The God Delusion翻译：第一章第二节（2）

Here's a particular example of our society's overweening respect for religion, one that really matters. By far the easiest grounds for gaining conscientious objector status in wartime are religious. You can be a brilliant moral philosopher with a prizewinning doctoral thesis expounding the evils of war, and still be given a hard time by a draft board evaluating your claim to be a conscientious objector. Yet if you can say that one or both of your parents is a Quaker you sail through like a breeze, no matter how inarticulate and illiterate you may be on the theory of pacifism or, indeed, Quakerism itself.
下面是我们的社会给于宗教过分尊重的一个特殊例子，而且非常重要。到目前为止，在战争时期，成为一个有良知的反战者最容易的理由就是宗教理由。你可能是个聪明过人的道德哲学家，你写的抨击战争罪恶的博士论文就算拿了大奖，预审答辩委员会还是会在评审你作为有良知的反战者的立场时刁难你。然而要是你能说你的父母或者父母之一是贵格教徒（老查注：贵格派是基督教新教中极端反战的教派，“不能为军队服务”是其基本教条之一。），那你可就一帆风顺了，才不管你在和平主义或者贵格派主张本身的理论上是含糊其辞还是一窍不通。

At the opposite end of the spectrum from pacifism, we have a pusillanimous reluctance to use religious names for warring factions. In Northern Ireland, Catholics and Protestants are euphemized to 'Nationalists' and 'Loyalists' respectively. The very word 'religions' is bowdlerized to 'communities', as in 'intercommunity
warfare'. Iraq, as a consequence of the Anglo-American invasion of 2003, degenerated into sectarian civil war between Sunni and Shia Muslims. Clearly a religious conflict - yet in the Independent of 20 May 2006 the front-page headline and first leading article both described it as 'ethnic cleansing'. 'Ethnic' in this context is yet another euphemism. What we are seeing in Iraq is religious cleansing. The original usage of 'ethnic cleansing' in the former Yugoslavia is also arguably a euphemism for religious cleansing, involving Orthodox Serbs, Catholic Croats and Muslim Bosnians.
与对待和平主义立场正相反，在提到宗教冲突双方的教派名称时我们却优柔寡断，犹豫不决。在北爱尔兰，天主教和新教分别被美其名曰“民族党”和“保皇党”。“宗教”这个词被隐讳为“族群”，比如说“族群间的战争”。伊拉克在英美2003年入侵之后陷入了逊尼派和什叶派穆斯林之间的教派内战。这很明显是一个宗教冲突-然而2006年5月20日的《独立报》头版标题和头版头条文章都称之为“种族清洗”。在这里，“种族的”这个词也算是一种美化之词。我们在伊拉克看到是宗教清洗。在前南斯拉夫一开始使用的“种族清洗”一词其实也可以说是宗教清洗的粉饰之词，因为东正教的塞尔维亚人，天主教的克罗地亚人和波斯尼亚的穆斯林都曾卷入其中。

I have previously drawn attention to the privileging of religion in public discussions of ethics in the media and in government. Whenever a controversy arises over sexual or reproductive morals, you can bet that religious leaders from several different faith groups will be prominently represented on influential committees, or on
panel discussions on radio or television. I'm not suggesting that we should go out of our way to censor the views of these people. But why does our society beat a path to their door, as though they had some expertise comparable to that of, say, a moral philosopher, a family lawyer or a doctor?
我以前曾在媒体上和政府事务中提请人们去注意在关于伦理的公众讨论中赋予宗教的特权。每当有和性或者生殖道德有关的争议时，可以打赌，在广播或电视上有影响的委员会或研讨会中总会有各个信仰团体的头头脑脑们显赫出场。我不是说我们应该摒除这些人的观点。但是为什么我们的社会总是自找上门，好像在这方面他们比别人更有专长，比如说，道德哲学家，家庭律师或者医生？

Here's another weird example of the privileging of religion. On 21 February 2006 the United States Supreme Court ruled that a church in New Mexico should be exempt from the law, which everybody else has to obey, against the taking of hallucinogenic drugs. Faithful members of the Centro Espirita Beneficiente Uniao do Vegetal believe that they can understand God only by drinking hoasca tea, which contains the illegal hallucinogenic drug dimethyltryptamine. Note that it is sufficient that they believe that the drug enhances their understanding. They do not have to produce evidence. Conversely, there is plenty of evidence that cannabis eases the nausea and discomfort of cancer sufferers undergoing chemotherapy. Yet the Supreme Court ruled, in 2005, that all patients who use cannabis for medicinal purposes are vulnerable to federal prosecution (even in the minority of states where such specialist use is legalized). Religion, as ever, is the trump card. Imagine members of an art appreciation society pleading in court that they 'believe' they need a hallucinogenic drug in order to enhance their understanding of Impressionist or Surrealist paintings. Yet, when a church claims an equivalent need, it is backed by the highest court in the land. Such is the power of religion as a talisman.
这里又是另外一个赋予宗教特权的古怪例子。在2006年2月21日，美国最高法院裁定新墨西哥州的一个教会对大家都必须遵守的不得使用致幻剂的法律拥有治外法权。这个所谓“仙草圣灵仁爱中心联合会”（老查注：这个教会的原文名称是葡萄牙语，翻译成英语是：Central Spiritual Charitable Union of Vegetable。没有查到标准的中文译名，所以只好意译成中文。这名字透着的不是一般的古怪，一看就是嗑药大仙们给取的。）的虔诚信徒们相信他们只能通过饮用含有非法致幻剂二甲基色胺的霍斯卡茶才能理解上帝。（老查注：霍斯卡是一种产于巴西亚马逊河流域热带雨林中的草本植物。现在还查不到标准的中文译名，所以只好用音译。这个东西的土著名称读音很像“坏茶”，哈哈，还真是名副其实。）注意，他们仅仅是相信药物能帮助他们理解，这就足够了。他们不需要给出任何证据。相反的，有大量的证据表明大麻可以减缓癌症病人化疗时的恶心和不适。但是最高法院还是在2005年裁定任何医疗上使用大麻的病人都会遭到联邦法律的追究（甚至在那些大麻特殊用途合法化的少数州也一样）。宗教又一次成了王牌。设想一下某艺术欣赏协会的会员们在法庭上辨称他们“相信”使用致幻剂可以增进他们对印象派或超现实主义画作的理解，结果会怎样。可是，当那个教会提出等价的要求，这个国家的最高法院就给与支持。这就是宗教作为护身符的力量。