The Problem With Religious Tolerance
---SNIP---
When I teach introductory courses in religion, I find my students are also unwilling to offer critical appraisals of religious beliefs, and for the same reason. Like Warwicks student union, they think refraining from criticism is essential to religious tolerance. After all, if you claim that a religious belief is wrong, arent you being intolerant? Better to accept religious relativism than run the risk of bigotry.
---SNIP---
If religious people (and secular people) disagree on basic aspects of history, science, and ethics, how is it possible to maintain the truth of ones own position while "tolerating" others? Educators like me can respond in two ways. By far the most common response is to teach that there are multiple religious perspectives, all of which are equally valid and deserving of respect. This not only feels good, it also feels legal. Wouldnt I violate the Establishment Clause, thinks the terrified public-school teacher, if I implied that some religions are superior to others?
The result, however, is disastrous. Suddenly we are in the land of bumper-sticker postmodernism, where truths are perspectival and no one can be objectively wrong. Like the unity of all religions, the validity of all religions is a lovely sentiment (Coexist!), but it is dangerous, disrespectful, and untrue. Dangerous, because it means people will be less likely to fight against injustices and falsehoods that are underwritten by religion. Disrespectful, because authentic respect involves caring when others beliefs go wrong, not just letting them believe whatever they want. And untrue, because basic logic tells us that "God condones slavery" and "God forbids slavery" cannot be equally valid claims.
---MORE at
The Chronicle of Higher Education