...I drug the dead horse in myself, too. Despite knowing full well the horrific tale of Miguel Servetus,* I got into an argument about religion.
For the record: I don't care what you believe or how you believe it, as long as you don't use it to push other people around. Whatever it is you believe in, I don't; not because I think it is evil or necessarily wrong (just unprovable) but because whatever it is in you that responds to the thrilling tales spun by preachers and the various and sundry rites and rituals of your faith, I haven't got. (I can't dance, either). It's like being tone-deaf or totally colorblind.
All I have to go by is the output of the process and the effort invested; I will point out that even for most people so inclined, time spent in work is greater than that spent in religion by roughly ten to one and the work produces a hugely larger tangible result.
Most of the religious appear themselves to be made very happy by their practices and no sane, decent person would begrudge them that. If they'd all treat others as they wish to be treated, it would be a happier world.
Given my 'druthers -- and in this place and time, I am free to follow 'em -- I'd rather invest my time in science and technology. How you -- peaceably! -- spend your time is your own business. My approval is not required and my censure is meaningless, especially if you're certain $DIETY is on your side.
Still -- how many meals has religion fed you and how many has science and technology? Can you prove your figures? I believe in what I can measure; it may not be better (doubtful) but it's all I have to work with.
* Slow-roasted. Go read the linked article, wonderfully written by a 19th-Century theologian with a low opinion of all the principal players.
One Evening On Kansas II
1 week ago