I’m surprised someone finally spoke out about an issue I find somewhat prominent: misguided religious fanaticism.

Craig Gunn’s assessment of atrocities carried out in the name of religion is accurate (“Time for the dissolution of organized religion,” SN 10/4). While I’m not a religious person, I do think religion can be a good institution when it isn’t being moderated by fundamentalist demagogues. Religion is meant for easing one’s doubts and raising one’s spirits. Why is it that throughout history so many of the atrocities on humanity were carried out in the name of religion (the Crusades, for example)? Doesn’t it seem a bit hypocritical or at least counterproductive?

Religious fervor is also to blame for withholding information. Scientists throughout history were persecuted simply for making observations that influential people didn’t agree with. I’d hate to think what the world would be like if electricity weren’t available because Thomas Edison was fearful of being drawn and quartered. I’m glad we stopped treating wounds by letting them bleed continuously. It’s rather comforting to know anesthetics are available before one is operated on, isn’t it?

I don’t mean to bash religion, but I do want to show that when its aims are misdirected, it can have very unfortunate and sometimes disastrous results. A guy in fancy vestments shouldn’t dictate spiritual attitude. Your right to be an individual is a fundamental right of this country, exercise some free will. Not going to church and sleeping in on Sunday for the 350th week in a row sounds good to me. I’d rather watch “SportsCenter” and the Fox pregame show.

Does anyone else think that if religious groups want to get involved in politics, they should be allowed as long as they start paying taxes? Just curious.

Adam Shinabarger
geological sciences senior