I'm sure his final suggestion wasn't serious - I shudder to think how the average pastor/minister/priest would 'teach evolution'. As it is, it appears that science teachers/football coaches are doing a less than satisfactory job.

His final suggestion did cheer me up, but I wonder at his assertion that the establishment of religion amendment is the most important one. I wonder how you would determine which is most important, or if that's even a useful question.

As a 'foreigner' who just happened to have been born in the same city as Christopher Hitchens, may I make the point to John that he was referring to the first amendment, which covers rather more than simply the law on religion :

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.'

A frequent and unnerving question relating to religion is why and how can it stubbornly persist in the face of science and rationalism. One of the answers to this is that the various churches and other religious institutions are insulated from outside influence and are free to teach their doctrines to the otherwise uneducated without presenting their subjects with alternatives. Should this be done, as Hitch suggests (I suspect faceciously), you'd have a lot less sheep and a lot more discussion. However, the irony is that the amendment in question prevents any governmental intrusion to require such a thing.

I guess that's our job.

You know there are not a lot of things I am proud of, being an American, right now. But thank the stars I am not forced to tithe to churches or synagogues or the like.

I'm shocked and confused by what Hitchens said about Germany -- is this really true? Do you HAVE to chose a religious institution to tithe to?

Are there any German readers of this blog -- or anyone who've lived there?

Dzwonka, I have a friend who's from Germany and he mentioned this to me one time. I believe though that only people who are declared members of a church have to pay the church tax.

Hitchens is somewhat off about Germany.

Your parents decide your religion, as far as the goverment is concerned, when you are born.

You may change that affiliation to whatever you want it to be starting age 14. "None" is a valid option. No questions asked.

The german goverment want´s to know about that because they are collecting taxes for some of the established churches (Churchtax) and get to keep a compensation.

If your parents decided, for example, that you are catholic, Churchtax will automatically be added to your tax burden as soon as you start to earn money.

I must admit that I do live here and I don't know exactly! So I had to look this up:

This is an introduction to Church taxes: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_tax http://www.steuer-forum-kirche.de/church-tax-short.pdf

The bottom line being that this tax is taken from your income tax (derived from the "10th" that was usual in early times), so nothing that you would really notice if its gone. That is probably why most people don't opt out of the church. They have the faint idea of "doing something good" by not cutting down on something that they would not notice anyways.

As I understand it, if you are not a member of the church, you do not have to pay. Reminds me that I still have to opt myself out of that...

Thanks guys! In that case, Germany is actually better than other nations with official state churches, in the sense that while you can opt out of a state church -- but your tax money will still be used to pay for it.

Just like you cannot opt out of having your tax money go to the myriad of "faith based initiatives" that the US government supports...

Hey Dzwonka, Can you explain how you opt out of having your taxes go to faith based initiatives? I don't live in the US anymore so I don't pay US taxes but I will move back at some point. (Unless another Republican is elected)

Also, it might be nice to hear what the people who read this blog do as far as charity. Who do you give to so as to help people but in a completely nonreligious manner?

Personally, I give to Amnesty International.

Are there any charities that are not upfront about being religious? Any that say they help the poor but really use you money to espouse religious recruitment?

Skanky, I said

Just like you cannot opt out of having your tax money go to the myriad of "faith based initiatives" that the US government supports

you cannot opt out...

Sorry if I got your hopes up, buddy! :)

I guess I chouldn't read anything till I have had my coffee.

Thanks for another upload. Hitchens, IMO, is the most intellectual and interesting social critic of our time, and in a while. I began being interested in his views about two years ago, and he has really changed my views on many things. His view on the war is one that I would never have understood with all the republican propaganda. But Hitchens manages to justify his view on a war on iraq if it was carried out correctly. Even debating whether or not mother theresa was a good person . . . a seemingly impossible argument to debate . . and he succeeds.

I wonder if this is just a game to Hitchens. Maybe he's so confident in his skills, that he just picks difficult social issues and argues the hardest side to support . . like a mad lawyer.