Re: Religion Instead of Science

On 4 Jun 2005 09:53:28 -0700, "Googler"
<GOOGLE.4.godfatha@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:

>thomas p wrote:
>> On 3 Jun 2005 20:38:21 -0700, "Googler"
>> <GOOGLE.4.godfatha@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>
> >
>> It is good to see that you can admit your mistake.  Claiming that
>> something was not religious because not all religious people accepted
>> it was pretty amazing.  Can you name one belief that all religious
>> people do accept?
>
>

>That's a loaded question and you know it.

No, that is not a loaded question.  Your statement made little sense.
I tried to get you to see that.  Perhaps you do see it; that would
explain your reluctance to answer my very relevant question.

>
>Here is the only response. There are beliefs which are claimed to be
>"religious" that *are not*.  There are beliefs which are claimed to be
>"religious" that *are*.

And there are religious beliefs that are not shared by all religious
people.  It is hard to believe that anyone would actually reject that
rather obvious fact.

>
>If you don't have the personal knowledge to bracket those properly,
>that is your problem.
>
>I see no reason to involve myself with that.    I am not interested in
>the limits of your personal belief system at all, nor is that the issue
>here.


I agree, and I never brought that subject up.  Why you think anyone
did is beyond me.

>
>I *am* interested in any evidence of anti-religion bias, however.
>Because, to the extent that someone may be of part of the scientifc
>community, such evidence would sup****t the contention I have stated
>here.

The fact that someone does not want creationism taught in public
schools is not evidence of anti-religious bias.  Many religious people
are also against the idea.  


>
>A specific question here, as taken from the title of the OP article, is
>whether creationism is implied by religion.
>
>The evidence that it doesn't is readily at hand - if one cared to look
>for it.

Nobody has made that claim.  Creationism is a religious belief.  Just
like most other religious beliefs not every religious person in the
world believes it; just like every religious person in the world does
not believe that Jesus was divine, yet that belief is also a religious
belief.  In short religion does not imply creationism, but creationism
does imply religion and has nothing to do with science.

>
>That being the case, posing "Religion Instead of Science" is a false
>dichotomy and an example of anti-religious bias.


Teaching creationism along side of or instead of the theory of
evolution would be setting up a religious belief as if it were a valid
scientific theory.  Whether or not the belief is true, it has nothing
to do with science, since it is not sup****ted by any objective
testable data.  That is not anti-religious, on the contrary it is the
position of more than a few religious people; some of whom happen to
be teachers of biology and active Christians, Jews etc.

>
>I think you are astute enough to know that.  Is your posturing here a
>result of an anti-religious attitude?  I'd like to know.

What a lovely personal attack.  It is rather like asking if you still
beat your wife.  It is not honest; it is very transparent, and, of
course, it has nothing to do with the topic under discussion.





Thomas P.

"Life must be lived forwards but understood backwards"

(Kierkegaard)