A sub-division of oldpunks.com

Friday, November 18, 2005

Science And Religion

The Intelligent Design debate is an inevitable controversy that wouldn't exist if both sides would just calm the fugg down. Bible literalists reject any science that goes against The Book while atheists believe the existence of science disproves the existence of God. Both side are nuts because while one the one hand literalists can't brush off all empirical evidence backed by reams of, uh, science, atheists have no proof there is no God. Religion is a science based on faith and atheism is a faith based on science. Ben Weasel once sagely wrote, "Science and Religion are not mutually exclusive". Hell, what if God created all science?

I'm a professional agnostic, so like sock puppet Cindy Sheehan mine is an absolute moral authority. I like religious people but am against proselytizing, which is condescending. Atheists are fine too as long as they hold back their bile, because as a group they're the most hateful and genocidal people I've come across, and it's often directed against family members, which means they're letting me know they live in Dysfunction Junction. As an agnostic I can also just shake my head and move on to more intriguing topics, like what a new Doc Savage movie should be so it doesn't suck like the last one.

The most excellent columnist Charles Krauthammer weighs in with Phony Theory, False Conflict 'Intelligent Design' Foolishly Pits Evolution Against Faith and then how about this: The Vatican's chief astronomer said Friday that "intelligent design" isn't science and doesn't belong in science classrooms

Here's the lyrics to Screeching Weasel's "Science Of Myth":

if you've ever question beliefs that you hold you're not alone but you oughtta realize that every myth is a metaphor in the case of christianity and judaism there exist the belief that spiritual matters are enslaved to history the buddhists believe that the functional aspects override the myth while other religions use the literal core to build foundations with see half the world sees the myth as fact while it's seen as a lie by the other half and the simple truth is that it's none of that and somehow no matter what the world keeps turning somehow we get by without ever learning science and religion are not mutually exclusive in fact for better understanding we take the facts of science and apply them and if both factors keep evolving then we continue getting information but closing off possibilities makes it hard to see the bigger picture consider the case of the women whose faith helped her make it through when she was raped and cut up left for dead in a trunk her beliefs held true it doesn't matter if it's real or not cause some things are better left without a doubt and if it works then it gets the job done somehow no matter what the world keeps turning


Blogger Robert G. said...

I'm not sure why god is something that has to be disproven. There's no evidence that an invisible leprechaun ISN'T sitting on my shoulder, is there?

I think it might be fairer to say that atheists live their lives AS IF god didn't exist.

8:07 AM

Blogger Richard said...

I think a lot of atheists are atheists more for moral convenience than anything else.

7:49 AM

Blogger Robert G. said...

Unlike everyone else, of course, Richard. Never heard of religion being used as a crutch?

8:22 AM

Blogger Richard said...

You mean a moral crutch for lack of a personal moral belief system? Certainly, if that's what you're getting at. I have a problem with atheism being the universal belief system of the "anything goes I'll do what I want" crowd.

6:50 AM

Blogger Robert G. said...

Well, that's more like nihilism, isn't it.

7:39 AM

Blogger Richard said...

I guess nihilism can be even more of a religion than atheism depending on who's talking.

9:53 AM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

The pic of Cindy Sheehan in another one of your pieces clinches it for me - she HAD to be the creation of intelligent design - nothing like that could have just evolved from primordial ooze right?????
Why is there no theory of stupid design? Or mediocre design?

8:33 AM


Post a Comment

<< Home