Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
Friday, December 22, 2006
Rebecca Hagelin :: Townhall.com Columnist
The "great pillars of human happiness"
by Rebecca Hagelin
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Who will win on November 4th?


In his 1971 song “Imagine,” John Lennon asks us to envision a secular utopia. There’s no heaven, no hell. Peace and harmony reign, and a global “brotherhood of man” flourishes. Amid this blissful state of affairs, of course, we find “no religion.”

Lennon was a talented songwriter, but when it came to theology, he was 180 degrees off. A world free of religion would certainly have no heaven. But there would be plenty of hell -- and right here on earth.

This isn’t simply the opinion of a lady who takes her faith seriously. A large and growing body of social science research shows what a huge difference religious faith makes in our everyday lives. It’s no overstatement, in fact, to say that religion makes civil society possible. Without it, just about every indicator of human misery would be off the charts.

For a concise yet comprehensive catalog of just how bad things could be, take a look at a startling new paper by Pat Fagan, The Heritage Foundation’s premier social-science researcher. In it, he sifts through countless studies that show the remarkable effect of religion on marriage, divorce, childrearing, drug/alcohol abuse, out-of-wedlock births -- even mental and physical health.

Start with an area near and dear to my heart -- family relations. My husband and I have raised our three teenagers in a loving, religious household. Our faith in God has sustained us in good times and bad, and it has been a steady source of inspiration, comfort and encouragement. So I was particularly pleased to read the following in Fagan’s paper:

“Compared with mothers who did not consider religion important, those who deemed religion to be very important rated their relationship with their child significantly higher … When mothers and their children share the same level of religious practice, they experience better relationships with one another. For instance, when 18-year-olds attended religious services with approximately the same frequency as their mothers, the mothers reported significantly better relationships with them, even many years later … Moreover, mothers who became more religious throughout the first 18 years of their child’s life reported a better relationship with that child, regardless of the level of their religious practice before the child was born.”

The same holds true for fathers:

“Compared with fathers who had no religious affiliation, those who attended religious services frequently were more likely to monitor their children, praise and hug their children, and spend time with their children. In fact, fathers’ frequency of religious attendance was a stronger predictor of paternal involvement in one-on-one activities with children than were employment and income -- the factors most frequently cited in the academic literature on fatherhood.” Continued...

1 2
| Full Article & Comments | Next >
Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author

Rebecca Hagelin, a vice president of The Heritage Foundation is the author of Home Invasion: Protecting Your Family in a Culture that's Gone Stark Raving Mad and runs the Web site HomeInvasion.org.

Be the first to read Rebecca Hagelin's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com delivered each morning to your inbox.

Subject: Is this suppose to inform?
Re. WHR Bill's invectives:

I suppose if I were to address WHRB directly, I would invite more of the same as in his previous post. Rather, I invite anyone else to observe that R. Hagelin, (& by reference in my previous posts) M. Stanton Evans and Rodney Stark offer ample evidence and scholarly analyses of the history of religious (or in the latter two references, Christian) influence in the West. WHRB offers only ad hominem attacks, vague and misinformed commentary on the Bible, and logical fallacies (e.g. genetic fallacy, and vacuity in his recent post - [translating: "I am an agnostic, and therefore I don't believe ..." - OF COURSE YOU DON"T! YOU'RE AN AGNOSTIC!]). I have neither the space, nor the desire to rehash the arguments laid out by Evans and Stark here. I simply claim that either reference would serve amply to expose this popular sophistry for what it is - pure rubbish, and a re-write of history that would make George Orwell proud.

I would be delighted to engage anyone familiar with those works, should you wish to take issue with the particulars of their arguments. However, this silly name calling and blustering serves no good cause, and in my humble opinion erodes the benefits of free speech so unique to Christendom.

Columbo

An "agnostic libertarian" replies
Mr. Ed posted:
"The point here for you agnostic libertarians, atheist socialists, and buddhist new-age environmentalists, is that you enjoy your freedoms to practice and preach your ideas, and criticize others, precisely because of the Christian foundation of Western civilization."


Sorry, but as one of the "agnostic libertarians" you're addressing, I don't buy this. I don't believe that the freedoms offered by Western civilization are solely, or even primarily, due to its "Christian foundation". There have been too many Christian societies in history with virtually no religious, political or personal freedom at all. Nor does it appear to me that Christianity is uniquely conducive, compared to other religions, to promoting freedom. The Jehovah of the Old Testament wasn't encouraging freedom and mutual tolerance when he urged his Hebrew followers to massacre heathens and idol worshippers, nor did Jesus in the New Testament espouse tolerance when he said "Those who are not with me are against me" and threatened those who did not follow him with eternal torment in hell.

No, I'm not saying that Christianity *as it is practiced in America today* is uniquely hostile to freedom, either. I don't live in fear that the fundamentalists are going to take over and create a theocracy and burn heretics like me at the stake. But I think the freedoms of Western and American civilization grow out of a number of factors, including Enlightenment rationalism, the legacy of Western religious wars which ended in the various Christian sects basically calling a truce based on mutual tolerance, and, yes, Christianity-- but a selective reading of Christianity that emphasizes the parts about the believer's freedom of choice over the parts about punishing the infidel.

{However, Mr. Ed, while I don't agree with your opinions, I must say that you express them very well for a talking horse....)
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily dose of conservative columns, editorial cartoons, talk radio, news, and more!
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.