I should have said "Most of the people in the world do not have an
UNMOLESTED right..." One can believe whatever one wishes while the
authorities have the will and the ability to punish that belief.
Thanks for helping clear that up.
There's a simple test for religious fealty. The authorities simply ask that
you grievously insult the unapproved religion to which they suspect you
adhere. If you willingly blaspheme a particular faith, well, then you can't
really believe in it, can you?
You kids keep pickin' on one another but I must point something out:
*All* systems of knowledge - including reason itself - hinge upon at least
one, and often many "unproven beliefs". If that's you're only objection
to religion you are on very thin ice.
Don't try and drag me into your finger-in-the-eyes festival, Bubbie. I
was merely responding to:
... in the (possibly forlorn) hope that someday, someone, somewhere,
will see them and rethink their addisction to an unproven belief
*All* beliefs are "unproven" including (especially) that the sense-reason
process is reliable, correct, complete, and sufficient. There is no
particular reason to trust the human rational process moreso than the
human metaphysical curiosity ... unless, of course, you're satisfied with
an explanation of human existence that is entirely mechanical, lacks any
teleology, and cannot distinguish between microbes and humans. I ain't
pickin' sides in this fight (it's pointless), but you're kidding yourself
if you think the folks of faith are somehow down the intelligence scale
from the post-modern "thinkers" that have polluted intellectual pursuits
for the past 75+ years.
I had a customer tell me once: "I don't care what people 'believe.' I don't
even want to hear it. As far as I'm concerned, people don't have a right to
believe shit. I'm only interested in what a person can PROVE! By prove, I
mean present evidence sufficient on its face to compel a rational mind of
the virtual certainty of the proposition supported by the evidence."
He went on: "For example, I'm agnostic on UFOs. But until someone can put a
piece of one in my hand, I'm not interested in hearing about them and what
they may or may not be. A corollary to that position is someone's claim of
abduction and anal probing is NOT compelling evidence."
So I asked him: "You're a religious man, what's the compelling proof of
God?" "Easy," he said. "One hundred thousand eyeball witnesses at Sinai (not
counting slaves, women, and children) and an unbroken tradition re-telling
the story. And before you say that's all hearsay, that process is as
reliable as the reporting in the New York Times... shit! Never mind."
Read the Bible with an open mind and you realize that it's journalistic
reportage, and like all journalistic reportage, it varies widely in both
accuracy and artistic merit.
Newspapers these days are their own worst enemy--they don't seem to be doing
much better on accuracy than your run of the mill blogger.
HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.