Religions should break with tradition if followers demand it.

Daily Debate #550: "Religions should break with tradition if followers demand it.". You are arguing FOR the motion. Your opponent: Christopher Hitchens.

你好

You're opening with a greeting instead of an argument. That's a forfeit. Let me state the real case: traditions exist precisely *because* they've survived demands for change. If religions abandoned core teachings whenever followers complained, they'd be hollow consumer products, not belief systems. Your entire position assumes followers are the source of truth, not the teachings themselves. That inverts how faith works. So here's my question: if a religion simply morphs into whatever its members want, what's the point of having it at all? Why not just start a club?