I watched Religulous last night. I have mixed feelings about it. I think Bill Maher is funny and made some valid points about how many people interpret and practice religion. However, I got the impression that he went out of his way to find the most unsophisticated believers to interview, and then, when he ran out of stupid people, he found people who didn’t speak English and couldn’t possibly reply intelligently to his questions, let alone understand them and the sarcasm behind them. All they could do was look into the camera and appear stupid.
I also think using the documentary (or investigative reporting) format to promote his anti-religious views was grossly unfair – crossing the line from documentary to propaganda. He used the same techniques as the people he criticizes to make his point and made very little effort to present a fair and balanced view of religion, its purpose in society, or the positive effects it has had. True, various religions have been used to organize groups to wage war, but religion has also been used to drive the development of colleges, universities, medical centers, and other valuable institutions.
I view evolution as a fact and do not believe it threatens Christian beliefs in any way. I don’t think Jonah lived inside a whale or a big fish. I don’t think God sculpted Adam into the first living human or that Adam and Eve were actually tempted by a talking snake. I don’t read the Bible to learn about science. I read it to learn about human truth. I view the New Testament as a manual on how to live one’s life, and if we were to live according to the tenets of the New Testament, many of the problems in the world that Maher himself pointed out in his video, the ones he attributes to religion, would no longer exist.
Maher uses the old straw man argument – a trick commonly employed to win a debate. With a straw man argument, you misrepresent your opponent’s position and then attack the misrepresentation and claim victory. In this case, Maher assigns all religious believers to the category of those who believe that religious writings must be interpreted literally and that everyone should share the same beliefs.
He then attacks this very narrow group of religious believers and claims that he has somehow proven that religion is at the root of all human suffering, when he has merely succeeded in knocking the stuffing out of his own straw man.
Maher is as close minded as any of the people he interviewed. He should have spent more time talking to the Catholic priest astronomer and that other Catholic priest he interviewed outside the Vatican. He should have spent more time talking to intelligent, articulate believers of all faiths. Then, maybe he would have a more balanced and healthy view of religion. Instead, he seems intent on throwing the baby out with the bathwater. All I can say is, good luck with that… and thanks for the laughs.
If you watched the flick (or you’re Bill Maher), please post a comment to let me know what you think.
{ 3 comments… read them below or add one }
Couldn’t agree more, Joe. Funny movie (I laughed throughout), but not exactly even-handed.
Thanks for the review! I admit to having wanted to watch this, but have avoided it thus far mostly because of the fact that it’s Bill Maher who I’ve never particularly liked. Also, I worry about being offended. I know it’s my choice whether to be offended or not, but it’s hard to control sometimes.
I, too, believe in evolution and believe that Adam (if he existed) was the “first man” in that he was either the first of his kind (the result of evolution), or the first to spoken to by God, or the first to be chosen for a particular task by God… or is simply a symbolic representation created by Moses (or whoever wrote those first chapters of Genesis) to explain symbolically the creation of man and his relationship with God.
And I consider myself to be very strongly religious and believe that science and religion can live together in complete harmony. So, would you recommend that I watch it? Do you think I’ll laugh more than I’ll be offended?
Hey, Stu, good question, but it’s tough to predict whether you’ll be offended. I’d say if you don’t like Maher, you should probably steer clear of it. He’s his typical arrogant self. He does have some funny lines and comebacks. He’s a genuinely witty guy – not one of those comedians who has to have everything prepared in advance.
What I found most offensive is the sinister use of rhetorical tricks to prove his point. It really is a form of propaganda. If he were just poking fun at goofy religious beliefs, I wouldn’t have a problem with it. If he presented a balanced view and was able to arrive at the same conclusion without the rhetorical tricks, I may have disagreed, but I wouldn’t have faulted him for it.
Pretending that he had a valid argument supported by solid evidence, however, kind of got me riled up. It was sort of like watching Colin Powell try to prove to the U.N. that Iraq had WMDs – I kept thinking, “If this is the best evidence he has to prove his point, he’s sunk.”