‘Religion’ refers to such a range of forms and functions that the single word is inadequate and misleading. Arguments made against a limited aspect taken to extreme or abused for political or other ends have obvious truth. Such argument against religion in general is simply ignorant and in error. Further, focus only on the phenomena excludes the question of the concept of religion and its potential. Once again I recommend John Hick’s well written The Fifth Dimension (Susan knows it) and my own writing.

I find it characteristic of many of your judgments over the years, especially of me, that a limited / distorted aspect of the case is basis of negative evaluation. This is truly uncomfortable for me—and difficult because if I object etc. you tend to become heated / sarcastic / evasive; I’ve written before but gotten no significant response. It would be entirely unfortunate for me except that even wrong headed criticism can be useful. It might be unfortunate for you but perhaps the judgmental style supports your sense of identity. In any case more listening is a solution to knowing. Less judging makes for better judgment.

Barack Obama—my attitude is that proper assessment of a man should balanced picture of the whole. In his case this is important because he is subject to an immense campaign of misinformation and distortion. It is harmful to America, especially re Obama and generally as a pervasive way of politics. I therefore consciously choose to speak the whole. I do not object to stating the negative—it is important. However, immediate opinion without pause, further judgment, and finally evasion enable you to judge my attitude without knowing it or knowing that you don’t know.