Can you argue with this?
If this rationale wins out in American society, how are we to argue? How do you present scientific evidence of a belief? How do you argue against a universal negative proposition? What are we to do? Or, is this similar to the villiage-athiest-egomanic-syndrome that has always plagued socieity, so there is no need for alarm? Response?
(Link in post)
(Link in post)
2 Comments:
I haven't looked at this guy's book - apparently he has written one - but, based on this little piece, he appears to believe two things quite firmly.
1. Anyone who holds a religious belief, especially the people he calls "Christians", are morons, and,
2. Morons pose a very serious threat to the happy and healthy existence of non-morons, especially non-morons (or maybe even other morons, as far as I can tell) who have been badly burned.
Ignore this horseshit. That is exactly what it is.
It's disgusting.
How can one justify equating a belief that the world was created in process with a willingness to kill thousands in a suicide attack?
And what the hell makes him think that a belief in the Second Coming is the cause of our society's inaction on environmental and energy issues? I suppose he hasn't heard of economics. And I also suppose he's using an electric car made entirely out of either (a) renewable resources like mud or (b) plastics created entirely from ethanol, and that he uses no non-renewable resources himself in any form.
And how is the number of cells relevant to the issue of whether life is worth protecting? If we are standing by and watching a moose goring a child to death, I suppose we should just let it happen, because more cells makes it more important.
If this is really the kind of idiot that is against us, then I would think that our job would be much easier.
Post a Comment
<< Home