Can Religious Thought and Intellectual Honesty Coexist?

The dangerous folks, CI, are not those trying to save lives. The dangerous folks are those condoning the killing.

real life wrote:

The dangerous folks, CI, are not those trying to save lives. The dangerous folks are those condoning the killing.

The truly dangerous folks...Life...are the people pretending they are trying to save lives...when in fact what they are doing is trying to take away a woman's right to make decisions about her own body.

The only comeback you have is the way I present my statements? You're not only a hypocrite, but a dangerous one in your attempt to control other people's lives.

Frank Apisa wrote:

real life wrote:

The dangerous folks, CI, are not those trying to save lives. The dangerous folks are those condoning the killing.

The truly dangerous folks...Life...are the people pretending they are trying to save lives...when in fact what they are doing is trying to take away a woman's right to make decisions about her own body.

The truly dangerous folks...Frank...are the people pretending they are for a woman's right to make decisions about her own body when it is actually the killing of a fetus.

You are begging the question

...and here base your comments on a different definition of reason than what was implicit in your earlier argument.

Reason is a way of thinking, not an answer book.

I would say that reason, or rationality, is a way of thinking, a way of dealing with considerations, not a consideration in and of itself.

OK by me: nit picking is not my thing.

From Phoenix's first post, "IMO, the rational, reasonable person uses his intellect to judge what is true and what is false."

That is the dilemma of religion. The "outside" observer sees too many contradictions not only in the teachings, but also in practice. I really don't understand how all my siblings are able to reconcile their belief while they practice discrimination against gays and lesbians.

cicerone imposter wrote:

From Phoenix's first post, "IMO, the rational, reasonable person uses his intellect to judge what is true and what is false."

That is the dilemma of religion. The "outside" observer sees too many contradictions not only in the teachings, but also in practice. I really don't understand how all my siblings are able to reconcile their belief while they practice discrimination against gays and lesbians.

Hi CI,

One person's definition of what is and is not rational and reasonable is obviously going to differ from every other's. Talk about contradictions in theory and in practice.

The dilemma of atheism is that with each person deciding what he thinks is and isn't right, it's simply a paved road to anarchy. Instead of one God, you postulate six billion human gods covering the planet.

BTW is their attitude toward homosexuals any different than your prejudice against Christians?

.......... What you call prejudice against christians is your opinion, and you are free to use that term. I call it bias .............

The dilemma of atheism is that with each person deciding what he thinks is and isn't right, it's simply a paved road to anarchy. Instead of one God, you postulate six billion human gods covering the planet.