Replies

Yep, indeed it was, but it is also the truth, in a roundabout way.

But to take offense at evolution for it is rather amusing to me. And to say that Atheism is a religion is rather amusing as well, but other then that, we are on the same page.

Evolution is the best scientific theory at this point to explain the evidence, to say that it isn't, is ridiculous, but to say that it is the absolute truth is ridiculous as well.

The only people that seem to have a monopoly on the truth are those that have religion, and are fanatical about it.

Evolution is not a religion. Those that defend evolution, understand that it is the best scientific theory to explain the evidence, and I say that with all candor and confidence.

Sorry Ichneumon, but I have to post this again, it is just too good!!

Thank you Ichneumon, It's perfect for this thread!!

I love it!

"Those that defend evolution, understand that it is the best scientific theory to explain the evidence, and I say that with all candor and confidence."

I have no dispute with that at all. In fact, sure, I'll agree wholeheartedly, there is currently no other theory that satisfies scientific criteria as well as the theory of evolution does.

"Evolution is not a religion." Not exactly, no. But some people do worship it as part of their religion. I guess it all depends on what your definition of "religion" is ;)

I think there's various levels of defining "religion":

Step 1: Religion is a system of beliefs. (Wirestripper's)

He's absolutely right. And indeed, religions, and atheism, and the theory of evolution all fall under this criteria. Which may mean it's too broad. Let's try and make it more specific.

Step 2: Religion is a system of beliefs that attempts to explain how we came to exist.

This does narrow it down, all mainstream religions do take a stab at answering this question (not sure if Tao or Buddhism do, tho I tend to think of them more as philosophies). To the question of "How did we come to exist?", the Catholic says "God" and almost all Atheists would say "Evolution". Even most agnostics would at least say "Evolution was involved".

So you are right, evolution is not a "religion". But for the hardcore atheists... the ones for whom Atheism is a religion, evolution is not itself the religion but the center of worship, just as God is not a religion but the Catholic religion's center of worship.

But we're still too simple. I think there's a step 3 to defining religion which is, in my mind, most accurate:

Step 3: Religion is a system of beliefs that attempts to explain HOW -and/or- WHY we exist.

This is where atheism becomes unique as a religion. All other religions (and now we include Taoism and Buddhism) do indeed attempt to answer WHY we exist, but atheism doesn't. Atheism doesn't even try. Atheism is purely concerned with the How.

The fact that atheism doesn't even attempt to explain Why is what troubles me about it. In the vacuum that renders life as generally purposeless, with survival and self-gratification as the only potential purposes inherent in it, it is clearly going to be devoid of social obligation.

Since social obligation is a requirement of civil society, atheists attempt to form philosophies to explain why human behavior should be expected to rise above that of animals. Secular Humanism is one good example. Marxism is another. The problem, though, is that with no answer to the "Why?" question that mandates consistent civility, morality becomes completely fluid. Ethics become completely subservient to convenience, and the ends always justify the means. And if the civil society that provides the reason for those philosophies breaks down, the beliefs that justify not killing and generally humane behavior are completely disposable - whereas even without society the religious person's moral inhibitions survive.

You undoubtedly have heard a litany of the atrocities of religion, particularly the Catholic Church. Me, I think the Church has had more than enough enemies (Protestantism, Communism) to have generated a tremendous amount of propaganda against it, and most of the "atrocities" I've read about haven't held up to close scrutiny. But FOR THE SAKE OF ARGUMENT, let's accept that they're mostly true.

You've heard a whole bunch of people point to the atrocities of religions past and claim that that clearly demonstrates that religion has a worse track record than secularism. What they completely fail to address is the fact that secularism and atheism as a basis of society are newborn infants compared to religions. They have 6,000 years of recorded history to track the sins of nations and men ruled by religions to find all the dirt among all the good. Societies based on secularism and atheism don't even historically register until at most 300 years ago, and ever since their track record since then has been almost universally atrocious.

With states that mandated adherence to atheism (China, the Soviets, etc. etc. etc.) and actively forbade religious expression, there has existed wholesale slaughter on scales never before seen in history.

In the secular states that were less hostile to religion and permitted it's free expression, their worth as governments pretty much directly contribute to the respect toward religion within that culture. Take France of the 18th century. This is the secular government that in an orgy of anti-religious bigotry put a whore on the steps of the Bastille and crowned her the Goddess of Reason, while the guillotines dropped day and night. Meanwhile the United States, with a very strong respect among it's population for religion, has a pretty excellent track record for prosperity and civil society among it's people. Meanwhile, today's France, which is mostly secular, lets 15,000 of their elderly die during a heat wave while everyone's off on vacation and never even seems to acknowledge that this was a bad thing. Certainly no qualms about putting the same environmental policy into the EU Constitution that also kept them from putting air conditioners with freon that would have saved almost all of those lives.

Religion has been a massive civilizing force in world history. Without it, we'd still be killing each other with clubs and spears because there would never have been a reason to civilize in the first place. The evils under it's rule have existed but they have also been self-correcting. The arguments against slavery (and the impetus to go to war over it) were completely based on the Christian philosophy of all humans as equal under God. Actually, contrary to the propaganda, the Church as an institution was always stridently opposed to slavery as far back as the 14th century.

The reason slavery went on is not -because- of religion, as so many anti-Christian bigots claim, but because everyone ignored the Church that spoke out against it, just as abortion goes on today because everyone ignores the Church.

I am certain though that if society eventually comes to universally believe that abortion is abhorrent (as slavery is universally abhorred today), after the propaganda mill of those with a grudge are done, they will look back and claim "Organized religion didn't do enough to stamp out the horrors of abortion". Exactly like today's propaganda claims that Pope Pius XII didn't "do enough" about Hitler when the truth is that during the several years that Hitler was unopposed, he was the ONLY one brave enough to speak out against him -at all-. That's the unjust irony of the way that religion's history is viewed through atheism's lens.

Qwinn