In 2004, the same geneticist who had earlier discovered a gene linked to male homosexuality found a gene associated with religious belief. The geneticist, Dr. Dean Hammer of the National Cancer Institute, used a 226-question survey to determine a person’s feelings of spirituality, or willingness to believe in supernatural phenomena. He found that those with an inclination for religiosity tended to share a gene called VMAT2. Nicknamed the “god gene”, it purportedly dictates the flow of mood-altering chemicals in the brain, and determines one’s level of belief in religious experiences.

I first accepted this research with a sense of mild dread. I assumed, forgetting that the devoutly religious tend to eschew all scientific or logical prospects, that the religious would respond to this discovery as a palpable sign that God exists. It seemed like a perfect opportunity for classic religious circular logic, the same used to “prove” the significance of the Bible: We know God exists because we believe in him, and we believe in him because he wants us to.

Even Dr. Hammer used this train of thought. In an interview shortly after his discovery became public, he said, “Religious believers can point to the existence of god genes as one more sign of the creator’s ingenuity - a clever way to help humans acknowledge and embrace a divine presence.”

However, the religious community did not embrace Hammer’s findings. Christian reviewers of Hammer’s book on the subject labeled it as bad science, and claimed that he didn’t define ‘spirituality’ properly. Theologists said Hammer just couldn’t isolate nature from nurture, despite findings in Hammer’s study suggesting that upbringing has no influence on spirituality. High-ranking Church officials simply rejected Hammer’s findings outright. Dr Donald Bruce, director of the Church of Scotland, had this to say about Hammer’s findings:

“I regard his claims as scientifically ridiculous. There is absolutely no such thing as a god gene. The whole point is that God makes himself available to all equally.”

The religious have always had a common tendency to believe whatever they desire, and ignore all evidence otherwise. We’ve certainly seen this trait before. But why do the religious reject this finding? What do they find so offensive and threatening about it? Doesn’t the “god gene”, as Dr Hammer said, serve well in their argument for God?

Not exactly. First, as Hammer explains in his book The God Gene, the gene VMAT2 and the brain chemicals it controls determines one’s sense of spiritual transcendence, or a Nirvana-esque emotion that makes a person “feel” a connection to God or some other supernatural force. This not only equalizes all religious from Christianity to Buddhism, it describes religious epiphanies as a typical reaction of brain chemicals, like any other strong emotion. Religious leaders find this understandably threatening, because it likens the touch of a “higher power” to mere superstition, strong emotion, or even nonreligious meditation.

Next, the discovery of a “god gene” completely devalues the importance of a religious environment. The religious right speak vehemently about the importance of a solidly Christian society to form a strong moral backbone and mold our children into upstanding, devout youth. They also make the claim that the heathens among us have come from warped, father-less, unstructured families with no access to religious guidance. If religious belief comes from genes rather than environment, this ideal Christian society does not matter at all.

Last, I suspect religious leaders find this discovery threatening because it does the same thing to religiosity that Hammer’s previous finding did to the understanding of homosexuality: it removes the myth of choice. If we accept the implications of the “god gene”, then we believe and devote our lives to religion because of genetics, not because of individual desire for piousness. We cannot commend someone for great faith, just as we can’t condemn anyone for their sexual orientation, because both boil down to a matter of genetics. A smug, holier-than-thou sense just doesn’t work when one’s holiness sprouts from a few excess brain chemicals.

This entry was posted on Sunday, July 9th, 2006 at 2:43 pm and is filed under Meaning of Life, Religion, Science. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.