Quote:
Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet
I think the fact that religion historically has had a position of power and respect and the fact that it is now dwindling to the point of extinction in the UK religionists now feel threatened when anyone dares to question their "faith" or belief with no evidence.
50 years ago if you were very religious people respected you and it gave you status in your community, now it probably has the reverse role.
Thus we get the truths line about aggressive atheists and the like, its a common theme - indeed Dawkins, who is a mild mannered and thoughtful chap gets all this biollocks thrown at him!
|
Many years ago, in all ancient societies, the only way to acquire knowledge was by personal experience. This meant that the wisest members of such societies were invariably the oldest members, which in turn led to the formation of 'Council of Elders' or similar bodies.
Among other duties, the Council of Elders were available for younger citizens with problems, to consult with to receive advice, which led to a long tradition of the aged members of every society being the most respected by other members - especially the young.
As civilization has 'progressed' and become increasingly more technologically advanced, young people now have access to more knowledge at the touch of a button than one million old people (who mainly do not understand such technology) could ever acquire in a million lifetimes each.
This is one of the reasons why (even subconsciously) old people are increasingly no longer respected by a lot of young people - though there are, of course, many other reasons - and this is fair enough; the young now 'know it all'.
It is exactly the same with religion. Scientific advances and increasing technological knowledge now increasingly persuades that God cannot exist, so religion and people of faith are increasingly no longer respected by a lot of others - which is fair enough; modern man now 'knows it all'.
A lack of respect is one thing if it remains just that - live and let live, amicable agreement to differ - but unfortunately, it often does not 'remain just that' and increasingly, some young people do not only not 'respect' old people, but perceive them as weak, defenseless and legitimate targets to bully, intimidate, beat, rob, and murder.
Similarly, where religion and people of faith are concerned, some people who do not believe - armed by their 'scientific knowledge and convinced of the absolute truth of atheism - perceive believers, no matter how moderate, as legitimate targets to bully, intimidate and verbally assault.
The truth of this can be evidenced on various threads on this forum, where the sheer vehemence of some anti-religious posts is both irrational and unwarranted.
There really is no need. I personally could not give a hoot what someone believes or does not believe, or what their reasons are, because I believe in live and let live, and we are all entitled to our own personal views and opinions. Yet, where I have been drawn into discussions on religion, I have often been subjected to 'over the top' abusive counters and been repeatedly forced into a 'defensive' or even 'apologetic' stance, despite the fact that I have always tried to discuss civilly and in a non-confrontational manner.
Science is not always right. Einstein redefined Newtons 'Laws', and new scientific discoveries are constantly proving the lie of other scientific 'laws' which we once regarded as absolutes.
Dawkins' book is riddled with fallacies, inconsistencies and contradictions, and - in my opinion - it takes a greater 'leap of faith' to accept it in its entirety, than it does to accept the Judeo Christian Bible wholly literally.
I do not mind humour - even when directed at me or my faith - but there is a vast difference between gentle fun and 'herd instinct' mockery and ridicule from multiple people.
I would love to write a comprehensive post on the very many logical reasons behind my decision to become a (non-orthodox) Christian, but I just know that instead of rational debate and discussion, it would descend into the usual melee.
Anyway, in my opinion, 'The Truth' is correct in a lot of his complaints, though I agree that he can sometimes be perceived as being a tad extreme in some of his assertions, but perhaps that may be because he has become 'conditioned' by constantly being met with extremism from those who he has previously debated with.
Incidentally L.T. and picking up on another post of yours; Barack Obama is not an atheist - he is a devout Muslim.