A 2006 Gallup poll found 92 percent of Americans surveyed could be classified as those who believe in God, 4 percent are not sure, while only 3 percent are convinced that God does not exist (Newport, 2006b). The wide consensus, however, stops there. Gallup polling further revealed that 40 percent of Protestants and 45 percent of non-Catholic Christians believe that the Bible is the literal word of God, and must be taken as is, word for word (Newport, 2007, 1). Moreover, in the debate of creationism versus evolutionism, 46 percent of Americans believe that God created the human being in its present form, sometime within the last 10,000 years, and that the human being has not evolved at all since that point (Newport, 2006a). Among Abrahamic religions, only 51 percent of Americans believe that Jews, Christians, and Muslims worship the same God (Harris Poll, 2006). Finally, only about half of Americans, 49 percent, believe that Muslims who live in the United States are loyal to the country, and 39 percent of Americans agree with requiring Muslims in the United States, even U.S. citizens who are Muslim, to carry a special identification that identifies them as Muslim, as a measure to protect further terrorist attacks (Saad, 2006).
[...] On the other hand, Esposito (2002) claimed that the Koran neither supports nor requires any terrorist or violent activity. However, Esposito did admit that the Koran allows and even requires “Muslims to defend themselves and their families, religion and community from aggression” (p. 119). Harris (2004) pointed to exactly that requirement as the danger within Islam since they see the West as aggressors who are trying to keep their families and children away from Islam. Esposito defended the Koran as he presented that Hebrew Scriptures and the Old Testament also refers to the protection of religion, fighting and war. [...]
[...] The O'Reilly Factor [Television broadcast]. New York: Fox News Channel. Retrieved December from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v= GExMLKOuySA Otto, R. (1958). The idea of the holy (J. W. Harvey, Tran.). New York: Oxford University Press. (Original work published 1923) Peek, C. W., & Brown, S. (1980). Sex prejudice among White Protestants: Like or unlike ethnic prejudice? Social Forces, 169-185. Peters, R. (2002). Rolling back radical Islam. Parameters, 4-16. Pipes, D. (2001). The danger within: Militant Islam in America. Commentary, 112(4), 19-24. Roborgh, H. [...]
[...] Kimball argued that fundamentalist Christians who attack and sometimes kill abortion doctors are an example of this evil produced by religion. Among many other scholars and philosophers, the above presented convincing arguments against religion. The debate on religion and faith has intensified in the post-9/11 era and became more divisive due to stark differences in opinions held by individuals on sociopolitical issues from abortion to gay rights. The debate is both a domestic and international one. Furthermore, the debate is happening across and within religions and religious denominations, along with those who doubt the existence of God and the rationality of a religious belief system; and seek a day when they observe the end of faith. [...]
[...] The following sections provide a discussion of Harris' primary arguments relating to the nature of those individuals who hold their beliefs based on faith, issues with Christianity, and issues with Islam. Should you hold your beliefs based on faith? Harris made various arguments and conclusions relating to those who hold their beliefs based on faith as evidence. One of the first propositions that Harris presented is that there is a relationship between beliefs and behavior; he argued that sometimes the belief may even justify murder. [...]
[...] He presented arguments on the issues surrounding belief systems, Christianity and violence, Islam and violence, implications, and recommendations, among other topics. These arguments were supported well by other scholars who study faith and religion. Overall, the reader is left with an understanding of faith and faith-based knowledge, and the reader is better able to challenge these doctrines and their dangerous outcomes. Although The End of Faith suffers from limitations, Harris still provided important historical, sociological, biological, and political arguments surrounding faith. [...]
using our reader.