Separation of Belief and Reason
It occurs to me that I should write a follow up essay to deal with conflicting belief. After all, there are quite a number of beliefs out there, and few see eye to eye. How to settle conflicts in these instances can be tricky, because no one likes their feelings hurt.
Determining a default belief is difficult. Which belief has seniority? Saying no belief has seniority pisses off some individuals, because it's seen as atheism and, to them, a belief. This is just silly. As an atheist, let me set the record strait. Atheism isn't a belief, but a lack of belief. It's no more a belief than not believing in leprechauns is a belief. It's the opposite of a belief, because it requires the atheist to do nothing. While beliefs and leprechauns have equal standing, their importance is to the believer. Not being officially supported by the state doesn't make them less important.
As for the argument the US was founded on Christianity, more attention should be payed to the Constitution. Article I contains the establishment clause, that clearly states no religious institutions will be given power over others. To do this requires them being equal, hence none having any power. Balancing religious influence can be tricky, and secularism might be the best way to go about it. Thomas Jefferson was the first to call this the separation of church and state, so, yes, our founding fathers did have this in mind.
Elsewhere in the world, beliefs and religion have other standing. One event overseas that disturbs me is the enacting of Sharia Law in Britain. Now, a British Citizen can opt to be tried in a special religious court, and judged on religious laws. Frankly, this is dangerous, having a double standard. It provides a foothold for other religions to have their religious courts.
Now, why should beliefs not be given special rights? Mostly, because it can be very dangerous. One may choose to believe in the Hogfather or whatever, but belief is more than the affirmation of existence. Everyone takes on an ideology. These ideologies, however, should not dictate the world, but ourselves. What is at stake? The foundation of modern society.
Global warming has been a contentious issue for over a few decades now. There are good arguments on both sides, except for one fringe side. That is the idea that we can piss on the earth, because God will come back in our lifetime and make stewardship of the planet unnecessary. This is shortsighted in many many ways. Firstly, twenty percent of the country is non-Christian. No group is an island, aside from Nogroup Island off the coast of Maine. What one group does affects the other, and doing a disservice to society can be short sighted in the long term, especially in this case, if one turns out to be wrong in either time frame, or the return of God, everyone's descendants suffer.
Now this is where belief really takes a toll, because science as it is today, has no room for belief and the supernatural. Science requires everything to be objective. So, for individuals who come in with an agenda of creationism, their belief threatens to destroy exactly what science is. An individual may believe that the world was created six thousand years ago, and one man carried two of all the worlds animals on a boat for forty days. All the same, an individual should not expect their belief to be given special privilege by the scientific community. Further, teaching creation “science” does a disservice to school children, stagnating rational thinking and promoting an atmosphere of intellectual dishonesty.
Belief isn't bad, it can be used for great things. But it has a place, separate from state and science. There's no reason to have to choose between the two, some secular individuals have beliefs in gods, as well, but can maintain a separation of belief and reason. Even we atheists believe.
Determining a default belief is difficult. Which belief has seniority? Saying no belief has seniority pisses off some individuals, because it's seen as atheism and, to them, a belief. This is just silly. As an atheist, let me set the record strait. Atheism isn't a belief, but a lack of belief. It's no more a belief than not believing in leprechauns is a belief. It's the opposite of a belief, because it requires the atheist to do nothing. While beliefs and leprechauns have equal standing, their importance is to the believer. Not being officially supported by the state doesn't make them less important.
As for the argument the US was founded on Christianity, more attention should be payed to the Constitution. Article I contains the establishment clause, that clearly states no religious institutions will be given power over others. To do this requires them being equal, hence none having any power. Balancing religious influence can be tricky, and secularism might be the best way to go about it. Thomas Jefferson was the first to call this the separation of church and state, so, yes, our founding fathers did have this in mind.
Elsewhere in the world, beliefs and religion have other standing. One event overseas that disturbs me is the enacting of Sharia Law in Britain. Now, a British Citizen can opt to be tried in a special religious court, and judged on religious laws. Frankly, this is dangerous, having a double standard. It provides a foothold for other religions to have their religious courts.
Now, why should beliefs not be given special rights? Mostly, because it can be very dangerous. One may choose to believe in the Hogfather or whatever, but belief is more than the affirmation of existence. Everyone takes on an ideology. These ideologies, however, should not dictate the world, but ourselves. What is at stake? The foundation of modern society.
Global warming has been a contentious issue for over a few decades now. There are good arguments on both sides, except for one fringe side. That is the idea that we can piss on the earth, because God will come back in our lifetime and make stewardship of the planet unnecessary. This is shortsighted in many many ways. Firstly, twenty percent of the country is non-Christian. No group is an island, aside from Nogroup Island off the coast of Maine. What one group does affects the other, and doing a disservice to society can be short sighted in the long term, especially in this case, if one turns out to be wrong in either time frame, or the return of God, everyone's descendants suffer.
Now this is where belief really takes a toll, because science as it is today, has no room for belief and the supernatural. Science requires everything to be objective. So, for individuals who come in with an agenda of creationism, their belief threatens to destroy exactly what science is. An individual may believe that the world was created six thousand years ago, and one man carried two of all the worlds animals on a boat for forty days. All the same, an individual should not expect their belief to be given special privilege by the scientific community. Further, teaching creation “science” does a disservice to school children, stagnating rational thinking and promoting an atmosphere of intellectual dishonesty.
Belief isn't bad, it can be used for great things. But it has a place, separate from state and science. There's no reason to have to choose between the two, some secular individuals have beliefs in gods, as well, but can maintain a separation of belief and reason. Even we atheists believe.