Quote:
Originally Posted by Guest
Dear Guest: you state your position succinctly well, objectively and with little judgment. Your demeanor tells me you are a good and moral person. But may I posit that in the secular world it seems bad actors always want to be top dog be it government or as egomanatic, god.
Some would argue that religion and science have co-existed through the ages. both are based on faith and both require repetition/consistency to remain viable.
In the case of Justice Scalia would you trust him more if he were of a secular mind rather than humbled by his belief in God?
Certainly we have had bad actors who in the name of religion have committed very bad acts. But on the other hand and this is especially true of Christianity more good has been accomplished.
I do not deal in absolutes but this nation was built on Judeo-Christians beliefs and the founders incorporated these concepts into our Charters of Freedom.
So in my view we must defend Freedom OF Religion and not confuse it with Freedom FROM Religion
None of us know the truth but if God did not exist I would have thought it a good thing to invent him because while not perfect God seems to bring out the best in man.
Personal Best Regards:
|
Perhaps this dialogue will be useful. Please read your post as it might appear to an atheist like me. Your claim that in a secular world evil people take control is wrong. You can certainly name some non-religious people who are evil and took control... Pot, Stalin for example, but I can name evil people who are performing their acts of evil because of their faith, as can you. You, I am sure, are very aware of the sad history of both Eastern and Western religions being the justification for war, slavery, slaughter, political and economic malice. And one need not go back to the Crusades nor the Spanish Inquisition for Christian examples. So the claim that it is preferable having leaders come from people of strong faith is wrong if they are using their particular book or their particular god(s) in their decision making.
Your next posit that science and religion are twins as both are faith based is errant. It is true that both have unknowns. But science and only science is disprovable (until we get a time machine). People of faith will tell you that there is no evidence, no study, no photograph, no document, nothing that will alter their belief. It will be a trick played by others to test their faith. Science tests, retests, tweaks and modifies. Science is mutable and fallible. Religion is immutable and infallible. Justice demands that evidence be examined and considered in making a decision. Religion demands that all observations fit a preconceived endpoint.
Justice Scalia has never seemed humbled to me.
We completely agree that our Western democracy has evolved from other Western institutions and ideas and prior governmental failures, including the failure of our own early country. And I will strongly support your freedom of religion whether it be Christian or Wiccan or anything. I want you to just as strongly support my freedom from your religion or any other religion being promoted by my government, and that when you enter government service you leave your holy book at home and use our laws to govern. That you decide what is Constitutional based on the Constitution not on Leviticus.
And lastly, while your invention of a god may bring out the best in some, it also brings out the worst in some. And yes, I think I am a moral and good person. If there is a god and there is a heaven which is meant as a reward for living a moral life here on earth, and I'm not allowed into heaven because I failed to accept a doctrine, then there is something very wrong with the entry requirements into heaven.