A CRUCIAL MESSAGE TO RICHARD DAWKINS
One of the
questions asked to Richard Dawkins by Ben Stein, in the recent documentary,
“Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed,” was why he would want to take the
belief in a God of love away from people who believed in Him. I do not
recall his final response, though I do recall a fairly long pause after the
question, which to me seemed to indicate a moment of discomfort -- and
perhaps some guilt.
Why, Richard? Why would
you ever want to take away from countless millions the idea that there
is a God of love that cares for them and that they can turn to in times of
grief? Why would anyone with a modicum of kindness want to steal from humans
the belief that there is a life after death and that they might still have
the opportunity to see their dead, loved ones in the future? Why would you
ever want to invalidate the belief that this God loves them so much that he
would even give Himself so as to have them with Himself forever?
Are you showing love toward these
people, Richard? Are you giving them something of superior quality to
replace their belief with? Are you giving them greater depth of meaning?
Will your philosophy make them stronger in a world filled with grief? Will
you make them better equipped to cope with the challenge of death?
What is it that really drives your
fanaticism, Richard? Why do you hate the Judeo-Christian God so much? Why do
you insist on distorting reality by calling brutal, arrogant, manipulative
and hypocritical people of the past, or of the present, by a name that can
never in all honesty be applied to them? Crusaders, witch burners, allies of
secular powers to maintain their own primacy, and killers of others who
disagreed with them were not Christians. Child molesting priests or
adulterous ministers are not followers of Jesus Christ, either. You would
have no problem seeing the incongruity if a person called himself an atheist
while he prayed faithfully to God; or if a professing communist openly supported
capitalistic principles. Why do you not see the incongruity of associating
evil with “true” Christianity, the Christianity that even insists on loving
your worst enemy, then?
Are you really
humane Richard? How can a person be humane while offering humanity emptiness
and confusion? Are you so blinded by greed and by fame, that you will not allow your
conscience to make you see the results of your work? And how can anyone even
think of continuing to fight the treasured notion of a loving God, even if
they only see a 1% possibility of Him existing. (Remember, you told Ben
Stein that you are 99% certain that God does not exist?).
Stop for a moment and consider. What
if God does exist? Think of the harm you’re causing. Think of the confusion
you’re sowing. Think of the hopelessness you have brought about in some
ambivalent and weak minds. Think of the possibility that some might have
even given up on life because of you and others like you. If someday there
will be a Judgment, and all the facts will be laid bare before you and
you’ll see the harm you may have caused, how will you feel then?
But you need not wait
until then, for there is enough intelligence in you to assess these
possibilities; especially the probability that you might have already helped
push some over the edge, or that your book might have already led some to divest
themselves of the fear of God that kept them from risky sex, drugs and
alcohol abuse and abandoned themselves to a life of debauchery which may
have led to incurable STD’s, or an early death due to drug or alcohol abuse.
Absurd, Richard? I think not.
I sincerely hope
that you will allow your
conscience to emerge once again, Richard. You do have some conscience left.
I believe I saw it when you paused and thought for a few seconds after Ben
asked you the question I mentioned above. You did not get defensive, and
you did consider for awhile. I believe that during that revealing pause you saw the enormity
of the consequences to your actions, though only for a brief while.
Have I lost hope in you Richard
Dawkins? No, I have not. I am quite convinced that behind your bombastic,
over-confident, at times offensive ways there is a man who can still reflect
long and deep
and can still allow the sensitive part of his being to re-emerge and overpower his
I hope you will, Richard -- for your
sake, and the sake of
the millions you might still affect.