Info Archive

[ Donate :    Dian Fossey Gorilla Fund    Save The Rhino

<Prev Next>
Subject: Re: religious tendencies ( 25 of 47 )
Posted by Simon

They have observed the realities of existence and accepted its trials and triumphs, confident in their heroic acceptance of meaninglessness.

They have observed many of the realities of existence and none of those observed depend upon anything beyond nature.

They live by their own rules, faithful that they will see all without bias, knowing that objectiveness can truly only come from within.

This is true, though the rules are those produced by the scientific collective and objectiveness is the natural product of a skeptical approach.

Following the ancient, outdated doctrines that have carried the feeble for thousands of years is surely nonsense. We are nearly in the 21st century now. Modern society has thrown these shackles and can't you see what an improvement it is?

Modern society has not thrown these shackles. Millions of people still follow a course mapped out by institutionalised fairy worship, a course that forces sectatrianism between different faiths.

We don't need to discipline our children.

Of course we do because they are not "small adults" and we cannot "give them guns". Religion is no prerequisite for child rearing, though.

Don't deny yourself for there is no "ultimate responsibility". The only truth is what feels good now. This is clearly self-evident and needs no further proof.

Responsibilities, again, are no more a property of a religious society than they are of a secular one.

No, they carry on through the darkness, illuminated by their ability to penetrate the slavish notions of others.

OK, I deserved that. I do owe Krissy an apology.

And then they die and that's it, proud in their hearts that they have worked and struggled to kept themselves alive as long as they could.

Proud in their hearts that they have worked as hard as they could to make the time that they and others had together as rich as possible without empty promises of another try.
<Prev Next>

[ Back to thread list ]


(c) 2001