It’s hard not to be put off, way off, by Bill Maher these days.
He’s not just an ideologue, he’s a smart-alecky one, the kind you wanna smack even if you agree with most of what he’s saying.
It’s one reason why “Religulous,” his new documentary debunking religion in all shapes and sizes, offers a few pleasant surprises.
Sure, he’s still as smug as ever, but there’s a bit of humanity in his presentation.
Maher’s assault on the major religions deposits him all over the earth, from middle America to the Vatican and Jerusalem. Along the way his quicksilver wit serves him well as he asks tough questions of spiritually connected folk. He also reaches out to them, sometimes physically with a touch or a pat, in order to connect in some tangible way.
Shockingly, it works. And it makes Maher look less like the bully he ultimately proves to be.
Naturally, it’s hard for his interview subjects to explain themselves, or answer his pointed queries. Faith, ultimately, is built on … faith, not facts. Still, his choice of subjects tends to be of the fish ‘n’ barrel variety. It’s no accident “Borat” director Larry Charles is calling the shots here.
People of faith are “selling an invisible product,” he says. “My product is doubt.”
Still, the laughs come easily as Christianity comes under his withering gaze. The first half is breezy, and frequently hilarious … but after a while he starts picking more radical, and thus less interesting, subjects.
He touches on Scientology briefly, and also the original tenets of Mormonism (Magical Underwear??).
The moral equivalency card gets thrown down hard when the subject turns to radical Islam. Suddenly, “Religulous” drops the funny cartoon and film inserts and turns relatively serious. Maher does pin down a few Muslim scholars, as well as a pro Jihad rapper, in a similar style to the other targets.
But he essentially says all religion is evil, blending the ignorance of some Christians with the murderous ways of Islamic radicals.
What’s missing, obviously, is religion’s upside - the charitable work, the countless lives it saves and the societal controls it sets in place. Maher has no room, or interest, in such debates. And he toys with the notion that people of faith are clinical insane, but either hasn’t the heart, or the evidence, to follow through with such an ugly conceit.
“Religulous” brings the funny, but ultimately it has little interest in a bona fide debate on its subject matter.
ALSO CHECK OUT:
The Culture Wars at a theater near you
A tale of two ‘Religulous’ reviews
(Photo: Bill Maher strikes a blow for atheists everywhere with his new documentary, “Religulous.” Here, Maher stands outside the Vatican City. Photo courtesy of Lionsgate)
{ 2 comments… read them below or add one }
Danny 10.03.08 at 6:02 pm
I think the obvious response to “What’s missing, obviously, is religion’s upside - the charitable work, the countless lives it saves and the societal controls it sets in place” from Maher (and any other atheist) is that charitable work would be much better if it came from a secular source, and would follow with the example of a church that donated millions to the tsunami victims, but taking an unspecified amount to pay for over 1 million bibles to distribute to the region.
Similarly, most charitable work is done as a way to advertise religion to the less fortunate, which again shows how a secular system for charity would work much much better, only there are less atheists in the world than Christians to support such notions.
And to the second part, how many countless lives have been lost due to religion? I can guarantee you those numbers will eclipse the numbers that religions have saved. And furthermore, it is the secular sciences that actually saves real lives.
cftoto 10.03.08 at 7:47 pm
Danny — thanks for writing.
I think it’s pretty unfair to say that religious people help the needy primarily to win recruits. I’m sure there’s an element in their work about that, but to write off their hard work and selflessness as just one big ad campaign sounds far too cynical.
I suspect that religious types donate more money than their atheistic peers, too, although I need to do some digging to back up that claim. More of a hunch at this point, admittedly.
No one denies the secular sciences save lives, but countless people have saved themselves from addictions and other personal crisis through their faith. Their numbers should not be discounted.
And if more people die in the future because of any one religion, it won’t be the one Maher concentrates on so mercilessly here.