Religion and Progress

Tonight's guest on the Colbert Report was Mara Vanderslice, a consultant who encourages Democrats to appeal to religious voters. Besides having an excellent last name, she made some valuable points. For instance, she said that voters of faith constitute a huge demographic: 80% of the US population believes in god. She also explained that since Democratic politicians are also religious, their party does not deserve the reputation of being anti-religion.

And then she said something else: she asserted that people of faith have been behind every progressive movement in American history.

This is a lie.

The notion that religion has been a driving force in the history of social progress is totally absurd. It is, however, a widely accepted misperception, and this is perhaps due to the subtlety of the logical fallacy it presents.

It is indeed true that there have always existed some religious people who have championed social progress; the fallacy here is to jump to the blanket statement, "Religious people have championed all social progress". This statement fails to reveal the whole picture: it disregards the groups of religious people who have opposed social progress, and it also disregards the groups of nonreligious people who have championed social progress.

Once one considers that there have always been religious people on both sides of social debates, it becomes clear that religion does as much harm as it does good. And once one considers that nonreligious people have also helped social progress, the role of faith becomes a moot point; clearly, religious belief was not a necessary factor, because it was a more specific element (social consciousness, ethical awareness, etc) that was driving positive change.

Take the abolition of slavery as an example. The religiously correct in this country love to point out how good Christian values were instrumental in changing people's minds and attitudes about slavery. But they conveniently forget or disregard the fact that religion was even more instrumental in attempts to defend the 'peculiar institution': southern Christian slaveholders used the curse of Canaan, for instance, to prove that God wants black people to serve white people. And there were prominent freethinkers - notably Horace Greeley - who did as much as any religious person in fighting for the freedom of blacks.

Women's suffrage is perhaps an even better example; religious rhetoric was used again and again to argue that the woman's place is in the home, but religious groups rarely came out to support women's rights.

And just look at the progressive movements of our own time! Only a liar or an idiot would argue that religious dogma is helping to support gay rights, or to champion the superiority of evolutionary science over superstitious bullshit.

In the end, I think any contributions that religion has provided to social progress would prove accidental. It is reason, and reason alone, that drives positive social change. Faith, which is the absence of reason, can only spread ignorance and suffering.