Watched Too Much TBN Today

If ever there was a reductio of intelligent design, it's the appendix.

Belief is something that cannot be sanctified by argument or evidence. Death is the elimination of consciousness. No matter what your religious belief, whether you have a soul or not, death is the finality of your ability to chose. If you get thrown to heaven or hell you experience such pleasure or pain that thinking no longer takes precedence. Religion may anethisizes us against our fear of death, but it has to be conceded that death destroys essentially what you are.

So most of us form our moral identity around our religion. We're all born into this experience where we are constantly seeking happiness. What we get, we lose - it's a given. We're just trying to find out how much happiness can be enjoyed by one being. Applying a code as defined by a religion allows/tries for happiness in this life and beyond.

O.K.

But if the bible really is the wisest book we have, we would be beating our kids and stoning women. We should be taking an eye for and eye. You can put your faith in our 21st century ethics or refer back to the 1st century outlook.

There's a rush to say that without religion, what's to prevent us from killing each other?

Look at the UN index. They categorize nations by everything. The most aethiestic societies are some of the ones with the lowest murder rate. I'm not making it up. Netherlands, Canada, Sweeden. There is no evidence to suggest that a heavier grouping of religion would make for a healthier environment.

I'm not insinuating that there would not be wars without religion. There's still tribalism, nationalism, racism, etc.... but the extremes of people killing other people because they think their religious creator wants them killing in his name might taper off. There's a word for not being religious, but seems to be no need to create a a word for 'Not being a Dentist' or 'Not Being An Enthusiastic Motorist'.

I know there is no greater conversation starter then faith. And what I'm writing probably stopped most of you at the top. But there needs to be an understanding of religion that is as clean as scientific studies. We need to understand this in a way that does not rely on divisive superstitions. Everytime a scientist says 'I don't know', religion rushes in with God to fill the gaps.

These are the same people that will say "There is nothing you can say that will change my mind" when it comes to their faith. Imagine that kind of response in medicine. That no matter what argument or evidence was presented, you could not sway another scientist. How corrosive would that be to reasoning? That sort of stubbornness is toxic. Your faith in one thing was so strong that you refuse all other forms of reasoning.

Dinosaur bones anyone?

Which leads to me to say that the moment you start to sound reasonable enough to start shaking someone's faith, you get demonized for trying to tempt them. Going counter of their dogma. Well, damnit, sometimes I just want to speak what I feel is painful obvious and the truth. I shouldn't be brow beaten for it.

I don't want to be burned at the stake either.

Reminders for class: Who let's me talk?