September 18, 2005

Letter to the Producers

I woke up a little early today and decided to watch a little Sunday morning tv while I ate breakfast. This show about contemporary religious issues was on, so I was all for watching it, but some of the guests on the show were amazingly biased when it came to actually talking about issues. They just wouldn't stop shooting their mouth off about the 'benefits' of their own religion, Christianity.

Now I'm not a Christian hater, but it's tiring to see Christian bias everywhere in our society and media while other religious ideas are simply ridiculed and distorted. Anyways, like any good citizen I decided I would take to the pen and paper and voice my opinion by writing to the show.



I just finished watching Listen Up for the first time today and came away with feelings of bewilderment. During the interview with 'religion expert' James Beverley I couldn't help but notice he was withheld from a valid and professional opinion by his completely Christian bias.

Discussing what makes a religion 'good' or 'true' goes a little deeper than its contemporary personna or someone's personal experience. Beverley cited that a bad religion is one that offers no freedom, takes money from its followers and/or sexually abuses people all in the name of God. I'll only guess he's alluding to aspects of modern day cults or the myths surrounding 'heathen' religions of the East, but Christianity has perhaps the most vivid history of involvement with all three of those aspects. During the Crusades, both the Muslim and Christian world were as equally eager at killing, raping and pillaging in the name of their God. The Inquisition of the Catholic Church had church officials torturing and ceizing the property of thousands of innocent individuals for decades.

All major religions have their history evils, but none of them in their teachings condone them. A decisive assessment on which religions may be 'true' or 'good' has been tried for centuries and go beyond a ten minute Q&A and towards consice evaluation of historical and religious comparison, all of which 'expert' James Beverley seems to dismiss as trivial given the nature of his answers.

As a journalist hosting a television show with a religious focus, Lorna Dueck may do good to include more unbiased guests with historically accurate information when it comes to segment topics that include the comparison of different religions. I'm happy when I see shows on tv that discuss the issues surrounding modern religions; its definitely something the world needs to see more of in the media. However, the world also needs to see less unbiased coverage that dismisses what religious and historical scholars worldwide teach about such a crucial aspect of society.

Thanks for your time,
Stu Hood

No comments: