As I have previously stated, I see myself as a cyber-warrior for Israel, and I will frequently find myself going head to head with some anti-Semitic troll about Israel and Judaism etc. I realise that it is mostly a lost cause. Occasionally one does find people who really are uninformed and would genuinely like to know more, and appreciate the history lessons etc but really, precious few. So I guess it's a waste of time, except for the fact that it helps me hone my 'voice' in advocacy of Israel instead of floundering around in spluttering outrage. It's also nice, though sometimes a bit creepy, to see how many Christians profess this love of Israel and the Jews. I mean, they may say that Israel belongs to the Jews (YES!) but then they may then discuss the importance of the Jews accepting YOU KNOW WHO as their Saviour (NO!) and then the Messiah will come (come AGAIN in their narrative) and kumbaya.
That's OK, I can deal with all that. I say, first, Hashem, send the Moshiach, and after that we can work out all the details about who he is etc.
But the ones who really get up my nose are the people, self-professed atheists, who say things like, if it wasn't for religion, well, there would be no wars and all wars are based on religious conflict. And they point to radical Muslims and they point to how the Jews only think that Israel is theirs because of religion, and if we all went all John Lennon and didn't have religion, there would be 'no one to kill and die for' and everyone would live as one.
Then the snarky ones will say things like, how all these silly people believe in their own 'imaginary friend in the sky', thus inferring that people who believe in G-d are all deluded and childish, and in fact, the brave atheists are the Keepers of the Common Sense, and back to religion being the source of all conflict.
Firstly, a quick ignorant sweeping look at history does seem to give us that impression: The Crusades. The Moors and the Catholics in Medieval Andalusia/Spain. The Troubles of Northern Ireland- Catholics and Protestants, right? All the Middle Eastern stuff, that's all religion, right? Muslims against Jews, against Christians, against Muslims, against everyone essentially.
But what of World Wars 1 and 2? And so many other forgotten wars which were about land and money and power. There is no end to the reasons for nations and people to kill each other.
So even if these statements might have some truth in them, the fact is that it isn't ALL about religion and even now, these current wars are about far more than religion.
But that isn't really what I want to talk about. Because instead of the Wise Atheists blaming all the world's ills on the stupid vicious children who actually believe in G-d, let's have a think for a minute about what the world would look like if nobody believed in a Higher Power, just in their own intellects. Imagine; no Heaven, no Hell, nothing to kill or die for, no religion, too.
There are people who call themselves Secular Humanists who believe in the essential goodness of civilised people who love each other and care for each other because we are all the Family of Man and we should do all that. To this I say: do you really think that the basis of this particular belief springs from logic and human intellect? Because, for example, where is the logic of caring for the sick and the weak? Where is the logic in Charity? Giving hard-earned money and goods to people who can't or won't look after themselves? No logic at all. It is far more logical and sensible to give to yourself and your family so you have the advantage; why on earth would you waste resources on people who have an incurable disease, or who were born with some sort of condition which would render them incapable of caring for themselves? Far more logical and sensible to put them out of their misery. Put the crippled child out on the hillside to be eaten by wolves; much better in terms of the environment as well. The Circle of Life and all that.
Like it or not, the Secular Humanists are drawing on a philosophy which is entirely based on monotheism, or at least the concept of a Higher Power who instructs us in a code of behaviour. And since the Jews were the first monotheists, followed by the Christians and the Johnny-come-lately Muslims, I feel entirely at peace in saying that if it wasn't for the Jews and for the Torah, we would be living in a complete jungle, where the Will to Power would be the driving force of existence.
There would be no charitable organisations catering to the poor, the sick, the incurable. There would be no neonatal intensive care, or really, not much in the way of intensive care at all, unless the person to be cared for was deemed to be important and powerful enough to be worth saving. Not much caring for old people; if they outlive their usefulness, what's the point? So expensive, and for what?
And once they die, why waste resources in burying or burning them? Why not recycle them? Like Soylent Green. I mean, why not? Who says you can't eat people? What's the difference between animals and people anyway? (Hello, Professor Peter Singer!) OK, so they can't talk, but neither can a baby or a dead person.
And what about relationships? Who says you have to commit to anyone? Marriage is about love, and what if love dies? So you move on. And marriage is about property, so you make legal arrangements. And what about children? Hmm, tricky one. That needs a bit of nutting out. That's always going to be tough. Are children property? Is it about love? Who says? Oh, it's in our genes, in our biology, look at animals, generally mothers, who will attack anything that threatens their young. Yes. But what about the example of the young lion who defeats the old lion and takes the lionesses for himself; and what does he do with the cubs? Kills them of course. It makes sense to him; that way the lionesses come back on heat and the next crop of cubs will all be his genetic line. So how should a stepfather behave to stepchildren, in this world of uncommitted relationships? Has anyone actually thought about this?
I mean, even today in our monotheistic-based societies, stepchildren can be dealt with pretty shoddily.
Boundaries are often transgressed there. We are all grossed out by Woody Allen's relationship with Soon-Yi Previn even though no laws were actually broken; and they are very happy together, thanks. And what of those stories you hear about brothers and sisters unintentionally marrying, and then intentionally staying together, once they learn the truth? (Even Oedipus was disgusted when he found out he had unintentionally married his mother; I wonder why? The Pharaohs had no problem with brother and sister marriages, in fact that was the norm, since they were, in their own eyes, gods.) So where do the Laws of Decency, which don't actually exist, come from? I don't think they come from the human intellect, the Clever Monkey, Homo Sapiens, who loves to pleasure itself however and whenever possible.
What about Culture? I guess people would support the Arts, much as today, and there would be some magnificence - although no Sistine Chapel or Michelangelo's David or Moses or Pietas or religious art at all, or Requiems or Oratorios, but there would be a lot of movies and shows about sex and death and revenge- so I guess there would be Opera. And Shakespeare! So all is not lost. And comedy, where stupid people are tricked and taken advantage of by smarter people, or slapstick or fart and boob jokes, or reality TV. That probably wouldn't change. There would be Tracy Emin and many of the same folks esteemed by today's appreciators of Art. Much of which is trash, in my opinion. It's very difficult to rise above yourself if you think that 'your self' is the highest thing around. And a lot of art does seem to be by and about humans infatuated with human infatuations.
I'm wandering off here because there is so much to think about in this World without Religion (and I'm not a theologian or philosopher.) I think a lot of it would look like Ancient Greeks and Spartans, and Romans, and some would look like Nazism and Communism and other totalitarian regimes. (And a lot would look like bits of today's secular societies.) Because it would all be about Power (Money Sex Death). And last I looked, these regimes were singularly warlike and responsible for the deaths of millions and millions of people. And the conflicts weren't religiously motivated. Jews weren't murdered because they prayed to Hashem and lived according to the Torah; they were targeted for reasons of 'race' or for being a convenient scapegoat, or for historical, even traditional reasons, or out of envy, or for so many reasons that make anti-Semitism still as mysterious and absurd as it is today.
So can we put that stupid theory to rest? About how religion is the root of war, and how much better the world would be without religion? Because no matter how dark are the days we live in, how much darker and more horrible would life be without the belief in some sort of Divine Plan or the concept of Tzedaka (which is not just Charity, but Just distribution of money or goods to the less fortunate), or the sense that there is something greater than us in the world. Imagine Humankind being the greatest thing there could possibly be. Just imagine that.
I don't think so.
