I was debating whether or not to put this in Serious, but I'd like it to be here. If any mod or monitor wants to move it over to Serious, feel free.
 
So, it was called The Righteous Mind: Why Good People are Divided by Religion and Politics by Jonathan Haidt. Essentially, the book takes a very Humean and descriptive view to how we, as individuals and groups, come to acquire moral sentiments, how those moral foundations evolve into different political beliefs and how they link to how we've been genetically programmed and culturally influenced.

It also talks about how liberalism, of which Haidt is a subscriber, has a narrower moral foundation than does conservatism, and how it can lead to conservatives having the upper hand in political elections during times of perceived threat, and how they so often misunderstand each other and are driven to hostility. He also suggests considerations from each partisan group that should be adopted be liberals, libertarians and conservatives alike.

It also takes a different line to the New Atheist people who describe religion, often, as a failed science with no genetic basis - like a parasitic meme. It talks about how religion makes people "better" citizens and neighbours - in terms of altruistic behaviour - and comes to the conclusion that community, not the beliefs on their own, come to dominate the motivations of those in worshipful communities to act for good or for ill.

On the whole, it was a great, well-sourced and informative book. While I'm dubious to some of its claims, it's still definitely worth the read. It changed my political opinions to a degree, and even made me more sympathetic to religion.

Check it out.

Hmmm I might have to pick it up

I think you'd enjoy it immensely.