Ethnocentrism In Our Society

A couple of days ago, I happened to find myself embroiled in an argument over the claim that certain religions are stupid. In fact, I really did not want to get involved in any way with the argument but somehow I did. What happened was that while minding my own business, I happened to tune in to an argument in which one claimed that he was free to join any religion except a stupid religion. Upon hearing that, I smiled to myself and asked myself what he really meant by the etchnocentric term, "a stupid religion". I was intrigued, but decided against firing a salvo in that argument. But, once it had really gotten way too much, I just had to say something, and without even realizing, I fired my first salvo. I immediately told the person that there was no such thing as a stupid religion. I went further by saying that each religion preaches differently because different people have different views and therefore ultimately leading to different perceptions as well as understandings about reality. Makes sense? Apparently, this statement did not make sense to the person who advocated the term "stupid religion." He said that the nature of certain teachings are stupid because they make no sense and that certain teachings imply that their believers should kill or exterminate all those who do not believe in their religion. This was where the topic changed. I went on by reminding the person of the fact that the ideology which he speaks of is due to the twisted interpretations of a certain religion by certain groups of fanatics and is in no way related to the texts or the preachings of the religion which the radicals based it on. But apparently this still sounded alien to him. He went on by arguing that since the majority of the followers from that faith practices this form of radicalism, therefore it has to be what the religion originally intended. After he had put across this point, I went on to give him a simple analogy. This is what it sounded like. If a parent teaches a child to be a good citizen, but the child differs from the parents teachings and decided to join the delinquents instead, does this mean that being a delinquent is what the parent originally intended for the child? And to my surprise, he answered yes. Now, at this point, I was at a loss for words. I simply asked him, are you trying to imply just because the child choose to join the delinquents instead of listening to his or her parents, that this is what the parent intended for him or her? He still said yes. I then proceeded to ask him in what way did his argument make sense? He responded by saying the exact same lines which he told me earlier. Since a good majority of its followers practices it, therefore it has to be what the religion intended. At this point, I reasoned that this argument is getting nowhere. Time for a change in strategy. After a momentary pause, I asked him what statistics was he basing his "majority of the people" on? What about the moderates? Don't their opinions and interpretation count as well? Furthermore, if your claim is indeed true, then every religion in the world is corrupted. Because, we have seen the development of radical or extremists in every religion out there. We have seen this in Hinduism, Christianity, Judaism, Islam and many more. So, are we then not being idiots by practicing these religions? At this point, there was silence. I went silent too. I had made my point. But inside, I was still debating. The point is simple, in order to offer criticism towards a religion or anything for that matter, we have to understand the meaning of its texts and not by the actions of its followers.
I believe that this kind of mentality is not an isolated case. In fact such ethnocentric views are quite widespread amongst the citizens of the world. Upon putting some thought into the matter, I have come up with a few possible reasons as to why the conditions are such. First, I think that the government controlled media has plenty to with it. This is because, each government has their own form of ideals and wishes to impose those set of ideals towards their citizens. And the best possible method is through the media. It is said that to be a good judge, one has to hear the story from both sides of the coin. And in this case, this rule is violated. Because, in a government controlled press, the stories are often given from one side of a coin. And when it comes to religion, it is just the same case. People are getting information that is extremely biased and shallow minded at best.
Second, I would like to fault preachers themselves. Just like in government controlled press, preachers in religious organizations often give a very biased view on religion. They never enforce critical thinking but rather thinking based on blind faith. In short, they tell you whatever they want you to believe or think. And as a result of this, many people have very ethnocentric views on other religions and are often overly critical of people from other religions.
So, these are only two of the many reasons which I think is to be blamed for such views which were expounded by the person whom I was arguing with earlier. Therefore, in my opinion, I think that it is time for us to change this view to a more mature view. Let us not only progress through technnology, but through the greater understanding of people and their respective religions.