Kolek planning to go pro
Very well put
To me it seems that people want religion to be like a corporation and to modify their product to the consumer. I just find that an amazingly arse backwards way of thinking about something like religion, but not surprised either in this country. What if a bunch of young Catholics believe abortion is the cat's meow, should the church start to line up and have abortion clinics? It could be a two for one, have grandma come play Bingo on Tuesday night and drop her grand daughter off at the clinic right there on campus....everyone can be a winner.Whether I agree or disagree with the church's position on gay marriage, divorce, abortion, whatever, their role should be to decide what is right or wrong not based on what the "consumers" want.
Whether I agree or disagree with the church's position on gay marriage, divorce, abortion, whatever, their role should be to decide what is right or wrong not based on what the "consumers" want.
One of the Church's primary missions is to seek truth. When facts change, when science changes perception of reality, it is the Church's obligation, in seeking the truth, to adjust Her teachings to account for these realities, these facts.For centuries the Church taught the earth was the center of the universe, but when science disproved this notion, the Church had to adjust (although it took way too long).The Church's current teachings on homosexuality are rooted in misconceptions that science has disproved (homosexuality is a choice, a disease, is unnatural, even though it is not a choice, not a disease, and happens in nature). Thus, they need to adjust. Your abortion analogy holds absolutely no water. Science has not come through with some development that now allows for a justification of abortion. Religion should not conflict with science. They should compliment one another. Science answers how and religion answers why. They must be in concert. Religion must be grounded in reason and rational thought. This is central to Catholic teaching and Catholic philosophy.
Precisely why it's all bogus to begin with.
That's an entirely different discussion, but not really. Religion and science answer different questions.
1.) What question(s) does religion "answer"?
The reason that "consumers" want the church to change their views on homosexuality is that the church's views are based on a bunch of fictions from a bygone day. It's pretty obvious to anyone with half a brain that homosexuality isn't a "choice" or a disease from which one can be cured. The nonsense that underpins the church's position on homosexuality defies science and is an affront to common sense and common decency. But glad to know that they're "leading the flock" and basing their decisions on "what is right and wrong". LOL. They are decades behind the curve - thank God that some of their "consumers" are helping to drag them out of the ignorance, intolerance and bigotry that you don't think they should question.
It 'answers' questions that science can't quite fully explain and gives those needing assurance an avenue to direct their lives.Does that make it correct? No. Does it make it necessary? For some, yes.The issues are when science can fully answer a question, religion offers too much resistance instead of accepting the truth and incorporating that.
Okay I'll bite. 1.) What question(s) does religion "answer"?2.) If they're supposed to answer different questions, why does religion constantly attempt to answer a question it's unqualified to answer, then force-feed it as dogma?
That's pretty fair statement in my opinion. I would only add that "when science can fully answer" is subjective, but often portrayed as settled. Quite frankly, science should never be "settled" is what my dad brilliantly told me. Science is about the pursuit of truth and one may think what is known today in science is the truth, but it may not be 10 years later of 500 years later. The problem is when people say it is settled for reasons that have NOTHING to do with science, but solely on policy or politics or what have you. Even Einstein's work came out to have some issues in the last 2 years that was considered settled, but now proven not to be entirely accurate. As long as people understand this, all is good. When they say it's settled, they usually want to stop discussion and lock in on a result, not the continued pursuit of truth and knowledge.
Good points. If they are supposed to answer different questions, why are (religious) politicians constantly trying to add religious elements into scientific studies in our schools. Why do they want Creationism taught in science class if they are "supposed" to answer different questions.
So it's not "settled" that the earth revolves around the sun but a "good Catholic" should consider all homosexual sex an abomination until further notice. Right.
Religion that attempts to answer scientific questions, such as Christian Creationism, isn't only bad science, it is bad religion. I abhor and detest such "religion."Religion should not try to trump science. A rational religious person, hopefully such as those who attended a Jesuit university, does not deny scientific evidence. I love science. I embrace scientific theory, including scientific descriptions for the creation of the universe and everything else. The Bible is not a history book, nor is it a science book. It conveys Truth, but through myth and metaphor. This is the thing biblical literalists do not understand. But even if the Big Bang theory can explain "how" we are here, it cannot answer "why." It cannot answer the questions regarding the purpose of our lives, the meaning of existence, and other deep philosophical questions humanity has pondered for millenia. It will never be able to answer these questions. Will religion ever be able to fully answer these questions either? No. But it is one of the avenues (along with philosophical inquiry) that allows humans to pursue this Truth. One of my favorite Jesuits (other than Bob Wild), is Guy Consolmagno, who is a head of the Vatican observatory. He better than anyone knows how science and religion are mutually compatible. I encourage you to watch his TED talk: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kmU2gDbP_Tk
The way I have always viewed it is that God gave us minds for a reason.
Down 1 w 5 seconds left. Doable.
This makes me so mad I can hardly believe it's a real thing sometimes. Among thousands of other reasons, this is just one more that leads our education system to be severely hampered.