishable by imprisonment of up to 3 years. Because of these difficulties, Mirza Tahir Ahmad migrated to London, UK.
Hindus[edit]
Main article: Persecution of Hindus
Persecution of Hindus refers to the religious persecution inflicted upon Hindus. Hindus have been historically persecuted during the Islamic rule of the Indian subcontinent[13] and during Portuguese rule of Goa. In modern times, Hindus in Pakistan and Bangladesh have also suffered persecution. Most recently, thousands of Hindus from Sindh province in Pakistan have been fleeing to India voicing fear for their safety. After the Partition of India in 1947, there were 8.8 million Hindus in Pakistan (excluding Bangladesh) in 1951. In 1951, Hindus constituted 22% of the Pakistani population (including present-day Bangladesh which formed part of Pakistan).[14][15] Today, the Hindu minority amounts to 1.7 percent of Pakistan's population.[16]
The Bangladesh Liberation War (1971) resulted in one of the largest genocides of the 20th century. While estimates of the number of casualties was 3,000,000, it is reasonably certain that Hindus bore a disproportionate brunt of the Pakistan Army's onslaught against the Bengali population of what was East Pakistan. An article in Time magazine dated 2 August 1971, stated "The Hindus, who account for three-fourths of the refugees and a majority of the dead, have borne the brunt of the Muslim military hatred."[17] Senator Edward Kennedy wrote in a report that was part of United States Senate Committee on Foreign Relations testimony dated 1 November 1971, "Hardest hit have been members of the Hindu community who have been robbed of their lands and shops, systematically slaughtered, and in some places, painted with yellow patches marked "H". All of this has been officially sanctioned, ordered and implemented under martial law from Islamabad". In the same report, Senator Kennedy reported that 80% of the refugees in India were Hindus and according to numerous international relief agencies such as UNESCO and World Health Organization the number of East Pakistani refugees at their peak in India was close to 10 million. In a syndicated column "The Pakistani Slaughter That Nixon Ignored", Pulitzer Prize–winning journalist Sydney Schanberg wrote about his return to liberated Bangladesh in 1972. "Other reminders were the yellow "H"s the Pakistanis had painted on the homes of Hindus, particular targets of the Muslim army" (by "Muslim army", meaning the Pakistan Army, which had targeted Bengali Muslims as well), (Newsday, 29 April 1994).
In Bangladesh, on 28 February 2013, the International Crimes Tribunal sentenced Delwar Hossain Sayeedi, the Vice President of the Jamaat-e-Islami to death for the war crimes committed during the 1971 Bangladesh Liberation War. Following the sentence, activists of Jamaat-e-Islami and its student wing Islami Chhatra Shibir attacked the Hindus in different parts of the country. Hindu properties were looted, Hindu houses were burnt into ashes and Hindu temples were desecrated and set on fire.[18][19] While the government has held the Jamaat-e-Islami responsible for the attacks on the minorities, the Jamaat-e-Islami leadership has denied any involvement. The minority leaders have protested the attacks and appealed for justice. The Supreme Court of Bangladesh has directed the law enforcement to start suo motu investigation into the attacks. US Ambassador to Bangladesh express concern about attack of Jamaat on Bengali Hindu community.[20][21] The violence included the looting of Hindu properties and businesses, the burning of Hindu homes, rape of Hindu women and desecration and destruction of Hindu temples.[22] According to community leaders, more than 50 Hindu temples and 1,500 Hindu homes were destroyed in 20 districts.[23]
Sikhs[edit]
Main articles: Sikh holocaust of 1762, Sikh holocaust of 1746 and 1984 anti-Sikh riots
See also: Category:Massacres of Sikhs.
The 1984 anti-Sikhs riots or the 1984 Sikh Massacre were a series of pogroms[24][25][26][27] directed against Sikhs in India, by anti-Sikh mobs, in response to the assassination of Indira Gandhi, on 31 October 1984, by two of her Sikh bodyguards in response to her actions authorising the military operation Operation Blue Star. There were more than 8,000[28] deaths, including 3,000 in Delhi.[26] In June 1984, during Operation Blue Star, Indira Gandhi ordered the Indian Army to attack the Golden Temple and eliminate any insurgents, as it had been occupied by Sikh separatists who were stockpiling weapons. Later operations by Indian paramilitary forces were initiated to clear the separatists from the countryside of Punjab state.[29]
The Indian government reported 2,700 deaths in the ensuing chaos. In the aftermath of the riots, the Indian government reported 20,000 had fled the city, however the People's Union for Civil Liberties reported "at least" 1,000 displaced persons.[30] The most affected regions were the Sikh neighbourhoods in Delhi. The Central Bureau of Investigation, the main Indian investigating agency, is of the opinion that the acts of violence were organized with the support from the then Delhi police officials and the central government headed by Indira Gandhi's son, Rajiv Gandhi.[31] Rajiv Gandhi was sworn in as Prime Minister after his mother's death and, when asked about the riots, said "when a big tree falls, the earth shakes" thus trying to justify the communal strife.[32]
There are allegations that the government destroyed evidence and shielded the guilty. The Asian Age front-page story called the government actions "the Mother of all Cover-ups"[33][34] There are allegations that the violence was led and often perpetrated by Indian National Congress activists and sympathisers during the riots.[35] The chief weapon used by the mobs, kerosene, was supplied by a group of Indian National Congress Party leaders who owned filling stations.[36]
Falun Gong[edit]
Main article: Persecution of Falun Gong
Falun Gong was introduced to the general public by Li Hongzhi(李洪志) in Changchun, China, in 1992. For the next few years, Falun Gong was the fastest growing qigong practice in Chinese history and, by 1999, there were between 70 and 100 million people practicing Falun Gong in China.[37] Following the seven years of widespread popularity, on July 20, 1999, the government of the People's Republic of China began a nationwide persecution campaign against Falun Gong practitioners, except in the special administrative regions of Hong Kong and Macau.[38][39] In late 1999, legislation was created to outlaw "heterodox religions" and retroactively applied to Falun Gong.[40] Amnesty International states that the persecution is "politically motivated" with "legislation being used retroactively to convict people on politically-driven charges, and new regulations introduced to further restrict fundamental freedoms".[41]
Ethnic persecution[edit]
Main article: Ethnic persecution
Ethnic persecution refers to perceived persecution based on ethnicity. Its meaning is parallel to racism, (based on race). Rwandan genocide remains an atrocity that the indigenous Hutu and Tutsi peoples still believe is unforgivable. The Japanese occupation of China caused the death of millions of people, mostly peasants murdered after the Doolittle Raid in early World War II.
Hazara people[edit]
Main article: Persecution of Hazara people
Hazara people of central Afghanistan have been persecuted by Afghan rulers at various times in the history. Since the tragedy of 9/11, Sunni Muslim terrorists have been attacking the Hazara community in southwestern Pakistani town of Quetta, home to some 500000 Hazara who fled persecution in neighbouring Afghanistan. Some 2400 men, women and children have been killed or wounded with Lashkar-e-Jhangvi claiming responsibility for most of the attacks against the community. Consequently, many thousands have fled the country seeking asylum in Australia.
Roma[edit]
Along with Jews, Homosexuals and others, the Romani Gypsies were rounded by the Nazi Regime of Germany and sent to the death camps.
Germans[edit]
Main article: Organised persecution of ethnic Germans


 This section does not cite any references or sources. Please help improve this section by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (December 2009)
The persecution of ethnic Germans refers to systematic activity against groups of ethnic Germans based on their ethnicity.
Historically, this has been due to two causes: the German population were considered, whether factually or not, linked with German nationalist regimes such as those of the Nazis or Kaiser Wilhelm. This was the case in the World War I era persecution of Germans in the United States, and also in Eastern and Central Europe following the end of World War II. While many victims of these persecutions did not, in fact, have any connection to those regimes, cooperation between German minority organisations and Nazi regime did occur, as the example of Selbstschutz shows, which is still used as a pretense of hostilities against those who did not take part in such organisations. After World War II, many such Volksdeutsche were killed or driven from their homes[who?] in acts of vengeance, others in ethnic cleansing of territories prior to populating them with citizens of the annexing country.[where?] In other cases (e.g. in the case of the formerly large German-speaking populations of Russia, Estonia, or the Transylvanian (Siebenbürgen) German minority in Rumania and the Balkans) such persecution was a crime committed against innocent communities who had played no part in the Third Reich.
Persecution based on genetics[edit]
People with albinism[edit]
Main article: Persecution of people with albinism
Persecution on the basis of albinism is frequently based on the belief that albinos are inferior to persons with higher concentration of melanin in their skin. As a result albinos have been persecuted, killed and dismembered, and graves of albinistic people dug up and desecrated. Such people have also been ostracized and even killed because they are presumed to bring bad luck in some areas. Haiti also has a long history of treating albinistic people as accursed, with the highest incidence under the influence of François "Papa Doc" Duvalier.
People with autism spectrum disorders[edit]
Main article: Persecution of people with autism spectrum disorders
Persecution on the basis of autism spectrum disorders, similar to other forms of persecution listed here, is based on the belief that people with autism spectrum disorder are genetically and/or morally inferior based on symptoms associated with these conditions; mainly hyperfocus, preoccupation with specialist interests, and general social behaviours deemed inept. Such persons are discriminated against socially, legally and in other forms, and in some religious traditions, mainly Abrahamic religions such as Evangelical Christianity or certain forms of Islam, due to the overall tendency of autistic persons toward logic and thus have trouble with displaying the correct prerequisite religious faith, can view such people as suffering from possession by malevolent spirits, at the more favourable end of the spectrum. However, this is not always the case and some persons on the spectrum can adhere to these religious faiths; other traditions may have dissenting views on the subject; namely, an autistic person in a New Age community is likely to be labelled as an indigo child or similar concept. Those capable of passing, and/or who are of a relatively high socio-economic status, are usually more favoured, or at least written off as merely eccentric. Generally speaking, cisgender females on the spectrum are more accepted, or at least tolerated, than their male counterparts, and the level of physical attractiveness in both genders can also affect the outcome; the outcome for transgender individuals is mixed, depending on success of transition and passing as "neurotypical" (person unaffected by autism spectrum disorder).
LGBT persecution[edit]
A number of countries, especially those in the [Western world], have passed measures to alleviate discrimination against sexual minorities, including laws against anti-gay hate crimes and workplace discrimination. Some have also legalized same-sex marriage or civil unions in order to grant same-sex couples the same protections and benefits as opposite-sex couples. In 2011, the United Nations passed its first resolution recognizing LGBT rights.
Persecution based on army service[edit]
Persecution on the basis of army service, or the lack of it, exists in Israel. In Israel, Jewish citizens who receive an exemption from army service are denied many prestigious career options, especially in the field of security. The root of discrimination on the basis of army service lies in the fact that at age 17, non-Arab citizens (including Druze) are called up to be examined for eligibility to compulsory military service. A record for each potential conscript is created, and those who actually serve in the military are distinguished from those rejected from service, by a Discharge Card, which has additional information on it, including the soldier's rank, military profession, and behavior during army service. Employers are particularly interested in the Discharge Card, since it is a universally available source of information about a potential employee. Citizens rejected from the army are frequently looked down upon by employers, who typically believe that "those who are unfit for army service are also unfit for the work environment", and those who succeeded in the army are also likely to be good employees. It is very frequent in Israel to see job advertisements requiring "Full Army Service", and the main problem is that the decisions taken by the draft board regarding a 17-year-old minor affect their entire life.
See also[edit]
Discrimination
Latter-day Saint martyrs
Persecution complex
Right to asylum
References[edit]
1.Jump up ^ S. Rempell, Defining Persecution, http://ssrn.com/abstract=1941006
2.Jump up ^ Telford Taylor "When people kill a people", The New York Times, March 28, 1982.
3.Jump up ^ Article 7.3 of the Rome Statute, which constitutes "compromise text" states that "For the purpose of this Statute, it is understood that the term 'gender' refers to the two sexes, male and female, within the context of society. The term 'gender' does not indicate any meaning different from the above." While under international criminal law persecution based on Gender Identity is also prohibited, during the Rome Diplomatic Conference that adopted the ICC Statute, it was decided to define gender narrowly in order to overcome opposition from the Holy See and other states that were concerned that the ICC could theoretically also look into discriminatory practices of religious institutions. This provision was balanced with that of Article 10, which states that "Nothing in this Part shall be interpreted as limiting or prejudicing in any way existing or developing rules of international law for purposes other than this Statute."
4.Jump up ^ International Federation for Human Rights (2003-08-01). "Discrimination against religious minorities in Iran" (PDF). fdih.org. Retrieved 2006-10-20.
5.Jump up ^ Open Doors: The worst 50 countries for persecution of Christians
6.Jump up ^ Open Doors: Weltverfolgungsindex 2012, p. 2
7.Jump up ^ Philpott, Daniel, Pope Francis and Religious Freedom, Washington, DC: Berkley Center for Religion, Peace & World Affairs
8.Jump up ^ New antisemitism
9.Jump up ^ New Anti-Semitism: Disguised As "Anti-Zionism" - Discover the Networks
10.Jump up ^ Anti-zionism as an expression of anti-Semitism in recent years
11.Jump up ^ Anti-Zionism#Jewish anti-Zionism
12.Jump up ^ Ordinance XX
13.Jump up ^ Durant, Will. The Story of Civilization: Our Oriental Heritage. p. 459. "The Mohammedan Conquest of India is probably the bloodiest story in history. It is a discouraging tale, for its evident moral is that civilization is a precarious thing, whose delicate complex of order and liberty, culture and peace may at any time be overthrown by barbarians invading from without or multiplying within. The Hindus had allowed their strength to be wasted in internal division and war; they had adopted religions like Buddhism and Jainism, which unnerved them for the tasks of life; they had failed to organize their forces for the protection of their frontiers and their capitals, their wealth and their freedom, from the hordes of Scythians, Huns, Afghans and Turks hovering about India's boundaries and waiting for national weakness to let them in. For four hundred years (600–1000 AD) India invited conquest; and at last it came."
14.Jump up ^ Census of Pakistan, 1951
15.Jump up ^ Hindu Masjids by Prafull Goradia, 2002 "In 1951, Muslims were 77 percent and Hindus were 22 percent."
16.Jump up ^ Census of Pakistan[dead link]
17.Jump up ^ "World: Pakistan: The Ravaging of Golden Bengal - Printout". TIME. 2 August 1971. Retrieved 2013-10-25.
18.Jump up ^ "Hindus Under Attack in Bangladesh". News Bharati. March 3, 2013. Retrieved March 26, 2013.
19.Jump up ^ "Bagerhat Hindu Temple Set on Fire". bdnews24.com. March 2, 2013. Retrieved March 20, 2013.
20.Jump up ^ "US worried at violence". The Daily Star (Bangladesh). March 12, 2013. Retrieved 12 March 2013.
21.Jump up ^ "Mozena: Violence is not the way to resolution". The Daily Ittefaq. March 11, 2013. Retrieved 12 March 2013.
22.Jump up ^ "Bangladesh: Wave of violent attacks against Hindu minority". Press releases. Amnesty International. Retrieved 8 March 2013.
23.Jump up ^ Ethirajan, Anbarasan (9 March 2013). "Bangladesh minorities 'terrorised' after mob violence". BBC News (London). Retrieved 17 March 2013.
24.Jump up ^ State pogroms glossed over. The Times of India. 31 December 2005.
25.Jump up ^ "Anti-Sikh riots a pogrom: Khushwant". Rediff.com. Retrieved 23 September 2009.
26.^ Jump up to: a b Bedi, Rahul (1 November 2009). "Indira Gandhi's death remembered". BBC. Archived from the original on 2 November 2009. Retrieved 2 November 2009. "The 25th anniversary of Indira Gandhi's assassination revives stark memories of some 3,000 Sikhs killed brutally in the orderly pogrom that followed her killing"
27.Jump up ^ Nugus, Phillip (Spring 2007). "The Assassinations of Indira & Rajiv Gandhi". BBC Active. Retrieved 23 July 2010.
28.Jump up ^ Delhi court to give verdict on re-opening 1984 riots case against Congress leader Jagdish Tytler
29.Jump up ^ Charny, Israel W. (1999). Encyclopaedia of genocide. ABC-CLIO. pp. 516–517. ISBN 978-0-87436-928-1. Retrieved 21 February 2011.
30.Jump up ^ Mukhoty, Gobinda; Kothari, Rajni (1984), Who are the Guilty ?, People's Union for Civil Liberties, retrieved 4 November 2010
31.Jump up ^ "1984 anti-Sikh riots backed by Govt, police: CBI". IBN Live. 23 April 2012. Retrieved 27 April 2012.
32.Jump up ^ "1984 anti-Sikh riots 'wrong', says Rahul Gandhi". Hindustan Times. 18 November 2008. Retrieved 5 May 2012.
33.Jump up ^ Mustafa, Seema (2005-08-09). "1984 Sikhs Massacres: Mother of All Cover-ups". Front page story (The Asian Age). p. 1.
34.Jump up ^ Agal, Renu (2005-08-11). "Justice delayed, justice denied". BBC News.
35.Jump up ^ "Leaders 'incited' anti-Sikh riots". BBC News. August 8, 2005. Retrieved November 23, 2012.
36.Jump up ^ Kaur, Jaskaran; Crossette, Barbara (2006). Twenty years of impunity: the November 1984 pogroms of Sikhs in India (PDF) (2nd ed.). Portland, OR: Ensaaf. p. 29. ISBN 978-0-9787073-0-9. Retrieved 4 November 2010.
37.Jump up ^ Source of Statistical Information, Number of Falun Gong practitioners in China in 1999: at least 70 million, Falun Dafa Information Center, accessed 01/01/08
38.Jump up ^ Faison, Seth (April 27, 1999) "In Beijing: A Roar of Silent Protesters" New York Times, retrieved June 10, 2006
39.Jump up ^ Kahn, Joseph (April 27, 1999) "Notoriety Now for Exiled Leader of Chinese Movement" New York Times, retrieved June 14, 2006
40.Jump up ^ Leung, Beatrice (2002) 'China and Falun Gong: Party and society relations in the modern era', Journal of Contemporary China, 11:33, 761 – 784
41.Jump up ^ The crackdown on Falun Gong and other so-called heretical organizations , The Amnesty International
External links[edit]
 Look up persecution in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.
Language alternatives to creating and being persecutors


[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Abuse























































[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Discrimination



































































































































































































Category
Portal


  


Categories: Abuse
Persecution














Navigation menu



Create account
Log in



Article

Talk









Read

Edit

View history

















Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store

Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page

Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page

Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version

Languages
العربية
Bosanski
Català
Čeština
Dansk
Eesti
Español
Esperanto
한국어
Hrvatski
Italiano
Kiswahili
Nederlands
日本語
Norsk bokmål
Polski
Português
Simple English
Slovenčina
Srpskohrvatski / српскохрватски
Suomi
Svenska
தமிழ்
ไทย
Türkçe
中文
Edit links
This page was last modified on 18 June 2015, at 16:11.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
    
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution










Persecution

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

"Persecuted" redirects here. For the film, see Persecuted (film).
Not to be confused with prosecution or Persécution.


 This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (June 2013)
Persecution is the systematic mistreatment of an individual or group by another individual or group. The most common forms are religious persecution, ethnic persecution and political persecution, though there is naturally some overlap between these terms. The inflicting of suffering, harassment, isolation, imprisonment, internment, fear, or pain are all factors that may establish persecution. Even so, not all suffering will necessarily establish persecution. The suffering experienced by the victim must be sufficiently severe. The threshold level of severity has been a source of much debate.[1]


Contents  [hide]
1 International law
2 Religious persecution 2.1 Atheists
2.2 Bahá'ís
2.3 Christians
2.4 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormonism)
2.5 Jehovah's Witnesses
2.6 Jews
2.7 Muslims
2.8 Hindus
2.9 Sikhs
2.10 Falun Gong
3 Ethnic persecution 3.1 Hazara people
3.2 Roma
3.3 Germans
4 Persecution based on genetics 4.1 People with albinism
4.2 People with autism spectrum disorders
5 LGBT persecution
6 Persecution based on army service
7 See also
8 References
9 External links

International law[edit]
As part of the Nuremberg Principles, crimes against humanity are part of international law. Principle VI of the Nuremberg Principles states that

The crimes hereinafter set out are punishable as crimes under international law:...
(c)Crimes against humanity:
Murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation and other inhumane acts done against any civilian population, or persecutions on political, racial, or religious grounds, when such acts are done or such persecutions are carried on in execution of or in connection with any crime against peace or any war crime.
Telford Taylor, who was Counsel for the Prosecution at the Nuremberg Trials wrote "[at] the Nuremberg war crimes trials, the tribunals rebuffed several efforts by the prosecution to bring such 'domestic' atrocities within the scope of international law as 'crimes against humanity'".[2] Several subsequent international treaties incorporate this principle, but some have dropped the restriction "in connection with any crime against peace or any war crime" that is in Nuremberg Principles.
The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, which is binding on 111 states, defines crimes against humanity in Article 7.1. The article criminalises certain acts "committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed against any civilian population, with knowledge of the attack". These include:

(h) Persecution against any identifiable group or collectivity on political, racial, national, ethnic, cultural, religious, gender[3]...or other grounds that are universally recognized as impermissible under international law, in connection with any act referred to in this paragraph [e.g. murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation, imprisonment, torture, sexual violence, apartheid, and other inhumane acts] or any crime within the jurisdiction of the Court
Religious persecution[edit]
Main article: Religious persecution
Religious persecution is systematic mistreatment of an individual or group due to their religious affiliation. Not only theorists of secularization (who presume a decline of religiosity in general) would willingly assume that religious persecution is a thing of the past[citation needed]. However, with the rise of fundamentalism and religiously related terrorism, this assumption has become even more controversial[citation needed]. Indeed, in many countries of the world today, religious persecution is a Human Rights problem.
Atheists[edit]
Main article: Persecution of atheists
Atheists have experienced persecution throughout history. Persecution may refer to unwarranted arrest, imprisonment, beating, torture, or execution. It also may refer to the confiscation or destruction of property.
Bahá'ís[edit]
Main article: Persecution of Bahá'ís
The persecution of Bahá'ís refers to the religious persecution of Bahá'ís in various countries, especially in Iran,[4] which has one of the largest Bahá'í populations in the world. The Bahá'í Faith originated in Iran, and represents the largest religious minority in that country.
Christians[edit]
Main article: Persecution of Christians



A Christian Dirce, by Henryk Siemiradzki. A Christian woman is martyred under Nero in this re-enactment of the myth of Dirce (painting by Henryk Siemiradzki, 1897, National Museum, Warsaw).
The persecution of Christians is religious persecution that Christians may undergo as a consequence of professing their faith, both historically and in the current era. Early Christians were persecuted for their faith at the hands of both Jews from whose religion Christianity arose and the Roman Empire which controlled much of the land across which early Christianity was distributed. Early in the fourth century, the religion was legalized by the Edict of Milan, and it eventually became the State church of the Roman Empire.
Christian missionaries, as well as the people that they converted to Christianity, have been the target of persecution, many times to the point of being martyred for their faith.
There is also a history of individual Christian denominations suffering persecution at the hands of other Christians under the charge of heresy, particularly during the 16th century Protestant Reformation as well as throughout the Middle Ages when various Christian groups deemed heretical were persecuted by the Papacy.
In the 20th century, Christians have been persecuted by various groups, and by atheistic states such as the USSR and North Korea. During the Second World War members of many Christian churches were persecuted in Germany for resisting the Nazi ideology.
In more recent times the Christian missionary organization Open Doors (UK) estimates 100 million Christians face persecution, particularly in Muslim-dominated countries such as Pakistan and Saudi Arabia.[5][6] According to the International Society for Human Rights, up to 80% of acts of persecution are directed at people of the Christian faith.[7]
Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormonism)[edit]
Main article: Anti-Mormonism
With the Missouri extermination order Mormons became the only religious group to have a state of the United States legalize the extermination of their religion. This was after a speech given by Sideny Rigdon called the July 4th Oration which while meant to state that Mormons would defend their lives and property was taken as inflammatory. Their forcible expulsion from the state caused the death of over a hundred due to exposure, starvation, and resulting illnesses. The Mormons suffered through tarring and feathering, their lands and possessions being repeatedly taken from them, mob attacks, false imprisonments, and the US sending an army to Utah to deal with the "Mormon problem" in the Utah War which resulted in the Mormons massacring settlers at the Mountain Meadows Massacre. A government militia slaughtered Mormons in what is now known as the Haun's Mill massacre. The founder of the church, Joseph Smith, was killed in Carthage, Illinois by a mob of about 200 men, almost all of whom were members of the Illinois state militia including some of the militia assigned to guard him.
Jehovah's Witnesses[edit]
Main article: Persecution of Jehovah's Witnesses
Throughout the history of Jehovah's Witnesses, their beliefs, doctrines and practices have engendered controversy and opposition from the local governments, communities, or mainstream Christian groups.
Jews[edit]
Main article: Persecution of Jews
Persecution of Jews is a recurring phenomenon throughout history. It has occurred on numerous occasions and at widely different geographical locations. It may include pogroms, looting and demolishing of private and public Jewish property (e.g., Kristallnacht), unwarranted arrest, imprisonment, torture, killing, or even mass execution (in World War II alone, approximately 6 million people were deliberately killed for the sole reason of being a Jew). They have been expelled from their hometowns/countries, hoping to find havens in other polities. In recent times antisemitism has often been manifested as Anti-Zionism,[8][9][10] despite the fact that there are various Jewish groups who themselves oppose the idea of Zionism.[11]
Muslims[edit]



 Mass grave where events of the Srebrenica massacre of Bosnian Muslims unfolded
Main articles: Persecution of Muslims and Persecution of Ahmadis
Persecution of Muslims is a recurring phenomenon from the beginning and throughout the history of Islam. Persecution may refer to unwarranted arrest, imprisonment, beating, torture, or execution. It also may refer to the confiscation or destruction of property, or incitement to hate Muslims.
Persecution can extend beyond those who perceive themselves as Muslims to include those who are perceived by others as Muslims, or to Muslims which are considered by fellow Muslims as non-Muslims. The Ahmadiyya regard themselves as Muslims, but are seen by many other Muslims as non-Muslims and "heretics". In 1984, the Government of Pakistan, under General Zia-ul-Haq, passed Ordinance XX,[12] which banned proselytizing by Ahmadis and also banned Ahmadis from referring to themselves as Muslims. According to this ordinance, any Ahmadi who refers to oneself as a Muslim by words, either spoken or written, or by visible representation, directly or indirectly, or makes the call for prayer as other Muslims do, is punishable by imprisonment of up to 3 years. Because of these difficulties, Mirza Tahir Ahmad migrated to London, UK.
Hindus[edit]
Main article: Persecution of Hindus
Persecution of Hindus refers to the religious persecution inflicted upon Hindus. Hindus have been historically persecuted during the Islamic rule of the Indian subcontinent[13] and during Portuguese rule of Goa. In modern times, Hindus in Pakistan and Bangladesh have also suffered persecution. Most recently, thousands of Hindus from Sindh province in Pakistan have been fleeing to India voicing fear for their safety. After the Partition of India in 1947, there were 8.8 million Hindus in Pakistan (excluding Bangladesh) in 1951. In 1951, Hindus constituted 22% of the Pakistani population (including present-day Bangladesh which formed part of Pakistan).[14][15] Today, the Hindu minority amounts to 1.7 percent of Pakistan's population.[16]
The Bangladesh Liberation War (1971) resulted in one of the largest genocides of the 20th century. While estimates of the number of casualties was 3,000,000, it is reasonably certain that Hindus bore a disproportionate brunt of the Pakistan Army's onslaught against the Bengali population of what was East Pakistan. An article in Time magazine dated 2 August 1971, stated "The Hindus, who account for three-fourths of the refugees and a majority of the dead, have borne the brunt of the Muslim military hatred."[17] Senator Edward Kennedy wrote in a report that was part of United States Senate Committee on Foreign Relations testimony dated 1 November 1971, "Hardest hit have been members of the Hindu community who have been robbed of their lands and shops, systematically slaughtered, and in some places, painted with yellow patches marked "H". All of this has been officially sanctioned, ordered and implemented under martial law from Islamabad". In the same report, Senator Kennedy reported that 80% of the refugees in India were Hindus and according to numerous international relief agencies such as UNESCO and World Health Organization the number of East Pakistani refugees at their peak in India was close to 10 million. In a syndicated column "The Pakistani Slaughter That Nixon Ignored", Pulitzer Prize–winning journalist Sydney Schanberg wrote about his return to liberated Bangladesh in 1972. "Other reminders were the yellow "H"s the Pakistanis had painted on the homes of Hindus, particular targets of the Muslim army" (by "Muslim army", meaning the Pakistan Army, which had targeted Bengali Muslims as well), (Newsday, 29 April 1994).
In Bangladesh, on 28 February 2013, the International Crimes Tribunal sentenced Delwar Hossain Sayeedi, the Vice President of the Jamaat-e-Islami to death for the war crimes committed during the 1971 Bangladesh Liberation War. Following the sentence, activists of Jamaat-e-Islami and its student wing Islami Chhatra Shibir attacked the Hindus in different parts of the country. Hindu properties were looted, Hindu houses were burnt into ashes and Hindu temples were desecrated and set on fire.[18][19] While the government has held the Jamaat-e-Islami responsible for the attacks on the minorities, the Jamaat-e-Islami leadership has denied any involvement. The minority leaders have protested the attacks and appealed for justice. The Supreme Court of Bangladesh has directed the law enforcement to start suo motu investigation into the attacks. US Ambassador to Bangladesh express concern about attack of Jamaat on Bengali Hindu community.[20][21] The violence included the looting of Hindu properties and businesses, the burning of Hindu homes, rape of Hindu women and desecration and destruction of Hindu temples.[22] According to community leaders, more than 50 Hindu temples and 1,500 Hindu homes were destroyed in 20 districts.[23]
Sikhs[edit]
Main articles: Sikh holocaust of 1762, Sikh holocaust of 1746 and 1984 anti-Sikh riots
See also: Category:Massacres of Sikhs.
The 1984 anti-Sikhs riots or the 1984 Sikh Massacre were a series of pogroms[24][25][26][27] directed against Sikhs in India, by anti-Sikh mobs, in response to the assassination of Indira Gandhi, on 31 October 1984, by two of her Sikh bodyguards in response to her actions authorising the military operation Operation Blue Star. There were more than 8,000[28] deaths, including 3,000 in Delhi.[26] In June 1984, during Operation Blue Star, Indira Gandhi ordered the Indian Army to attack the Golden Temple and eliminate any insurgents, as it had been occupied by Sikh separatists who were stockpiling weapons. Later operations by Indian paramilitary forces were initiated to clear the separatists from the countryside of Punjab state.[29]
The Indian government reported 2,700 deaths in the ensuing chaos. In the aftermath of the riots, the Indian government reported 20,000 had fled the city, however the People's Union for Civil Liberties reported "at least" 1,000 displaced persons.[30] The most affected regions were the Sikh neighbourhoods in Delhi. The Central Bureau of Investigation, the main Indian investigating agency, is of the opinion that the acts of violence were organized with the support from the then Delhi police officials and the central government headed by Indira Gandhi's son, Rajiv Gandhi.[31] Rajiv Gandhi was sworn in as Prime Minister after his mother's death and, when asked about the riots, said "when a big tree falls, the earth shakes" thus trying to justify the communal strife.[32]
There are allegations that the government destroyed evidence and shielded the guilty. The Asian Age front-page story called the government actions "the Mother of all Cover-ups"[33][34] There are allegations that the violence was led and often perpetrated by Indian National Congress activists and sympathisers during the riots.[35] The chief weapon used by the mobs, kerosene, was supplied by a group of Indian National Congress Party leaders who owned filling stations.[36]
Falun Gong[edit]
Main article: Persecution of Falun Gong
Falun Gong was introduced to the general public by Li Hongzhi(李洪志) in Changchun, China, in 1992. For the next few years, Falun Gong was the fastest growing qigong practice in Chinese history and, by 1999, there were between 70 and 100 million people practicing Falun Gong in China.[37] Following the seven years of widespread popularity, on July 20, 1999, the government of the People's Republic of China began a nationwide persecution campaign against Falun Gong practitioners, except in the special administrative regions of Hong Kong and Macau.[38][39] In late 1999, legislation was created to outlaw "heterodox religions" and retroactively applied to Falun Gong.[40] Amnesty International states that the persecution is "politically motivated" with "legislation being used retroactively to convict people on politically-driven charges, and new regulations introduced to further restrict fundamental freedoms".[41]
Ethnic persecution[edit]
Main article: Ethnic persecution
Ethnic persecution refers to perceived persecution based on ethnicity. Its meaning is parallel to racism, (based on race). Rwandan genocide remains an atrocity that the indigenous Hutu and Tutsi peoples still believe is unforgivable. The Japanese occupation of China caused the death of millions of people, mostly peasants murdered after the Doolittle Raid in early World War II.
Hazara people[edit]
Main article: Persecution of Hazara people
Hazara people of central Afghanistan have been persecuted by Afghan rulers at various times in the history. Since the tragedy of 9/11, Sunni Muslim terrorists have been attacking the Hazara community in southwestern Pakistani town of Quetta, home to some 500000 Hazara who fled persecution in neighbouring Afghanistan. Some 2400 men, women and children have been killed or wounded with Lashkar-e-Jhangvi claiming responsibility for most of the attacks against the community. Consequently, many thousands have fled the country seeking asylum in Australia.
Roma[edit]
Along with Jews, Homosexuals and others, the Romani Gypsies were rounded by the Nazi Regime of Germany and sent to the death camps.
Germans[edit]
Main article: Organised persecution of ethnic Germans


 This section does not cite any references or sources. Please help improve this section by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (December 2009)
The persecution of ethnic Germans refers to systematic activity against groups of ethnic Germans based on their ethnicity.
Historically, this has been due to two causes: the German population were considered, whether factually or not, linked with German nationalist regimes such as those of the Nazis or Kaiser Wilhelm. This was the case in the World War I era persecution of Germans in the United States, and also in Eastern and Central Europe following the end of World War II. While many victims of these persecutions did not, in fact, have any connection to those regimes, cooperation between German minority organisations and Nazi regime did occur, as the example of Selbstschutz shows, which is still used as a pretense of hostilities against those who did not take part in such organisations. After World War II, many such Volksdeutsche were killed or driven from their homes[who?] in acts of vengeance, others in ethnic cleansing of territories prior to populating them with citizens of the annexing country.[where?] In other cases (e.g. in the case of the formerly large German-speaking populations of Russia, Estonia, or the Transylvanian (Siebenbürgen) German minority in Rumania and the Balkans) such persecution was a crime committed against innocent communities who had played no part in the Third Reich.
Persecution based on genetics[edit]
People with albinism[edit]
Main article: Persecution of people with albinism
Persecution on the basis of albinism is frequently based on the belief that albinos are inferior to persons with higher concentration of melanin in their skin. As a result albinos have been persecuted, killed and dismembered, and graves of albinistic people dug up and desecrated. Such people have also been ostracized and even killed because they are presumed to bring bad luck in some areas. Haiti also has a long history of treating albinistic people as accursed, with the highest incidence under the influence of François "Papa Doc" Duvalier.
People with autism spectrum disorders[edit]
Main article: Persecution of people with autism spectrum disorders
Persecution on the basis of autism spectrum disorders, similar to other forms of persecution listed here, is based on the belief that people with autism spectrum disorder are genetically and/or morally inferior based on symptoms associated with these conditions; mainly hyperfocus, preoccupation with specialist interests, and general social behaviours deemed inept. Such persons are discriminated against socially, legally and in other forms, and in some religious traditions, mainly Abrahamic religions such as Evangelical Christianity or certain forms of Islam, due to the overall tendency of autistic persons toward logic and thus have trouble with displaying the correct prerequisite religious faith, can view such people as suffering from possession by malevolent spirits, at the more favourable end of the spectrum. However, this is not always the case and some persons on the spectrum can adhere to these religious faiths; other traditions may have dissenting views on the subject; namely, an autistic person in a New Age community is likely to be labelled as an indigo child or similar concept. Those capable of passing, and/or who are of a relatively high socio-economic status, are usually more favoured, or at least written off as merely eccentric. Generally speaking, cisgender females on the spectrum are more accepted, or at least tolerated, than their male counterparts, and the level of physical attractiveness in both genders can also affect the outcome; the outcome for transgender individuals is mixed, depending on success of transition and passing as "neurotypical" (person unaffected by autism spectrum disorder).
LGBT persecution[edit]
A number of countries, especially those in the [Western world], have passed measures to alleviate discrimination against sexual minorities, including laws against anti-gay hate crimes and workplace discrimination. Some have also legalized same-sex marriage or civil unions in order to grant same-sex couples the same protections and benefits as opposite-sex couples. In 2011, the United Nations passed its first resolution recognizing LGBT rights.
Persecution based on army service[edit]
Persecution on the basis of army service, or the lack of it, exists in Israel. In Israel, Jewish citizens who receive an exemption from army service are denied many prestigious career options, especially in the field of security. The root of discrimination on the basis of army service lies in the fact that at age 17, non-Arab citizens (including Druze) are called up to be examined for eligibility to compulsory military service. A record for each potential conscript is created, and those who actually serve in the military are distinguished from those rejected from service, by a Discharge Card, which has additional information on it, including the soldier's rank, military profession, and behavior during army service. Employers are particularly interested in the Discharge Card, since it is a universally available source of information about a potential employee. Citizens rejected from the army are frequently looked down upon by employers, who typically believe that "those who are unfit for army service are also unfit for the work environment", and those who succeeded in the army are also likely to be good employees. It is very frequent in Israel to see job advertisements requiring "Full Army Service", and the main problem is that the decisions taken by the draft board regarding a 17-year-old minor affect their entire life.
See also[edit]
Discrimination
Latter-day Saint martyrs
Persecution complex
Right to asylum
References[edit]
1.Jump up ^ S. Rempell, Defining Persecution, http://ssrn.com/abstract=1941006
2.Jump up ^ Telford Taylor "When people kill a people", The New York Times, March 28, 1982.
3.Jump up ^ Article 7.3 of the Rome Statute, which constitutes "compromise text" states that "For the purpose of this Statute, it is understood that the term 'gender' refers to the two sexes, male and female, within the context of society. The term 'gender' does not indicate any meaning different from the above." While under international criminal law persecution based on Gender Identity is also prohibited, during the Rome Diplomatic Conference that adopted the ICC Statute, it was decided to define gender narrowly in order to overcome opposition from the Holy See and other states that were concerned that the ICC could theoretically also look into discriminatory practices of religious institutions. This provision was balanced with that of Article 10, which states that "Nothing in this Part shall be interpreted as limiting or prejudicing in any way existing or developing rules of international law for purposes other than this Statute."
4.Jump up ^ International Federation for Human Rights (2003-08-01). "Discrimination against religious minorities in Iran" (PDF). fdih.org. Retrieved 2006-10-20.
5.Jump up ^ Open Doors: The worst 50 countries for persecution of Christians
6.Jump up ^ Open Doors: Weltverfolgungsindex 2012, p. 2
7.Jump up ^ Philpott, Daniel, Pope Francis and Religious Freedom, Washington, DC: Berkley Center for Religion, Peace & World Affairs
8.Jump up ^ New antisemitism
9.Jump up ^ New Anti-Semitism: Disguised As "Anti-Zionism" - Discover the Networks
10.Jump up ^ Anti-zionism as an expression of anti-Semitism in recent years
11.Jump up ^ Anti-Zionism#Jewish anti-Zionism
12.Jump up ^ Ordinance XX
13.Jump up ^ Durant, Will. The Story of Civilization: Our Oriental Heritage. p. 459. "The Mohammedan Conquest of India is probably the bloodiest story in history. It is a discouraging tale, for its evident moral is that civilization is a precarious thing, whose delicate complex of order and liberty, culture and peace may at any time be overthrown by barbarians invading from without or multiplying within. The Hindus had allowed their strength to be wasted in internal division and war; they had adopted religions like Buddhism and Jainism, which unnerved them for the tasks of life; they had failed to organize their forces for the protection of their frontiers and their capitals, their wealth and their freedom, from the hordes of Scythians, Huns, Afghans and Turks hovering about India's boundaries and waiting for national weakness to let them in. For four hundred years (600–1000 AD) India invited conquest; and at last it came."
14.Jump up ^ Census of Pakistan, 1951
15.Jump up ^ Hindu Masjids by Prafull Goradia, 2002 "In 1951, Muslims were 77 percent and Hindus were 22 percent."
16.Jump up ^ Census of Pakistan[dead link]
17.Jump up ^ "World: Pakistan: The Ravaging of Golden Bengal - Printout". TIME. 2 August 1971. Retrieved 2013-10-25.
18.Jump up ^ "Hindus Under Attack in Bangladesh". News Bharati. March 3, 2013. Retrieved March 26, 2013.
19.Jump up ^ "Bagerhat Hindu Temple Set on Fire". bdnews24.com. March 2, 2013. Retrieved March 20, 2013.
20.Jump up ^ "US worried at violence". The Daily Star (Bangladesh). March 12, 2013. Retrieved 12 March 2013.
21.Jump up ^ "Mozena: Violence is not the way to resolution". The Daily Ittefaq. March 11, 2013. Retrieved 12 March 2013.
22.Jump up ^ "Bangladesh: Wave of violent attacks against Hindu minority". Press releases. Amnesty International. Retrieved 8 March 2013.
23.Jump up ^ Ethirajan, Anbarasan (9 March 2013). "Bangladesh minorities 'terrorised' after mob violence". BBC News (London). Retrieved 17 March 2013.
24.Jump up ^ State pogroms glossed over. The Times of India. 31 December 2005.
25.Jump up ^ "Anti-Sikh riots a pogrom: Khushwant". Rediff.com. Retrieved 23 September 2009.
26.^ Jump up to: a b Bedi, Rahul (1 November 2009). "Indira Gandhi's death remembered". BBC. Archived from the original on 2 November 2009. Retrieved 2 November 2009. "The 25th anniversary of Indira Gandhi's assassination revives stark memories of some 3,000 Sikhs killed brutally in the orderly pogrom that followed her killing"
27.Jump up ^ Nugus, Phillip (Spring 2007). "The Assassinations of Indira & Rajiv Gandhi". BBC Active. Retrieved 23 July 2010.
28.Jump up ^ Delhi court to give verdict on re-opening 1984 riots case against Congress leader Jagdish Tytler
29.Jump up ^ Charny, Israel W. (1999). Encyclopaedia of genocide. ABC-CLIO. pp. 516–517. ISBN 978-0-87436-928-1. Retrieved 21 February 2011.
30.Jump up ^ Mukhoty, Gobinda; Kothari, Rajni (1984), Who are the Guilty ?, People's Union for Civil Liberties, retrieved 4 November 2010
31.Jump up ^ "1984 anti-Sikh riots backed by Govt, police: CBI". IBN Live. 23 April 2012. Retrieved 27 April 2012.
32.Jump up ^ "1984 anti-Sikh riots 'wrong', says Rahul Gandhi". Hindustan Times. 18 November 2008. Retrieved 5 May 2012.
33.Jump up ^ Mustafa, Seema (2005-08-09). "1984 Sikhs Massacres: Mother of All Cover-ups". Front page story (The Asian Age). p. 1.
34.Jump up ^ Agal, Renu (2005-08-11). "Justice delayed, justice denied". BBC News.
35.Jump up ^ "Leaders 'incited' anti-Sikh riots". BBC News. August 8, 2005. Retrieved November 23, 2012.
36.Jump up ^ Kaur, Jaskaran; Crossette, Barbara (2006). Twenty years of impunity: the November 1984 pogroms of Sikhs in India (PDF) (2nd ed.). Portland, OR: Ensaaf. p. 29. ISBN 978-0-9787073-0-9. Retrieved 4 November 2010.
37.Jump up ^ Source of Statistical Information, Number of Falun Gong practitioners in China in 1999: at least 70 million, Falun Dafa Information Center, accessed 01/01/08
38.Jump up ^ Faison, Seth (April 27, 1999) "In Beijing: A Roar of Silent Protesters" New York Times, retrieved June 10, 2006
39.Jump up ^ Kahn, Joseph (April 27, 1999) "Notoriety Now for Exiled Leader of Chinese Movement" New York Times, retrieved June 14, 2006
40.Jump up ^ Leung, Beatrice (2002) 'China and Falun Gong: Party and society relations in the modern era', Journal of Contemporary China, 11:33, 761 – 784
41.Jump up ^ The crackdown on Falun Gong and other so-called heretical organizations , The Amnesty International
External links[edit]
 Look up persecution in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.
Language alternatives to creating and being persecutors


[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Abuse























































[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Discrimination



































































































































































































Category
Portal


  


Categories: Abuse
Persecution














Navigation menu



Create account
Log in



Article

Talk









Read

Edit

View history

















Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store

Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page

Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page

Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version

Languages
العربية
Bosanski
Català
Čeština
Dansk
Eesti
Español
Esperanto
한국어
Hrvatski
Italiano
Kiswahili
Nederlands
日本語
Norsk bokmål
Polski
Português
Simple English
Slovenčina
Srpskohrvatski / српскохрватски
Suomi
Svenska
தமிழ்
ไทย
Türkçe
中文
Edit links
This page was last modified on 18 June 2015, at 16:11.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
    
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution









Prejudice

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

This article is about a discrimination concept. For legal procedure, see Prejudice (legal procedure).
Part of a series on
Discrimination


General forms[show]



















Specific forms
 

Social[show]







































Manifestations[show]





















































Policies[show]































Other forms[show]








Countermeasures[show]














Related topics[show]




















Portal icon Discrimination portal
v ·
 t ·
 e
   
Prejudice is prejudgment, or forming an opinion before becoming aware of the relevant facts of a case. The word is often used to refer to preconceived, usually unfavorable, judgments toward people or a person because of gender, political opinion, social class, age, disability, religion, sexuality, race/ethnicity, language, nationality, or other personal characteristics. In this case, it refers to a positive or negative evaluation of another person based on their perceived group membership.[1] Prejudice can also refer to unfounded beliefs[2] and may include "any unreasonable attitude that is unusually resistant to rational influence".[3] Gordon Allport defined prejudice as a "feeling, favorable or unfavorable, toward a person or thing, prior to, or not based on, actual experience".[4]


Contents  [hide]
1 Historical approaches
2 Contemporary theories and empirical findings
3 Controversies and prominent topics 3.1 Sexism
3.2 Nationalism
3.3 Classism
3.4 Sexual discrimination
3.5 Racism
3.6 Religious discrimination
3.7 Linguistic discrimination
4 Multiculturalism
5 Reducing prejudice 5.1 The contact hypothesis
5.2 Empirical research
6 See also
7 References
8 Further reading

Historical approaches[edit]
The first psychological research conducted on prejudice occurred in the 1920s. This research attempted to prove white supremacy. One article from 1925 reviewing 73 studies on race concluded that the studies seemed "to indicate the mental superiority of the white race".[5] These studies, along with other research, led many psychologists to view prejudice as a natural response to inferior races.
In the 1930s and 1940s, this perspective began to change due to the increasing concern about anti-Semitism. At the time, theorists viewed prejudice as pathological and thus looked for personality syndromes linked with racism. Theodor Adorno believed that prejudice stemmed from an authoritarian personality; he believed that people with authoritarian personalities were the most likely to be prejudiced against groups of lower status. He described authoritarians as "rigid thinkers who obeyed authority, saw the world as black and white, and enforced strict adherence to social rules and hierarchies".[6]
In 1954, Gordon Allport linked prejudice to categorical thinking. Allport claimed that prejudice is a natural and normal process for humans. According to him, "The human mind must think with the aid of categories… Once formed, categories are the basis for normal prejudgment. We cannot possibly avoid this process. Orderly living depends upon it."[7]
In the 1970s, research began to show that prejudice tends to be based on favoritism towards one's own groups, rather than negative feelings towards another group. According to Marilyn Brewer, prejudice "may develop not because outgroups are hated, but because positive emotions such as admiration, sympathy, and trust are reserved for the ingroup."[8]
In 1979, Thomas Pettigrew described the ultimate attribution error and its role in prejudice. The ultimate attribution error occurs when ingroup members "(1) attribute negative outgroup behavior to dispositional causes (more than they would for identical ingroup behavior), and (2) attribute positive outgroup behavior to one or more of the following causes: (a) a fluke or exceptional case, (b) luck or special advantage, (c) high motivation and effort, and (d) situational factors."[6]
Contemporary theories and empirical findings[edit]
The out-group homogeneity effect is the perception that members of an out-group are more similar (homogenous) than members of the in-group. Social psychologists Quattrone and Jones conducted a study demonstrating this with students from the rival schools Princeton University and Rutgers University.[9] Students at each school were shown videos of other students from each school choosing a type of music to listen to for an auditory perception study. Then the participants were asked to guess what percentage of the videotaped students' classmates would choose the same. Participants predicted a much greater similarity between out-group members (the rival school) than between members of their in-group.
The justification-suppression model of prejudice was created by Christian Crandall and Amy Eshleman.[10] This model explains that people face a conflict between the desire to express prejudice and the desire to maintain a positive self-concept. This conflict causes people to search for justification for disliking an out-group, and to use that justification to avoid negative feelings (cognitive dissonance) about themselves when they act on their dislike of the out-group.
The realistic conflict theory states that competition between limited resources leads to increased negative prejudices and discrimination. This can be seen even when the resource is insignificant. In the Robber's Cave experiment,[11] negative prejudice and hostility was created between two summer camps after sports competitions for small prizes. The hostility was lessened after the two competing camps were forced to cooperate on tasks to achieve a common goal.
Another contemporary theory is the integrated threat theory (ITT), which was developed by Walter G Stephan.[12] It draws from and builds upon several other psychological explanations of prejudice and ingroup/outgroup behaviour, such as the realistic conflict theory and symbolic racism.[13] It also uses the social identity theory perspective as the basis for its validity; that is, it assumes that individuals operate in a group-based context where group memberships form a part of individual identity. ITT posits that outgroup prejudice and discrimination is caused when individuals perceive an outgroup to be threatening in some way. ITT defines four threats:
Realistic threats
Symbolic threats
Intergroup anxiety
Negative stereotypes
Realistic threats are tangible, such as competition for a natural resource or a threat to income. Symbolic threats arise from a perceived difference in cultural values between groups or a perceived imbalance of power (for example, an ingroup perceiving an outgroup's religion as incompatible with theirs). Intergroup anxiety is a feeling of uneasiness experienced in the presence of an outgroup or outgroup member, which constitutes a threat because interactions with other groups cause negative feelings (e.g., a threat to comfortable interactions). Negative stereotypes are similarly threats, in that individuals anticipate negative behaviour from outgroup members in line with the perceived stereotype (for example, that the outgroup is violent). Often these stereotypes are associated with emotions such as fear and anger. ITT differs from other threat theories by including intergroup anxiety and negative stereotypes as threat types.
Additionally, social dominance theory states that society can be viewed as group-based hierarchies. In competition for scarce resources such as housing or employment, dominant groups create prejudiced "legitimizing myths" to provide moral and intellectual justification for their dominant position over other groups and validate their claim over the limited resources.[14] Legitimizing myths, such as discriminatory hiring practices or biased merit norms, work to maintain these prejudiced hierarchies.
Prejudice can be a central contributing factor to depression.[15] This can occur in someone who is a prejudice victim, being the target of someone else's prejudice, or when people have prejudice against themselves that causes their own depression.
Controversies and prominent topics[edit]
One can be prejudiced against or have a preconceived notion about someone due to any characteristic they find to be unusual or undesirable. A few commonplace examples of prejudice are those based on someone's race, gender, nationality, social status, sexual orientation, or religious affiliation, and controversies may arise from any given topic.
Sexism[edit]
Main article: Sexism
The term sexism is generally linked to negative sentiments with regard to females that derive from the belief that females are worth less or less capable than males.[16] The discussion of such sentiments, and actual gender differences and stereotypes continue to be controversial topics. Throughout history, women have been thought of as being subordinate to men, often being ignored in areas like the academia or belittled altogether. Traditionally, men were thought of as being more capable than women, mentally and physically.[16] In the field of social psychology, prejudice studies like the "Who Likes Competent Women" study led the way for gender-based research on prejudice.[16] This resulted in two broad themes or focuses in the field: the first being a focus on attitudes toward gender equality, and the second focusing on people's beliefs about men and women.[16] Today, studies based on sexism continue in the field of psychology as researchers try to understand how people's thoughts, feelings, and behaviors influence and are influenced by others.
Nationalism[edit]
Main article: Nationalism
Nationalism is a sentiment based on common cultural characteristics that binds a population and often produces a policy of national independence or separatism.[17] It suggests a "shared identity" amongst a nation's people that minimizes differences within the group and emphasizes perceived boundaries between the group and non-members.[18] This leads to the assumption that members of the nation have more in common than they actually do, that they are "culturally unified", even if injustices within the nation based on differences like status and race exist.[18] During times of conflict between one nation and another, nationalism is controversial since it may function as a buffer for criticism when it comes to the nation's own problems since it makes the nation's own hierarchies and internal conflicts appear to be natural.[18] It may also serve a way of rallying the people of the nation in support of a particular political goal.[18] Nationalism usually involves a push for conformity, obedience, and solidarity amongst the nation's people and can result not only in feelings of public responsibility but also in a narrow sense of community due to the exclusion of those who are considered outsiders.[18] Since the identity of nationalists is linked to their allegiance to the state, the presence of strangers who do not share this allegiance may result in hostility.[18]
Classism[edit]
Main article: Classism
Classism is defined by dictionary.com as "a biased or discriminatory attitude on distinctions made between social or economic classes."[19] The idea of separating people based on class is controversial in itself. Some argue that economic inequality is an unavoidable aspect of society, so there will always be a ruling class.[20] Some also argue that, even within the most egalitarian societies in history, some form of ranking based on social status takes place. Therefore, one may believe the existence of social classes is a natural feature of society.[21]
Others argue the contrary. According to anthropological evidence, for the majority of the time the human species has been in existence, humans have lived in a manner in which the land and resources were not privately owned.[21] Also, when social ranking did occur, it was not antagonistic or hostile like the current class system.[21] This evidence has been used to support the idea that the existence of a social class system is unnecessary. Overall, society has neither come to a consensus over the necessity of the class system, nor been able to deal with the hostility and prejudice that occurs because of the class system.
Sexual discrimination[edit]
Main article: Homophobia
One's sexual orientation is the "direction of one's sexual interest toward members of the same, opposite, or both sexes".[22] Like most minority groups, homosexuals and bisexuals are not immune to prejudice or stereotypes from the majority group. They may experience hatred from others because of their sexual preferences; a term for such intense hatred based upon one's sexual orientation is homophobia.
Due to what social psychologists call the vividness effect, a tendency to notice only certain distinctive characteristics, the majority population tends to draw conclusions like gays flaunt their sexuality.[23] Such images may be easily recalled to mind due to their vividness, making it harder to appraise the entire situation.[23] The majority population may not only think that homosexuals flaunt their sexuality or are "too gay", but may also erroneously believe that homosexuals are easy to identify and label as being gay or lesbian when compared to others who are not homosexual.[24]
The idea of heterosexual privilege seems to flourish in society. Research and questionnaires are formulated to fit the majority; i.e., heterosexuals. This discussion of whether heterosexuals are the privileged group and whether homosexuals are a minimized group is controversial. Research shows that discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation is a powerful feature of many labor markets. For example, controlling for human capital, studies show that gay men earn 10% - 32% less than heterosexual men in the United States, and that there is significant discrimination in hiring on the basis of sexual orientation in many labor markets.[25]
Racism[edit]
Main article: Racism
Racism is defined as the belief that physical characteristics determine cultural traits, and that racial characteristics make some groups superior.[26] By separating people into hierarchies based upon their race, it has been argued that unequal treatment among the different groups of people is just and fair due to their genetic differences.[26] Racism can occur amongst any group that can be identified based upon physical features or even characteristics of their culture.[26] Though people may be lumped together and called a specific race, everyone does not fit neatly into such categories, making it hard to define and describe a race accurately.[26]
Scientific racism began to flourish in the eighteenth century and was greatly influenced by Charles Darwin's evolutionary studies, as well as ideas taken from the writings of philosophers like Aristotle; for example, Aristotle believed in the concept of "natural slaves".[26] This concept focuses on the necessity of hierarchies and how some people are bound to be on the bottom of the pyramid. Though racism has been a prominent topic in history, there is still debate over whether race actually exists,[citation needed] making the discussion of race a controversial topic. Even though the concept of race is still being debated, the effects of racism are apparent. Racism and other forms of prejudice can affect a person's behavior, thoughts, and feelings, and social psychologists strive to study these effects.
Religious discrimination[edit]
Main article: Religious discrimination
While various religions teach their members to be tolerant of those who are different and to have compassion, throughout history there have also been instances where religion has been used to promote hate.[27] Researchers have done various studies explore the relationship between religion and prejudice; thus far, they have received mixed results. A study done with US college students found that those who reported religion to be very influential in their lives seem to have a higher rate of prejudice than those who reported not being religious.[27] Other studies found that religion has a positive effect on people as far as prejudice is concerned.[27] This difference in results may be attributed to the differences in religious practices or religious interpretations amongst the individuals. Those who practice "institutionalized religion", which focuses more on social and political aspects of religious events, are more likely to have an increase in prejudice.[28] Those who practice "interiorized religion", in which believers devote themselves to their beliefs, are most likely to have a decrease in prejudice.[28]
Linguistic discrimination[edit]
Main article: Linguistic discrimination
Individuals or groups may be treated unfairly based solely on their use of language. This use of language may include the individual's native language or other characteristics of the person's speech, such as an accent, the size of vocabulary (whether the person uses complex and varied words), and syntax. It may also involve a person's ability or inability to use one language instead of another. In the mid-1980s, linguist Tove Skutnabb-Kangas captured this idea of discrimination based on language as the concept of linguicism. Kangas defined linguicism as the ideologies and structures used to "legitimate, effectuate, and reproduce unequal division of power and resources (both material and non-material) between groups which are defined on the basis of language."[29]
Multiculturalism[edit]
Main article: Multiculturalism
Humans have an evolved propensity to think categorically about social groups, manifested in cognitive processes with broad implications for public and political endorsement of multicultural policy, according to psychologists Richard J. Crisp and Rose Meleady.[30] They postulated a cognitive-evolutionary account of human adaptation to social diversity that explains general resistance to multiculturalism, and offer a reorienting call for scholars and policy-makers who seek intervention-based solutions to the problem of prejudice.
Reducing prejudice[edit]
The contact hypothesis[edit]
The contact hypothesis predicts that prejudice can only be reduced when in-group and out-group members are brought together.[31] In particular, there are six conditions that must be met to reduce prejudice, as were cultivated in Elliot Aronson's "jigsaw" teaching technique.[31] First, the in- and out-groups must have a degree of mutual interdependence. Second, both groups need to share a common goal. Third, the two groups must have equal status. Fourth, there must be frequent opportunities for informal and interpersonal contact between groups. Fifth, there should be multiple contacts between the in- and the out-groups. Finally, social norms of equality must exist and be present to foster prejudice reduction.
Empirical research[edit]
Academics Thomas Pettigrew and Linda Tropp conducted a meta-analysis of 515 studies involving a quarter of a million participants in 38 nations to examine how intergroup contact reduces prejudice. They found that three mediators are of particular importance: Intergroup contact reduces prejudice by (1) enhancing knowledge about the outgroup, (2) reducing anxiety about intergroup contact, and (3) increasing empathy and perspective-taking. While all three of these mediators had mediational effects, the mediational value of increased knowledge was less strong than anxiety reduction and empathy.[32] In addition, some individuals confront discrimination when they see it happen, with research finding that individuals are more likely to confront when they perceive benefits to themselves, and are less likely to confront when concerned about others' reactions.[33]
See also[edit]
Ambivalent prejudice
Benevolent prejudice
Bigotry
Common ingroup identity
Hostile prejudice
Idée fixe (psychology)
Stigma management
Suspension of judgment
References[edit]
1.Jump up ^ Dovidio, J. F., & Gaertner. S. L. (2010). "Intergroup bias". In S. T. Fiske, D. T. Gilbert, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), The Handbook of Social Psychology (5th ed., Vol. 2). New York: Wiley.
2.Jump up ^ William James wrote: "A great many people think they are thinking when they are merely rearranging their prejudices." Quotable Quotes – Courtesy of The Freeman Institute
3.Jump up ^ Rosnow, Ralph L. (March 1972). "Poultry and Prejudice". Psychologist Today 5 (10): 53–6.
4.Jump up ^ Allport, Gordon (1979). The Nature of Prejudice. Perseus Books Publishing. p. 6. ISBN 0-201-00179-9.
5.Jump up ^ Garth, T. Rooster. (1930). "A review of race psychology". Psychological Bulletin 27 (5): 329–56. doi:10.1037/h0075064.
6.^ Jump up to: a b Plous, S. "The Psychology of Prejudice". Understanding Prejudice.org. Web. 07 Apr. 2011.[verification needed]
7.Jump up ^ Allport, G. W. (1954). The Nature of Prejudice. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.[page needed]
8.Jump up ^ Brewer, Marilynn B. (1999). "The Psychology of Prejudice: Ingroup Love and Outgroup Hate?". Journal of Social Issues 55 (3): 429–44. doi:10.1111/0022-4537.00126.
9.Jump up ^ Quattrone, George A.; Jones, Edward E. (1980). "The perception of variability within in-groups and out-groups: Implications for the law of small numbers". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 38: 141–52. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.38.1.141.
10.Jump up ^ Crandall, Christian S.; Eshleman, Amy (2003). "A justification-suppression model of the expression and experience of prejudice". Psychological Bulletin 129 (3): 414–46. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.129.3.414. PMID 12784937.
11.Jump up ^ Sherif, Muzafer; Harvey, O. J.; White, B. Jack; Hood, William R.; Sherif, Carolyn W. (1988). The Robbers Cave Experiment: Intergroup Conflict and Cooperation. Middletown, Connecticut: Wesleyan University Press. ISBN 978-0-8195-6194-7.[page needed]
12.Jump up ^ Stephan, Cookie White; Stephan, Walter C.; Demitrakis, Katherine M.; Yamada, Ann Marie; Clason, Dennis L. (2000). "Women's Attitudes Toward Men: an Integrated Threat Theory Approach". Psychology of Women Quarterly 24: 63–73. doi:10.1111/j.1471-6402.2000.tb01022.x.
13.Jump up ^ Riek, Blake M.; Mania, Eric W.; Gaertner, Samuel L. (2006). "Intergroup Threat and Outgroup Attitudes: A Meta-Analytic Review". Personality and Social Psychology Review 10 (4): 336–53. doi:10.1207/s15327957pspr1004_4. PMID 17201592.
14.Jump up ^ Sidanius, Jim; Pratto, Felicia; Bobo, Lawrence (1996). "Racism, conservatism, Affirmative Action, and intellectual sophistication: A matter of principled conservatism or group dominance?". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 70 (3): 476–90. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.70.3.476.
15.Jump up ^ Cox, William T. L.; Abramson, Lyn Y.; Devine, Patricia G.; Hollon, Steven D. (2012). "Stereotypes, Prejudice, and Depression: The Integrated Perspective". Perspectives on Psychological Science 7 (5): 427–49. doi:10.1177/1745691612455204.
16.^ Jump up to: a b c d Dovidio, John, Peter Glick, and Laurie Rudman. On the Nature of Prejudice. Malden: Blackwell Publishing, 2005. 108. Print.
17.Jump up ^ "Nationalism", dictionary.com
18.^ Jump up to: a b c d e f Blackwell, Judith; Smith, Murray; Sorenson, John (2003). Culture of Prejudice: Arguments in Critical Social Science. Toronto: Broadview Press. pp. 31–2.
19.Jump up ^ "Classism", dictionary.com
20.Jump up ^ Blackwell, Judith, Murray Smith, and John Sorenson. Culture of Prejudice: Arguments in Critical Social Science. Toronto: Broadview Press, 2003. 145. Print.
21.^ Jump up to: a b c Blackwell, Judith, Murray Smith, and John Sorenson. Culture of Prejudice: Arguments in Critical Social Science. Toronto: Broadview Press, 2003. 146. Print.
22.Jump up ^ "Sexual Orientation", dictionary.com
23.^ Jump up to: a b Anderson, Kristin. Benign Bigotry: The Psychology of Subtle Prejudice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010. 198. Print.
24.Jump up ^ Anderson, Kristin. Benign Bigotry: The Psychology of Subtle Prejudice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010. 200. Print.
25.Jump up ^ Tilcsik, A (2011). "Pride and Prejudice: Employment Discrimination against Openly Gay Men in the United States". American Journal of Sociology 117 (2): 586–626. PMID 22268247.
26.^ Jump up to: a b c d e Blackwell, Judith, Murray Smith, and John Sorenson. Culture of Prejudice: Arguments in Critical Social Science. Toronto: Broadview Press, 2003. 37–38. Print.
27.^ Jump up to: a b c Dovidio, John, Peter Glick, and Laurie Rudman. On the Nature of Prejudice. Malden: Blackwell Publishing, 2005. 413. Print.
28.^ Jump up to: a b Dovidio, John, Peter Glick, and Laurie Rudman. On the Nature of Prejudice. Malden: Blackwell Publishing, 2005. 414. Print.
29.Jump up ^ Quoted in Skutnabb-Kangas, Tove, and Phillipson, Robert, "'Mother Tongue': The Theoretical and Sociopolitical Construction of a Concept". In Ammon, Ulrich (ed.) (1989), Status and Function of Languages and Language Varieties, p. 455. Berlin, New York: Walter de Gruyter & Co. ISBN 3-11-011299-X.
30.Jump up ^ Crisp, Richard J.; Meleady, Rose (2012). "Adapting to a Multicultural Future". Science 336 (6083): 853–5. doi:10.1126/science.1219009. PMID 22605761.
31.^ Jump up to: a b Aronson, E., Wilson, T. D., & Akert, R. M. (2010). Social Psychology (7th edition). New York: Pearson.
32.Jump up ^ Pettigrew, Thomas F.; Tropp, Linda R. (2008). "How does intergroup contact reduce prejudice? Meta-analytic tests of three mediators". European Journal of Social Psychology 38 (6): 922–934. doi:10.1002/ejsp.504.
33.Jump up ^ Good, J. J.; Moss-Racusin, C. A.; Sanchez, D. T. (2012). "When do we confront? Perceptions of costs and benefits predict confronting discrimination on behalf of the self and others". Psychology of Women Quarterly 36: 210–226. doi:10.1177/0361684312440958.
Further reading[edit]
Adorno, Th. W., Frenkel-Brunswik, E., Levinson, D. J. and Sanford, R. N. (1950). The authoritarian personality. New York: Harper.
Dorschel, A., Rethinking prejudice. Aldershot, Hampshire – Burlington, Vermont – Singapore – Sydney: Ashgate, 2000 (New Critical Thinking in Philosophy, ed. Ernest Sosa, Alan H. Goldman, Alan Musgrave et alii)
MacRae, C. Neil; Bodenhausen, Galen V. (2001). "Social cognition: Categorical person perception". British Journal of Psychology 92: 239–55. doi:10.1348/000712601162059.
Sherman, Jeffrey W.; Lee, Angela Y.; Bessenoff, Gayle R.; Frost, Leigh A. (1998). "Stereotype efficiency reconsidered: Encoding flexibility under cognitive load". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 75 (3): 589–606. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.75.3.589. PMID 9781404.
Kinder, Donald R.; Sanders, Lynn M. (1997). "Subtle Prejudice for Modern Times". Divided by Color: Racial Politics and Democratic Ideals. American Politics and Political Economy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. pp. 92–160. ISBN 978-0-226-43574-9.
 Wikimedia Commons has media related to Prejudice.
 Look up prejudice or prejudgment in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.


[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Abuse























































[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Discrimination



































































































































































































Category
Portal




Authority control
NDL: 00563100
 

  


Categories: Abuse
Discrimination
Prejudices
Anti-social behaviour









Navigation menu



Create account
Log in



Article

Talk









Read

Edit

View history

















Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store

Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page

Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page

Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version

Languages
العربية
Български
Català
Čeština
Corsu
Cymraeg
Dansk
Deutsch
Eesti
Español
Esperanto
Euskara
فارسی
Français
Galego
हिन्दी
Hrvatski
Bahasa Indonesia
Íslenska
Italiano
עברית
Кыргызча
Latina
Latviešu
Magyar
Македонски
Nederlands
日本語
Norsk bokmål
Polski
Português
Română
Русский
Simple English
Slovenščina
Српски / srpski
Srpskohrvatski / српскохрватски
Suomi
Svenska
Tagalog
தமிழ்
ไทย
Türkçe
Українська
Vèneto
Tiếng Việt
中文
Edit links
This page was last modified on 16 June 2015, at 15:08.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
  

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prejudice










Prejudice

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

This article is about a discrimination concept. For legal procedure, see Prejudice (legal procedure).
Part of a series on
Discrimination


General forms[show]



















Specific forms
 

Social[show]







































Manifestations[show]





















































Policies[show]































Other forms[show]








Countermeasures[show]














Related topics[show]




















Portal icon Discrimination portal
v ·
 t ·
 e
   
Prejudice is prejudgment, or forming an opinion before becoming aware of the relevant facts of a case. The word is often used to refer to preconceived, usually unfavorable, judgments toward people or a person because of gender, political opinion, social class, age, disability, religion, sexuality, race/ethnicity, language, nationality, or other personal characteristics. In this case, it refers to a positive or negative evaluation of another person based on their perceived group membership.[1] Prejudice can also refer to unfounded beliefs[2] and may include "any unreasonable attitude that is unusually resistant to rational influence".[3] Gordon Allport defined prejudice as a "feeling, favorable or unfavorable, toward a person or thing, prior to, or not based on, actual experience".[4]


Contents  [hide]
1 Historical approaches
2 Contemporary theories and empirical findings
3 Controversies and prominent topics 3.1 Sexism
3.2 Nationalism
3.3 Classism
3.4 Sexual discrimination
3.5 Racism
3.6 Religious discrimination
3.7 Linguistic discrimination
4 Multiculturalism
5 Reducing prejudice 5.1 The contact hypothesis
5.2 Empirical research
6 See also
7 References
8 Further reading

Historical approaches[edit]
The first psychological research conducted on prejudice occurred in the 1920s. This research attempted to prove white supremacy. One article from 1925 reviewing 73 studies on race concluded that the studies seemed "to indicate the mental superiority of the white race".[5] These studies, along with other research, led many psychologists to view prejudice as a natural response to inferior races.
In the 1930s and 1940s, this perspective began to change due to the increasing concern about anti-Semitism. At the time, theorists viewed prejudice as pathological and thus looked for personality syndromes linked with racism. Theodor Adorno believed that prejudice stemmed from an authoritarian personality; he believed that people with authoritarian personalities were the most likely to be prejudiced against groups of lower status. He described authoritarians as "rigid thinkers who obeyed authority, saw the world as black and white, and enforced strict adherence to social rules and hierarchies".[6]
In 1954, Gordon Allport linked prejudice to categorical thinking. Allport claimed that prejudice is a natural and normal process for humans. According to him, "The human mind must think with the aid of categories… Once formed, categories are the basis for normal prejudgment. We cannot possibly avoid this process. Orderly living depends upon it."[7]
In the 1970s, research began to show that prejudice tends to be based on favoritism towards one's own groups, rather than negative feelings towards another group. According to Marilyn Brewer, prejudice "may develop not because outgroups are hated, but because positive emotions such as admiration, sympathy, and trust are reserved for the ingroup."[8]
In 1979, Thomas Pettigrew described the ultimate attribution error and its role in prejudice. The ultimate attribution error occurs when ingroup members "(1) attribute negative outgroup behavior to dispositional causes (more than they would for identical ingroup behavior), and (2) attribute positive outgroup behavior to one or more of the following causes: (a) a fluke or exceptional case, (b) luck or special advantage, (c) high motivation and effort, and (d) situational factors."[6]
Contemporary theories and empirical findings[edit]
The out-group homogeneity effect is the perception that members of an out-group are more similar (homogenous) than members of the in-group. Social psychologists Quattrone and Jones conducted a study demonstrating this with students from the rival schools Princeton University and Rutgers University.[9] Students at each school were shown videos of other students from each school choosing a type of music to listen to for an auditory perception study. Then the participants were asked to guess what percentage of the videotaped students' classmates would choose the same. Participants predicted a much greater similarity between out-group members (the rival school) than between members of their in-group.
The justification-suppression model of prejudice was created by Christian Crandall and Amy Eshleman.[10] This model explains that people face a conflict between the desire to express prejudice and the desire to maintain a positive self-concept. This conflict causes people to search for justification for disliking an out-group, and to use that justification to avoid negative feelings (cognitive dissonance) about themselves when they act on their dislike of the out-group.
The realistic conflict theory states that competition between limited resources leads to increased negative prejudices and discrimination. This can be seen even when the resource is insignificant. In the Robber's Cave experiment,[11] negative prejudice and hostility was created between two summer camps after sports competitions for small prizes. The hostility was lessened after the two competing camps were forced to cooperate on tasks to achieve a common goal.
Another contemporary theory is the integrated threat theory (ITT), which was developed by Walter G Stephan.[12] It draws from and builds upon several other psychological explanations of prejudice and ingroup/outgroup behaviour, such as the realistic conflict theory and symbolic racism.[13] It also uses the social identity theory perspective as the basis for its validity; that is, it assumes that individuals operate in a group-based context where group memberships form a part of individual identity. ITT posits that outgroup prejudice and discrimination is caused when individuals perceive an outgroup to be threatening in some way. ITT defines four threats:
Realistic threats
Symbolic threats
Intergroup anxiety
Negative stereotypes
Realistic threats are tangible, such as competition for a natural resource or a threat to income. Symbolic threats arise from a perceived difference in cultural values between groups or a perceived imbalance of power (for example, an ingroup perceiving an outgroup's religion as incompatible with theirs). Intergroup anxiety is a feeling of uneasiness experienced in the presence of an outgroup or outgroup member, which constitutes a threat because interactions with other groups cause negative feelings (e.g., a threat to comfortable interactions). Negative stereotypes are similarly threats, in that individuals anticipate negative behaviour from outgroup members in line with the perceived stereotype (for example, that the outgroup is violent). Often these stereotypes are associated with emotions such as fear and anger. ITT differs from other threat theories by including intergroup anxiety and negative stereotypes as threat types.
Additionally, social dominance theory states that society can be viewed as group-based hierarchies. In competition for scarce resources such as housing or employment, dominant groups create prejudiced "legitimizing myths" to provide moral and intellectual justification for their dominant position over other groups and validate their claim over the limited resources.[14] Legitimizing myths, such as discriminatory hiring practices or biased merit norms, work to maintain these prejudiced hierarchies.
Prejudice can be a central contributing factor to depression.[15] This can occur in someone who is a prejudice victim, being the target of someone else's prejudice, or when people have prejudice against themselves that causes their own depression.
Controversies and prominent topics[edit]
One can be prejudiced against or have a preconceived notion about someone due to any characteristic they find to be unusual or undesirable. A few commonplace examples of prejudice are those based on someone's race, gender, nationality, social status, sexual orientation, or religious affiliation, and controversies may arise from any given topic.
Sexism[edit]
Main article: Sexism
The term sexism is generally linked to negative sentiments with regard to females that derive from the belief that females are worth less or less capable than males.[16] The discussion of such sentiments, and actual gender differences and stereotypes continue to be controversial topics. Throughout history, women have been thought of as being subordinate to men, often being ignored in areas like the academia or belittled altogether. Traditionally, men were thought of as being more capable than women, mentally and physically.[16] In the field of social psychology, prejudice studies like the "Who Likes Competent Women" study led the way for gender-based research on prejudice.[16] This resulted in two broad themes or focuses in the field: the first being a focus on attitudes toward gender equality, and the second focusing on people's beliefs about men and women.[16] Today, studies based on sexism continue in the field of psychology as researchers try to understand how people's thoughts, feelings, and behaviors influence and are influenced by others.
Nationalism[edit]
Main article: Nationalism
Nationalism is a sentiment based on common cultural characteristics that binds a population and often produces a policy of national independence or separatism.[17] It suggests a "shared identity" amongst a nation's people that minimizes differences within the group and emphasizes perceived boundaries between the group and non-members.[18] This leads to the assumption that members of the nation have more in common than they actually do, that they are "culturally unified", even if injustices within the nation based on differences like status and race exist.[18] During times of conflict between one nation and another, nationalism is controversial since it may function as a buffer for criticism when it comes to the nation's own problems since it makes the nation's own hierarchies and internal conflicts appear to be natural.[18] It may also serve a way of rallying the people of the nation in support of a particular political goal.[18] Nationalism usually involves a push for conformity, obedience, and solidarity amongst the nation's people and can result not only in feelings of public responsibility but also in a narrow sense of community due to the exclusion of those who are considered outsiders.[18] Since the identity of nationalists is linked to their allegiance to the state, the presence of strangers who do not share this allegiance may result in hostility.[18]
Classism[edit]
Main article: Classism
Classism is defined by dictionary.com as "a biased or discriminatory attitude on distinctions made between social or economic classes."[19] The idea of separating people based on class is controversial in itself. Some argue that economic inequality is an unavoidable aspect of society, so there will always be a ruling class.[20] Some also argue that, even within the most egalitarian societies in history, some form of ranking based on social status takes place. Therefore, one may believe the existence of social classes is a natural feature of society.[21]
Others argue the contrary. According to anthropological evidence, for the majority of the time the human species has been in existence, humans have lived in a manner in which the land and resources were not privately owned.[21] Also, when social ranking did occur, it was not antagonistic or hostile like the current class system.[21] This evidence has been used to support the idea that the existence of a social class system is unnecessary. Overall, society has neither come to a consensus over the necessity of the class system, nor been able to deal with the hostility and prejudice that occurs because of the class system.
Sexual discrimination[edit]
Main article: Homophobia
One's sexual orientation is the "direction of one's sexual interest toward members of the same, opposite, or both sexes".[22] Like most minority groups, homosexuals and bisexuals are not immune to prejudice or stereotypes from the majority group. They may experience hatred from others because of their sexual preferences; a term for such intense hatred based upon one's sexual orientation is homophobia.
Due to what social psychologists call the vividness effect, a tendency to notice only certain distinctive characteristics, the majority population tends to draw conclusions like gays flaunt their sexuality.[23] Such images may be easily recalled to mind due to their vividness, making it harder to appraise the entire situation.[23] The majority population may not only think that homosexuals flaunt their sexuality or are "too gay", but may also erroneously believe that homosexuals are easy to identify and label as being gay or lesbian when compared to others who are not homosexual.[24]
The idea of heterosexual privilege seems to flourish in society. Research and questionnaires are formulated to fit the majority; i.e., heterosexuals. This discussion of whether heterosexuals are the privileged group and whether homosexuals are a minimized group is controversial. Research shows that discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation is a powerful feature of many labor markets. For example, controlling for human capital, studies show that gay men earn 10% - 32% less than heterosexual men in the United States, and that there is significant discrimination in hiring on the basis of sexual orientation in many labor markets.[25]
Racism[edit]
Main article: Racism
Racism is defined as the belief that physical characteristics determine cultural traits, and that racial characteristics make some groups superior.[26] By separating people into hierarchies based upon their race, it has been argued that unequal treatment among the different groups of people is just and fair due to their genetic differences.[26] Racism can occur amongst any group that can be identified based upon physical features or even characteristics of their culture.[26] Though people may be lumped together and called a specific race, everyone does not fit neatly into such categories, making it hard to define and describe a race accurately.[26]
Scientific racism began to flourish in the eighteenth century and was greatly influenced by Charles Darwin's evolutionary studies, as well as ideas taken from the writings of philosophers like Aristotle; for example, Aristotle believed in the concept of "natural slaves".[26] This concept focuses on the necessity of hierarchies and how some people are bound to be on the bottom of the pyramid. Though racism has been a prominent topic in history, there is still debate over whether race actually exists,[citation needed] making the discussion of race a controversial topic. Even though the concept of race is still being debated, the effects of racism are apparent. Racism and other forms of prejudice can affect a person's behavior, thoughts, and feelings, and social psychologists strive to study these effects.
Religious discrimination[edit]
Main article: Religious discrimination
While various religions teach their members to be tolerant of those who are different and to have compassion, throughout history there have also been instances where religion has been used to promote hate.[27] Researchers have done various studies explore the relationship between religion and prejudice; thus far, they have received mixed results. A study done with US college students found that those who reported religion to be very influential in their lives seem to have a higher rate of prejudice than those who reported not being religious.[27] Other studies found that religion has a positive effect on people as far as prejudice is concerned.[27] This difference in results may be attributed to the differences in religious practices or religious interpretations amongst the individuals. Those who practice "institutionalized religion", which focuses more on social and political aspects of religious events, are more likely to have an increase in prejudice.[28] Those who practice "interiorized religion", in which believers devote themselves to their beliefs, are most likely to have a decrease in prejudice.[28]
Linguistic discrimination[edit]
Main article: Linguistic discrimination
Individuals or groups may be treated unfairly based solely on their use of language. This use of language may include the individual's native language or other characteristics of the person's speech, such as an accent, the size of vocabulary (whether the person uses complex and varied words), and syntax. It may also involve a person's ability or inability to use one language instead of another. In the mid-1980s, linguist Tove Skutnabb-Kangas captured this idea of discrimination based on language as the concept of linguicism. Kangas defined linguicism as the ideologies and structures used to "legitimate, effectuate, and reproduce unequal division of power and resources (both material and non-material) between groups which are defined on the basis of language."[29]
Multiculturalism[edit]
Main article: Multiculturalism
Humans have an evolved propensity to think categorically about social groups, manifested in cognitive processes with broad implications for public and political endorsement of multicultural policy, according to psychologists Richard J. Crisp and Rose Meleady.[30] They postulated a cognitive-evolutionary account of human adaptation to social diversity that explains general resistance to multiculturalism, and offer a reorienting call for scholars and policy-makers who seek intervention-based solutions to the problem of prejudice.
Reducing prejudice[edit]
The contact hypothesis[edit]
The contact hypothesis predicts that prejudice can only be reduced when in-group and out-group members are brought together.[31] In particular, there are six conditions that must be met to reduce prejudice, as were cultivated in Elliot Aronson's "jigsaw" teaching technique.[31] First, the in- and out-groups must have a degree of mutual interdependence. Second, both groups need to share a common goal. Third, the two groups must have equal status. Fourth, there must be frequent opportunities for informal and interpersonal contact between groups. Fifth, there should be multiple contacts between the in- and the out-groups. Finally, social norms of equality must exist and be present to foster prejudice reduction.
Empirical research[edit]
Academics Thomas Pettigrew and Linda Tropp conducted a meta-analysis of 515 studies involving a quarter of a million participants in 38 nations to examine how intergroup contact reduces prejudice. They found that three mediators are of particular importance: Intergroup contact reduces prejudice by (1) enhancing knowledge about the outgroup, (2) reducing anxiety about intergroup contact, and (3) increasing empathy and perspective-taking. While all three of these mediators had mediational effects, the mediational value of increased knowledge was less strong than anxiety reduction and empathy.[32] In addition, some individuals confront discrimination when they see it happen, with research finding that individuals are more likely to confront when they perceive benefits to themselves, and are less likely to confront when concerned about others' reactions.[33]
See also[edit]
Ambivalent prejudice
Benevolent prejudice
Bigotry
Common ingroup identity
Hostile prejudice
Idée fixe (psychology)
Stigma management
Suspension of judgment
References[edit]
1.Jump up ^ Dovidio, J. F., & Gaertner. S. L. (2010). "Intergroup bias". In S. T. Fiske, D. T. Gilbert, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), The Handbook of Social Psychology (5th ed., Vol. 2). New York: Wiley.
2.Jump up ^ William James wrote: "A great many people think they are thinking when they are merely rearranging their prejudices." Quotable Quotes – Courtesy of The Freeman Institute
3.Jump up ^ Rosnow, Ralph L. (March 1972). "Poultry and Prejudice". Psychologist Today 5 (10): 53–6.
4.Jump up ^ Allport, Gordon (1979). The Nature of Prejudice. Perseus Books Publishing. p. 6. ISBN 0-201-00179-9.
5.Jump up ^ Garth, T. Rooster. (1930). "A review of race psychology". Psychological Bulletin 27 (5): 329–56. doi:10.1037/h0075064.
6.^ Jump up to: a b Plous, S. "The Psychology of Prejudice". Understanding Prejudice.org. Web. 07 Apr. 2011.[verification needed]
7.Jump up ^ Allport, G. W. (1954). The Nature of Prejudice. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.[page needed]
8.Jump up ^ Brewer, Marilynn B. (1999). "The Psychology of Prejudice: Ingroup Love and Outgroup Hate?". Journal of Social Issues 55 (3): 429–44. doi:10.1111/0022-4537.00126.
9.Jump up ^ Quattrone, George A.; Jones, Edward E. (1980). "The perception of variability within in-groups and out-groups: Implications for the law of small numbers". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 38: 141–52. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.38.1.141.
10.Jump up ^ Crandall, Christian S.; Eshleman, Amy (2003). "A justification-suppression model of the expression and experience of prejudice". Psychological Bulletin 129 (3): 414–46. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.129.3.414. PMID 12784937.
11.Jump up ^ Sherif, Muzafer; Harvey, O. J.; White, B. Jack; Hood, William R.; Sherif, Carolyn W. (1988). The Robbers Cave Experiment: Intergroup Conflict and Cooperation. Middletown, Connecticut: Wesleyan University Press. ISBN 978-0-8195-6194-7.[page needed]
12.Jump up ^ Stephan, Cookie White; Stephan, Walter C.; Demitrakis, Katherine M.; Yamada, Ann Marie; Clason, Dennis L. (2000). "Women's Attitudes Toward Men: an Integrated Threat Theory Approach". Psychology of Women Quarterly 24: 63–73. doi:10.1111/j.1471-6402.2000.tb01022.x.
13.Jump up ^ Riek, Blake M.; Mania, Eric W.; Gaertner, Samuel L. (2006). "Intergroup Threat and Outgroup Attitudes: A Meta-Analytic Review". Personality and Social Psychology Review 10 (4): 336–53. doi:10.1207/s15327957pspr1004_4. PMID 17201592.
14.Jump up ^ Sidanius, Jim; Pratto, Felicia; Bobo, Lawrence (1996). "Racism, conservatism, Affirmative Action, and intellectual sophistication: A matter of principled conservatism or group dominance?". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 70 (3): 476–90. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.70.3.476.
15.Jump up ^ Cox, William T. L.; Abramson, Lyn Y.; Devine, Patricia G.; Hollon, Steven D. (2012). "Stereotypes, Prejudice, and Depression: The Integrated Perspective". Perspectives on Psychological Science 7 (5): 427–49. doi:10.1177/1745691612455204.
16.^ Jump up to: a b c d Dovidio, John, Peter Glick, and Laurie Rudman. On the Nature of Prejudice. Malden: Blackwell Publishing, 2005. 108. Print.
17.Jump up ^ "Nationalism", dictionary.com
18.^ Jump up to: a b c d e f Blackwell, Judith; Smith, Murray; Sorenson, John (2003). Culture of Prejudice: Arguments in Critical Social Science. Toronto: Broadview Press. pp. 31–2.
19.Jump up ^ "Classism", dictionary.com
20.Jump up ^ Blackwell, Judith, Murray Smith, and John Sorenson. Culture of Prejudice: Arguments in Critical Social Science. Toronto: Broadview Press, 2003. 145. Print.
21.^ Jump up to: a b c Blackwell, Judith, Murray Smith, and John Sorenson. Culture of Prejudice: Arguments in Critical Social Science. Toronto: Broadview Press, 2003. 146. Print.
22.Jump up ^ "Sexual Orientation", dictionary.com
23.^ Jump up to: a b Anderson, Kristin. Benign Bigotry: The Psychology of Subtle Prejudice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010. 198. Print.
24.Jump up ^ Anderson, Kristin. Benign Bigotry: The Psychology of Subtle Prejudice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010. 200. Print.
25.Jump up ^ Tilcsik, A (2011). "Pride and Prejudice: Employment Discrimination against Openly Gay Men in the United States". American Journal of Sociology 117 (2): 586–626. PMID 22268247.
26.^ Jump up to: a b c d e Blackwell, Judith, Murray Smith, and John Sorenson. Culture of Prejudice: Arguments in Critical Social Science. Toronto: Broadview Press, 2003. 37–38. Print.
27.^ Jump up to: a b c Dovidio, John, Peter Glick, and Laurie Rudman. On the Nature of Prejudice. Malden: Blackwell Publishing, 2005. 413. Print.
28.^ Jump up to: a b Dovidio, John, Peter Glick, and Laurie Rudman. On the Nature of Prejudice. Malden: Blackwell Publishing, 2005. 414. Print.
29.Jump up ^ Quoted in Skutnabb-Kangas, Tove, and Phillipson, Robert, "'Mother Tongue': The Theoretical and Sociopolitical Construction of a Concept". In Ammon, Ulrich (ed.) (1989), Status and Function of Languages and Language Varieties, p. 455. Berlin, New York: Walter de Gruyter & Co. ISBN 3-11-011299-X.
30.Jump up ^ Crisp, Richard J.; Meleady, Rose (2012). "Adapting to a Multicultural Future". Science 336 (6083): 853–5. doi:10.1126/science.1219009. PMID 22605761.
31.^ Jump up to: a b Aronson, E., Wilson, T. D., & Akert, R. M. (2010). Social Psychology (7th edition). New York: Pearson.
32.Jump up ^ Pettigrew, Thomas F.; Tropp, Linda R. (2008). "How does intergroup contact reduce prejudice? Meta-analytic tests of three mediators". European Journal of Social Psychology 38 (6): 922–934. doi:10.1002/ejsp.504.
33.Jump up ^ Good, J. J.; Moss-Racusin, C. A.; Sanchez, D. T. (2012). "When do we confront? Perceptions of costs and benefits predict confronting discrimination on behalf of the self and others". Psychology of Women Quarterly 36: 210–226. doi:10.1177/0361684312440958.
Further reading[edit]
Adorno, Th. W., Frenkel-Brunswik, E., Levinson, D. J. and Sanford, R. N. (1950). The authoritarian personality. New York: Harper.
Dorschel, A., Rethinking prejudice. Aldershot, Hampshire – Burlington, Vermont – Singapore – Sydney: Ashgate, 2000 (New Critical Thinking in Philosophy, ed. Ernest Sosa, Alan H. Goldman, Alan Musgrave et alii)
MacRae, C. Neil; Bodenhausen, Galen V. (2001). "Social cognition: Categorical person perception". British Journal of Psychology 92: 239–55. doi:10.1348/000712601162059.
Sherman, Jeffrey W.; Lee, Angela Y.; Bessenoff, Gayle R.; Frost, Leigh A. (1998). "Stereotype efficiency reconsidered: Encoding flexibility under cognitive load". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 75 (3): 589–606. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.75.3.589. PMID 9781404.
Kinder, Donald R.; Sanders, Lynn M. (1997). "Subtle Prejudice for Modern Times". Divided by Color: Racial Politics and Democratic Ideals. American Politics and Political Economy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. pp. 92–160. ISBN 978-0-226-43574-9.
 Wikimedia Commons has media related to Prejudice.
 Look up prejudice or prejudgment in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.


[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Abuse























































[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Discrimination



































































































































































































Category
Portal




Authority control
NDL: 00563100
 

  


Categories: Abuse
Discrimination
Prejudices
Anti-social behaviour









Navigation menu



Create account
Log in



Article

Talk









Read

Edit

View history

















Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store

Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page

Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page

Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version

Languages
العربية
Български
Català
Čeština
Corsu
Cymraeg
Dansk
Deutsch
Eesti
Español
Esperanto
Euskara
فارسی
Français
Galego
हिन्दी
Hrvatski
Bahasa Indonesia
Íslenska
Italiano
עברית
Кыргызча
Latina
Latviešu
Magyar
Македонски
Nederlands
日本語
Norsk bokmål
Polski
Português
Română
Русский
Simple English
Slovenščina
Српски / srpski
Srpskohrvatski / српскохрватски
Suomi
Svenska
Tagalog
தமிழ்
ไทย
Türkçe
Українська
Vèneto
Tiếng Việt
中文
Edit links
This page was last modified on 16 June 2015, at 15:08.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
  

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prejudice