The 20th century journalist and social critic H.L. Menken once said, “We must respect the other fellow’s religion, but only in the sense and to the extent that we respect his theory that his wife is beautiful and his children are smart.”

As a student, you may have been asked by a professor to respect classmate’s opinions, beliefs and suggestions. If you have taken a course on religion, you certainly have. If at any point you questioned why it is always appropriate for this to be asked of you, you are not alone.

The realm of immunity from rational and reasonable criticisms society affords to religious belief, its dogmas, its leaders and institutions is rather peculiar; and if you push me hard enough, I would argue it is both ill-advised and unconscionable. So, allow me to object to these societal mores, with all due respect.

Religious belief is not simply belief in a creator; it makes much greater and more ambitious claims than this. It makes unquestionable claims through revelations that God has illuminated his omniscient and omnipotent capabilities, while making moral prescriptions on matters including what we may eat, how we should treat our enemies, how and who we should have sex with and what we can and cannot do with our own genitalia, with a promise of judgment day in which those who have defied his sacred canons will experience an eternity of pain and misery. Yet, they say, God loves you!

These claims are implicitly endorsed by society’s demand for our unwavering respect.

In every other domain of discourse, we humans are typically only willing to respect other people’s beliefs, even though we may disagree, if they are based on merit. We do this if we feel we are given good reasons. This is why we choose not to respect those who deny that the Holocaust happened, or those who believe the world is flat.

If I were to stand in front of a classroom, and profess my belief that all men are not in fact equal and some are fit to be my slave, or that women as anything but obedient homemakers is an abomination, and attributed divine warrant for this declaration as a specially chosen prophet, NOBODY would be burdened with the obligation to RESPECT my belief.

A last ditch rebuttal to those who will inevitably say that I cannot evaluate all religious persons and beliefs based on a very small sect that evoke religious dogma to commit the most heinous acts, I will simply say that I do not do this; I do not need to. All I can do is judge these doctrines on the merits of its pretensions; it is against this that I hold religion accountable.

If we were free to call a spade a spade, we can rather easily conclude that those who presuppose theological prescriptions pertaining to morality and the human condition as eternal paragons belong at the margins of our society. This would be no different than how we appropriately dismiss astrological claims that the alignment of certain planets has direct implications in the outcomes of interactions between human beings.

One thing is clear. If I am wrong about this, I am bound for the gates of hell. I admit this without recourse. However, my inclination to publicly espouse these concerns in the wake of possible eternal damnation, demonstrate just how inadequate I find reasons for being religious are.

In the same manner in which Mr. Menken suggests, I will gladly allow the religious person to speak and make their point known, while also standing by their side in support of everyone’s freedom to believe and worship anything that may suit their fancy. But as far as “respecting” their religion’s intemperate and immoral claims, well, I suppose society will have to wait until I am provided with good reasons.