My original blog topic was vaguely just on the debate on the validity of the existence of God, but I have actually focused my blog so far on Christopher Hitchens’ (a notable anti-theist) perspectives, conclusions, and debate.
This most recent summer, Hitchens was diagnosed with esophageal cancer (he is an avid smoker and a known alcoholic: in most of his interviews he has a scotch in one hand and a cigarette in the other). Because of his presence in atheist culture, Hitchens’ illness has sparked much controversy. Many followers of various faiths see his disease as God’s way of punishing him for his career built on blasphemizing God. He is after all, the author who wrote “god is not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything.” One particular interesting idea being passed around (his wife and children are frequently targeted and harassed for their father’s skeptical beliefs) is the common belief that god chose to give Hitchens cancer of the esophagus (the tube in the throat leading from the back of the mouth or pharynx down to the stomach) as a way of targeting where or what he used to speak out against religion. I thought this was interesting because with the exception of burping, the esophagus plays no role in speech. Parallel to the esophagus is the trachea, the windpipe leading down from the pharynx to the lungs. The pharynx separates at a point called the epiglottis, which is a flap that covers either the trachea while swallowing or the esophagus while breathing or speaking. The vocal cords are located at the top of the trachea. My point here is describe how the believers disregard fact (the science and anatomy behind their claims) to try and create a truth in their own minds in favor of their beliefs. Essentially, people are making up ideas and calling them facts, claiming that their idea is undeniably correct because it has to do with God’s will, and God’s will is absolute. This is, in Hitchens’ opinion, the focal point in the religious argument at which the logical fallacy is made.
By that, I mean Hitchens says that the reason why avid believers create false conclusions is because they base those conclusions on false premises. It is true that some of the stories told in the bible help people through trying times. In the short run, they have some being of infinite power that wants them to complete their test of faith and they will undeniably live in paradise for eternity. The problem is that these believers are not helped in the long run because later they will not look inside themselves for the power to achieve, but rather an idea that can leave them at any time. If one were to look at the bible (or any religious scripture) with a scientist’s scrutiny for proof, one would notice it is full of false premises, and any belief in any faith is basically a foundation of values which someone thousands of years ago wrote that everyone should follow or go to Hell forever.
So, because Hitchens does not believe in god, he will allegedly go to Hell after he dies. This article is Hitchens’ own perspective of how so many people are “praying for him.” When bringing up the idea of his full recovery, Hitchens wondered if that would be seen by the religious followers praying for him as those prayers being answered. Clearly, this would be an amazing thing for Hitchens and his family, given his bleak prognosis, but in his own words, “That would somehow be irritating.”
I fixed this blog mostly with changes in wording to help put sentences together in a way that made more sense. Hitchens’ personal lifestyle and choice for drug use is his own fault, so to say that God GAVE him cancer is making an assumption (an assumption that God gives people cancer as a way of punishing them) based on personal bias disregarding any scientific reason that Hitchens could have done this to himself. I also wanted to include in the blog how Hitchens family is being attacked. I felt that this was important to note that followers of a belief that are supposed to treat everyone like neighbors and family members are harassing the troubled family members of a cancer patient. That just seems unchristian to me.
I also added some conclusive sentences at the end of a couple paragraphs to paraphrase them a little more. I felt the idea sounded stronger that way.
Lastly, I included in the middle of paragraph 3 a description of how Religion can ultimately harm people. I feel like this is one of the main reasons I personally choose not to believe in God, and although this is somewhat of an assumption on my part, I am basing it on what I see around me all the time; “recovered” drunks, addicts, and criminals all standing outside public places trying to recruit members for their religion because at one point, they felt it gave them the strength to overcome a physical real world problem of theirs. Not many people look into these stories and conclude that these men and women who “found Jesus and saw the error in their ways” actually just didn’t possess the confidence in themselves to do what was best for them until an almighty power was introduced to them, giving them the hope to do what they couldn’t do themselves. This may sound like a good thing, but I feel that we should all be this confident in ourselves without the need for a religion. True will and conscience is stronger than that derived from a book.
No comments:
Post a Comment