I am a Catholic.

Well, I was a Catholic. No, it wasn't the Church's
stance on gays or the pope's infallibility that got me down — it was memories
from my youth. As an acolyte or "altar boy" in fourth grade, I had finally
worked up the courage to carry the cross in my parish's opening ceremony. I was
nervous and weak, and the cross swayed in my arms. After the service, adults
mocked me. I ignored that memory for years and continued to find comfort in the
knowledge that my faith had given me high moral standards. After attending
public high school and meeting countless people like me who were polite and
moral, but were raised without religion, the question sparked by my childhood
tormentors became obvious, and the answer even more so: Does religion
necessarily make a person any more or less moral? While I certainly appreciate
what my Catholic K-8 education did for me, it has become clear that organized
religion is a fine community-building tool, but human beings will act in what
they believe to be their self-interest and distort religious doctrine to fit
their aims.

Whether religion is a net gain, or loss, for human
society is an unanswerable question when we consider the impact of religious-based
charities and weigh them against religious-based terrorists. Would either these
charities or the killers exist without the faith-based community under whose
banner they meet? Logic would dictate that if one would, the other must as
well. If you have an answer to the ultimate question about whether religion is
still worth the time of our species, shoot me an e-mail.

Still, there are questions we can attempt to answer,
such as what the holy books and doctrines we believe in say about our species,
the way we approach our political dilemmas and whether we have outgrown them.
The fact that increasing numbers of pious individuals refuse an entirely
literal reading of the Bible is evidence of progress in itself — that religion
does not necessarily retard the moral and political growth of our society.

Doing
unto others

Religion at its core corresponds to the material
factional needs of humankind. Terrorists have so effectively marshaled an army
willing to die for their cause due to their manipulation of the Quran and its
dictum to submit to faith. However, they also claim a political mandate due to
their desire to control Middle Eastern oil reserves and force Americans to
abandon military bases in the region. In this sense, Islam has become a tool of
our opposition, but no more than nationalism was a tool for the Japanese
government to inspire its kamikaze fighters.

Islam and religion as a whole cannot take primary
blame for unrest in the Middle East. From the disastrous effects of the
colonial period, the arbitrary borders drawn thereafter to internal political
strife, religion has been used by powerbrokers as a tool. While it does have an
impact on events, religion operates in the margins (wide margins, I must admit)
of the path of "natural" human conflict without spiritual motivations.

Most of human history has played out in such
horrific conditions that simply believing in one another isn't a palatable
option. Acknowledgement that our fate lies in the hands of a violent self-interested
mob may well discourage people from finding ways to persevere. In this sense,
faith itself may be a survival mechanism.

It also serves to validate collective survival
instincts and mass political upheaval. Noah's Ark is a perfect example: As God
himself becomes so disgusted with the filth he created and the beauty most of
the population seems to see in its lifestyle that he drowns them all alive. The
ones who do survive have one great leader — the only one God chooses to speak
to — to thank for their salvation. This revolutionary theme has been repeated
countless times throughout history.

Until
morale improves…

This week, a number of writers have shared their
thoughts on our nation's religious controversies, and did a tremendous job
fleshing out the myriad of underlying conflicts. The extent to which religious
implications are inserted into common factionalism, and vice-versa, is a
striking aspect of the issues they address. We as a species struggle with the
implications of competing faiths that, by their very nature, can never find
true unity with the rest. We seem hopelessly divided — destined to gain
influence and oppress, or cry foul at perceived mistreatment.

Therefore, it seems that if our species is to
continue evolving socially and institutionally, we must reach an age beyond
religion.

…the
beatings will continue

When I clung to the Catholic Church in my first few
months of public high school a good friend asked, "Do you need an invisible man
to tell you that it's good to help out your species from time to time? Do you
dedicate your life to finding some way to avoid burning in the earth’s magma
until the dimension of time disappears?”

The answer is no.

But in an age where brutality persists throughout
most of the world and hope often dangles by a thin thread, religion remains
necessary. And those who advocate belief in secular reason won't have an easy
time convincing the vast majority of the world to abandon their one true hope.
As we continue to chase our destiny, the atheists must be aware that pulling
too hard on those who embrace religion will cause all of us to stumble and fall
and the
reactionaries will surely win that day. The energies of those who want to rid
society of religion will be wasted unless it's spent on empathy and charity for
the downtrodden majority of our planet.

Bassey
Etim
([email protected]) is a senior
majoring in political science and journalism.