Often the conclusion is made by “casual” affiliates of any religious denomination that the absence of an extremist behavior constitutes a moral right, and moral validity, to the comfort and happiness said individuals may achieve through prayer and belief. However, this extremely common and rarely challenged point of view precludes the possibility that a significant number of people have misinterpreted what it means for the nature of something to be harmless. A good example of this may come from briefly discussing University of Arizona professor and microbiologist Charles Gerba. Gerba, who is also the spokesperson for Coverall Health-Based Cleaning System, a commercial cleaning industry that commonly specializes in office workplace bacteria control, has published several scientific case studies pertaining to the unknown danger of microbial bacteria that commonly lurks in unsuspected areas. Much of Gerba’s work is to analyze the bacterial composition of unsuspecting and/or common household surfaces, followed by comparing the bacterial infestation of said surfaces with commonly suspected surfaces of bacterial infestation. For example, it is of common assumption to believe that a toilet seat or toilet bowl has a significantly greater bacterial infestation than say, a door handle or a TV remote, when in actuality, according to Gerba, the opposite is more commonly true. This is due to the simple fact that areas such as toilet bowls, or other commonly assumed homes of bacterial infestation, are much more frequently subjected to regular cleaning, whereas hardly anyone considers it a necessity to wipe down their television remote or bathroom doorknob, despite it being smothered is harmful bacteria.
Casual, or “harmless” religious association, can be equated to something of a similar nature, in that modernized societies (such as the United States) will usually share progressive enough values to be in agreement toward stomping out and/or disavowing the extremist mentality of certain religious individuals, however, much of modernized society fails to consider the unsuspecting nature, and very genuine danger that comes from allowing the perpetuation of said form of belief. Perhaps a reason for such inherent blindness is the inability of one to see beyond the malicious nature of their own prosperity. After all, if an individual prospers from a belief that is socially acceptable, whether said prosperity be socially or through monetary value, one would surely have difficulty in identifying the negative consequences that others suffer from as a result if they or their loved ones are not subjected to said consequences in any manner. This is the unspoken privilege of belief, the ability to abstain from certain laws pertaining to others, to be exempt from taxes that others are not, to be held in higher political regard, to be represented on all American bills of currency (not to mention the racial dilemma that is many historically known slave owners represented on American currency as well), and to even interpret to Constitution as one sees fit.
Are believers even familiar with the much overlooked military prejudice that is still currently in affect? A recent and sickening example of this is the 2014 incidence of an American Air Force sergeant who was refused military reenlistment based on his choice to abstain from the words “so help me God,” written within the religious oath section of his and all other military personnel contracts of the Air Force. If anyone happens to be equipped with the unfortunate gall to defend these actions, said individual must also be prepared to defend the idea that a soldier who has enlisted his or her service in honor and defense of his or her country is not protected by the very document he or she is upholding, which I suppose, given the unspoken privilege, one would be freely supported in their ignorance to do so. There is also the well-known matter of “conscientious objector” status for military drafting, in which an individual who seeks to decline military drafting based solely on the grounds of his or hers own moral and ethical judgment is never given equivalent consideration that an individual who declines military drafting based on grounds of religious doctrine.
Austin Cline, contributor to the religion section of About.com, describes what is referred to in the social science as “Unconscious Ideology,” under the article “Religious Privilege: How Religion, Religious Groups, and Beliefs are Privileged.” Unconscious Ideology is a simple concept, in that an individual’s religious privilege is perpetuated in a manner that said individual is not conscious of, due to the structure of his or her environment being catered toward a lifestyle of unquestioned belief. There is also the particularly sinister existence of “Blasphemy Laws,” which are of relatively equivalent nature to the dystopian concept of “thought crime” in George Orwell’s novel 1984, in which individuals who speak out and or verbally reject religious ideologies are extremely susceptible, and often subjected to, criminal punishment. Though laws of this manner are nearly non-existent in all of western civilization, they are still regularly practiced and endorsed throughout the Middle East.
Aether of Infancy 