Every so often, someone will voice the opinion that the world would be better off if everybody followed some particular religion. The reasons why someone supposes this vary somewhat, but essentially boil down to the belief that this religion is the best way or even the only true way. Similar opinions are voiced in the name of irreligion when we hear someone state the world would be better off if nobody followed any religions at all. That opinion also holds the assumption that their way is the best way or perhaps the only true way. In both cases, accepting these opinions as true would mean discarding any potential value that religious diversity has for humanity. That's quite the tall order indeed, as it doesn't take much to recognize that many religions - religious diversity - makes for a better world than one religion or none at all.
There are various ways one could argue the case for this, but I'm going to borrow from an author I read regularly who is the inspiration for this thread. The list below is inspired by that work, but also different from it, but to give credit where credit is due, that article is here (A World With Many Religions is Better Than a World With Only One).
There are various ways one could argue the case for this, but I'm going to borrow from an author I read regularly who is the inspiration for this thread. The list below is inspired by that work, but also different from it, but to give credit where credit is due, that article is here (A World With Many Religions is Better Than a World With Only One).
- All religions have something beautiful to offer. Further, the ways in which these religions are beautiful are different. That is, if you remove any one of them, you loose something amazing. This isn't to say all these religions don't also have their ugly sides, but is it really worth loosing that beauty to remove some blemishes? Talk about throwing out the seeds with the soil.
- One religion (or none at all) is not a sustainable condition. History shows us what happens when humans lack choices, as our nature begs for options. Attempts at monopolies fail - the authoritarian structure become corrupt over time, and people beg for something different when the monopoly inevitably fails to meet someone's particular needs. One way cannot last and will fragment into many. So why try and force a monopoly of religion (or irreligion) in the first place?
- There's no way to know if something is the "One True Way". Many hearken to the notion of one religion for all (or no religions for anyone) because they want certainty. There is no such certainty to be had. If there is a "best" or "right" way, we'll never agree on what that is or know if we've found it. We can only know what is "best" or "right" for us and our communities right now... and that answer can chance over time. A monopoly doesn't give you options when your needs change.
