I left the following comment at Why Evolution Is True (http://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2009/12/21/bloggingheads-wright-vs-hitchens-part-ii/), and thought I'd share it to hopefully stimulate discussion here as well:
Let's consider an example of what is purely a belief, not a belief about what is or isn't factual. Some of us believe that human lives have intrinsic worth; some people do not. There are religious traditions and individuals, and non-religious traditions and individuals, on both sides when it comes to this topic (I suspect that this is the case with all but a few of these arational sorts of beliefs; I'm not addressing here irrational beliefs, which can also be found in both religious and non-religious contexts).
How do we assess such a belief in intrinsic human worth? I cannot think of a scientific approach that can test for the intrinsic worth of human beings. Chemical analysis won't demonstrate it, I'm quite certain.
It seems perfectly rational to conclude that a belief system which affirms the intrinsic value of human beings does NOT poison everything. The claim that a certain category of human belief systems 'poisons everything' is factually dubious, whether understood metaphorically (as I assume Christopher Hitchens intended) or literally (not all religions put toxic substances in Kool-Aid).
Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In