A N Wilson's attempt to hijack a brave man's grief

Tariq Jahan's courage and fortitude, in the face of his surely almost unbearable loss, are undeniably exemplary qualities. Unfortunately, A N Wilson has hijacked Mr Tariq's admirable appeal for calm, in pursuit of his own rather nauseating agenda.

Wilson thinks that moral absolutes come from religion, and that the 'bedrock' of morality is being 'steadily eroded' by secularism. Yet his own confusion is apparent: he points out that this morality, which he believes comes from God, needs to be instilled in children at an early age. Why so, when Wilson, after Immanuel Kant, believes in the 'moral law within me'? Why can't morality be placed in children before birth, along with their ability to feel hunger, pain, fatigue and love?

Once again we see indefensible, irrational nonsense published in a major national newspaper because it is based on the mutely accepted ideas that (a) religion is, at bottom, all about being good, and (b) any pap with the religion badge attached deserves automatic respect for no other reason.

Wilson claims that Mr Tariq is 'guided in his conduct by his religious belief'. What a disgusting insult to an honourable man. Surely, if Wilson's assertion were true, then if Mr Tariq had not been born into Islam he would be a thoroughly immoral blackguard. If you find that difficult to believe, then you must doubt Wilson's assertion also.

Of course there are many religious people like Mr Tariq. And there are many secularists like him, too. One does not need religion in order to be good (although, it seems, nothing leads potentially good people to do evil as effectively as does religion).

Wilson claims that Sikhs build gurdwaras inspired by their awe of Kant's starry heavens and inner morality. This is pure cant, as opposed to pure Kant. Sikhs build gurdwaras as a form of social control, elevating a textbook written hundreds of years ago by an overrated mammal to the status of immutable, unquestionable law which must be followed by all who enter the gurdwara. Check out any Sikh website for the list of admonitions and prohibitions forced upon any 'welcome' guest who sets foot in such a place.

Wilson admires people who 'go to the mosque and fall prostrate before the mystery' which so impressed Kant. Why should we be proud of behaving like abject serfs before a capricious, despotic master? What's so good about falling prostrate? If Wilson has ever flown on an aeroplane, or benefited from modern medical procedures, he has due reason to salute those who stood upright and confronted mystery head on. Yesterday's mystery is today's solution. The fascination with mystery comes from the bawling, terrified infancy of humanity, when there were no proper explanations and the authoritarian pronouncements of the witch doctor held unquestioned sway.

How dare Wilson write of 'the fundamental truths of the great religions' that have 'stood the test of time for thousands of years'. Religions far, far older than the modern few that inspire his pitiable awe have passed into history. The Olympian gods of Greece and Rome; Horus, Seth, the Aten and Osiris; all of these dealt in 'fundamental truths' for longer than Wilson might care to acknowledge, and those truths are dim memories in the wind.

Particularly evil is Wilson's implication that Jade Goody ought to be held accountable for the drug addiction and unfashionably sordid death of her father. Perhaps Wilson's inerrant morality extends to punishing children for their parents' sins to the third and fourth generation (Exodus 20:5).

Hitler gets a mention, as a 'satanic Nazi dictator'. Wilson has forgotten the belt-buckle motto proudly displayed by every Gestapo sadist: Gott mit uns. Moreover, when Wilson bangs on about how morally pure London was 100 years ago, has he anything to say about 75 years ago when Cable Street cheered the Nazi Oswald Mosley to the echo?

Wilson cannot resist a sideswipe at the modern intellectuals Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens. Each of these men has more common sense in his little fingernail than Wilson demonstrates in his entire tradition-inflated ego, and both have separately steamrollered Wilson's tired arguments on many an occasion. It is ever likely that Wilson feels intimidated by such formidable debating opponents. Religion might not be responsible for all the world's evils but, where human beings are involved in perpetrating evil, you can bet that religion plays more than a minor role. Hitchens cites multiple examples from his own personal experiences in Northern Ireland, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Israel, Lebanon and India.

Religion, through centuries of shameful precedent, gives people like Wilson the confidence to spout the most outrageous tripe with impunity. God, the projected embodiment of humanity's darkest, basest, most sadistic, tyrannical nature, enfolds such whining pipsqueaks as Wilson in his leathery wrap, perhaps sniggering inwardly at the prospect of their horror when they discover his non-existence. Wilson and his kind will never understand the horror of the secularist, when contemplating those who would wish God were real.