On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 22:04:53 -0700, Patrick Elliott wrote:

> Well, this is one common argument. That the good outweighs the bad of
> it. But, you just described in pretty clear terms above that it *isn't*
> doing them all that much good at all, even if they spend a lot of times
> telling themselves it is, and feeling all warm and fuzzy about how
> everyone agrees with them on the matter. But no, arguing with someone
> too far gone isn't productive at all. One is forced to simply hope that
> something happens to jar them into questioning matters, and hope that it
> is, how ever much you would prefer otherwise, painful enough that they
> truly question why it happened. Some people never escape, such as the
> people in one church recently that where betrayed completely by their
> priest, and didn't just leave, they closed the church. Some of them
> might take a real hard look at their beliefs. The rest will just dive
> head first into some nearby church with the same sort of leader, the
> same double standards, the same comfortable lies, and 10-20 years down
> the road it will happen all over again.

Actually, for my mom (and let me state clearly - she is not a member of 
the LDS church - I realise I might've been unclear on that point, but it 
is the Lutheran church she's a member of), at her stage of life, she's 
not looking more at the evolution of life, but rather the end of hers.  
She's over 70 years ago, and my father passed away a couple years ago at 
89.  The church has given her comfort in losing my dad, and individuals 
in the church have counseled her through some extremely painful childhood 
experiences that she repressed for more than 50 years.  So when it comes 
to my mom's experience, you're damned right that the good outweighs the 
bad.  We're not talking about a church there that has people believing in 
creationism, we're talking about a church that - all pastoral issues 
aside - genuinely tries to help people.  That's a rare thing, in my view 
of religions.

I certainly won't deny her her beliefs because they bring her comfort at 
her stage of life.  She talks to me frequently about "when I'm gone" or 
"when I'm with your dad"; the subject makes me uncomfortable, because in 
all honesty the truth of our existence sure seems to be that we're flying 
on this rock through space, doing our thing, and then we vanish from the 
universe one day.  It might be a fire, it might be a disease, it might be 
a bus hitting us, but we're here one minute and gone the next.

If some want to believe in an afterlife or a God who has a greater plan 
for us, who are we to deny them if that brings comfort and meaning to 
their lives?

But like I said, that right to a world view stops at the point at which 
they try to impose it on others.  And I think this is the point at which 
your point of view and mine come together.

If someone wants to believe that God created the earth 6000 years ago, 
did it in 7 days, and it went exactly like the book of Genesis says, I 
won't begrudge them that belief.  If they ask what I think, I'll tell 
them I think they're insane for that belief because of all of the 
geological evidence to the contrary, and if they try to convince me I'll 
tell them to stop, because I have my own beliefs on the origins of the 
planet based on the scientific evidence.

If they want to put it in the schools, I'll fight it to my dying breath, 
because we need the schools to turn out people who have the ability to 
think and reason, and cramming creationism down students' throats does 
not give us that kind of populace.

> And, when 48% of the country thinks that evolution "is" invalid and
> creationism makes more sense, trying to point out to the gullible masses
> that the DI doesn't intend to stop with that, but to undermine
> ***everything***, just goes right over their heads.

Which is why I would fight that within my area as stated earlier, because 
we need to have thinkers.  Critical thinking skills in the US (in 
particular) seem to be at an all-time low.  Societally, we are, I think, 
fairly lazy when it comes to thinking and fact-checking, preferring 
instead to be entertained by reality TV.  At the same time at which 48% 
of the country thinks evolution is invalid and creationism is correct, 
even more significantly, a larger percentage of people vote on American 
Idol than do in the presidential race, and we end up with the fanatics 
dictating policy because the fanatics are the only ones who care enough 
to turn out to vote.  Everyone else is looking to see what trouble 
Brittany Spears or Linday Lohan are in.  (Great, now I need to wash my 
keyboard again, I've soiled it with those two names)

The problem here isn't religion (though it is perhaps a part of the 
problem), the problem is apathy, procrastination, and this need for 
instant gratification and constant entertainment like we're fresh from 
the womb.

Jim

Post a reply to this message