Freddie gains some spotlight for his posts on religious moderation, and the efforts by New Atheists to build a utilitarian utopia where we are all happily Godless.
Freddie makes a good point (certainly more lucid than the one sentence summary I just gave of it), if everyone was moderate, be they moderate religious or moderate atheist, there's a good chance that sectarian violence, theocratic politics, and religious extremism in general would vacuously decrease.
But what is missing here is the acknowledgment that not all religious extremists are bad. Not every radical act of religion is bad. People should remember that King's "I Have A Dream" speech was written by a Baptist minister in the style of a sermon. King, at no point in his trek to provide equality to blacks in America, chose to pursue political reform without regard to his religion. The speech itself is riddled with religious allusion, quoting Psalms, Amos, and Isaiah. In fact, many of King's speeches were given at religious functions, and many of his speeches stemmed from, or were adaptations of, his sermons.
There are plenty of other examples of good religous extremists, to be sure, especially outside American borders. But the point I want to make is this: I want people to know I am a Christian. I want them to separate me by my beliefs, to know that despite my strong scientific background I am fundamentally in love with a creator God and his Son. I want people to look at my family and quote the words of Tertullian: "Look [at the Christians], see how they love one another. See how they are ready to die for one another."
In a tapioca world of moderation as envisioned Freddie, where vanilla and chocolate have been eliminated...sure, things might be better than they are today with extremists at each other's throats. But as quickly as we point the finger at Muslim radicals and wish they were more rational, more moderate...would we point the finger just as quickly at Mother Teresa?
The Best Of The Dish Today
2 hours ago