A very smart person once said that the human race is ready, if not obligated, to disregard various religious doctrines.He wasn’t attacking spirituality, or encouraging people to become godless heathens or Scientologists. It’s just that much of what is taught by many of the world’s major religions is no longer relevant to our high-tech, increasingly interconnected society.Let’s take three of these said religions: Christianity, Islam and Judaism. Most of the framework for these religions was formed hundreds of years before we started to become an industrialized society, and there were far fewer people around. Both of these factors add new problems with which the human race has to deal.Or, the hell with it; we could just all die. While some religious tenets, like the Judeo-Christian “thou shalt not kill” are pretty much timeless (although ignored by the people that seem to profess belief and their personal morality the loudest), others were politically expedient decrees created by various religious head honchos supposedly speaking for some sort of deity.Arguably, all those rules came about to ensure each doctrines’ survival and further gain of earthly reward. An example of this is how a variety of Christian sects don’t eat meat on Fridays. This originally came about to save meat, a nutritiously dense food, for the military.The proles, instead of complaining about unfair treatment, hoped for some sort of vague spiritual reward. It’s kind of funny to see how a teaching like that, made up hundreds of years after the conception of the religion, still flourishes today.Enough of that crap. I’d hoped to illustrate how a lot, not all, but definitely a lot, of religious tenets are no longer appropriate and might even cause excess suffering in the modern world. (This is assuming that the debatable point that religion is a tool used by governments to exploit the masses is not true.) Religions of all stripes are infamous for their conservative stances on a wide range of social issues.I’m not saying they’re all bad. Just look at all the religious groups that protest the death penalty in our country. Or missionaries both stateside and overseas that try to alleviate human suffering and poverty.What I would really like to raise attention to is the Israel/Palestinian conflict. Internationally, the death it has caused is tragic and stupid. On campus, in what is supposed to be a bastion of reason, various people with viewpoints representing both sides feel obligated to tell us why their side is right and how that justifies any military action.Here’s how the land conflict is irrelevant: The Earth’s population is growing exponentially, without showing signs of stopping. The Earth, obviously, is remaining the same size. If we fight now over something as trivial as religious doctrine, killing soldiers and civilians alike, imagine how bad things will get when we have to fight over food or even fresh water. It seems much more rational to focus our attentions on issues that will ensure that the human race survives and prospers.Both sides claim the land in question has great religious significance. Both sides need to realize that all the human blood spilled, regardless of whether it is Israeli or Palestinian, does more good inside a human being than being lost defending religious tenets. You’re not a bad-ass if you kill someone for a cause. You’re either evil or someone’s chump.
John Roszkowski, a sophomore sociology major from Stow, Ohio, hosts a talk show every Wednesday at 7 p.m. on The Underground student-run radio station.
