Where is the ‘evidence’ that one religion is right and all the others are wrong?

OLIVER BRODERICK (Letters, October 22) says he is going to ask Fr Con McGillicuddy for his bullet-proof vest to protect himself after his long dismissal of all Richard Dawkins’s “disciples” and the apparent lack of “evidence” to support Dawkins’s arguments.

I think he would find the only protection he needs to talk to most of us who would laugh out loud to be considered Dawkins’s disciples is an open mind and a sense of humour. As many atheists would point out, evolution may only be a theory, but then so is gravity — ha, ha. Mr Broderick asks whether many of Dawkins’s disciples have been baptised.

Clearly the answer is yes, although nobody personally asked me if I approved at the time.

If they had, I am not sure I was really in a position to answer at only a few weeks old.

Did Mr Broderick evaluate the evidence and come to his deep and personal decision before he was baptised? He avoids the key question from another Dawkins’ contemporary (and definitely not a disciple), Christopher Hitchens, and his equally bestselling ‘God is Not Great’.

Hitchens ask how followers of a religion can propose not just a creator but also that their particular faith is right and, by implication, that all the other faiths are wrong.

As Hitchens argues, if you move beyond the belief that faith in nature is enough and you need the supernatural as well, then you move into the realm of which religion is right. This is where the real numbers and issues are. Mr Broderick says there is enough “evidence” for him to believe in the Christian religion (he did not say whether Catholic, Protestant or Orthodox).

Where is Mr Broderick’s “evidence” that he is right and all the other faiths are wrong?

Andrew Doyle

Lehenagh

Lislevane

Bandon

Co Cork