Religulousists

I'm going to review Religulous before I've seen it. I will play into the classic stereotype of a right-wing, closed-minded, uneducated, prejudiced Christian who believes everyone is going to hell except those who believe like I do. Crappadoo-doo! Why not? Seems like nothing a theist or, God forbid, a Christian can say or do will disentangle him (I forgot "sexist") from this image.

I will review the film, then view it, the re-review it. I suppose we could say that I shall pre-review the film. How's that my friends? [I would like a Pulitzer for creating a new genre of literature.]

And I haven't followed Maher that much. Too cheap to buy HBO. I only know that when he appears on TV interviews, the producers insist on tagging him (in the banner which appears in the lower part of the frame) as a "comedian." I may date myself here but, when I was coming along, comedians made people laugh or they had to find other work. Obviously, that's what Maher did. The producers as usual, haven't been informed.

Full disclosure - I've seen the trailer once and I voted for George Bush . . . twice. I wish I could say "thrice." Voted for George Bush, that is.

If you will please wipe the grin off your face long enough to take me serious, I will give this thing a serious whirl.

Maher identifies religious kooks (branded and not) who embrace belief in God for a variety of uninformed and illogical reasons. This is Exhibit A in the prosecution's case that belief in God is totally unwarranted. Rather than concluding that people are stupid and leave it at that, Maher concludes that he is not. And that belief in God is therefore stupid. He interviews a few experts who confirm his findings lending an air of credibility to his contentions.

Let me state it as inductive logic:
1. Stupid people believe in God.
2. Smart people do not believe in God.
3. Stupid people are wrong and smart people are right.
4. God does not exist because smart people cannot possibly be wrong.

The classic mistake that atheists are almost bound to make is that religion = belief in God. If religion is discredited, there goes any warranted belief in a deity. The argument is too irresistible. It's just too easy. There are too many kooks out there waving some religious banner. (My favorites are the more entertaining ones like Robert Tilton and Benny Hinn. I'm sure you have your favs). One can discredit preachers and religious people as easily as one can lick sugar off a sucker. It's really not that difficult.

That's it. That's my pre-review. I'm sure I'll probably regret the use of a few words like "totally." Like, totally, dude.

Thankfully, we live in an age when precision of thought, exactitude of logic and accuracy of fact is not nearly as important as audacity. Given that my presumptive (read "audacious") review of Religulous is now available for billions of internet users, do I not deserve an appearance on Oprah or at least in the Obama administration?

I would like to apologize to high school and college graduates for my limited vocabulary. Please bear in mind that I am reviewing Maher.