George W. Bush and the Almighty

Forums: Spirituality And Religion
Email this Topic • Print this Page

I'm not sure whether this belongs here or in the Politics forum. But, wherever it belongs, it's certainly worth reading and -- if you so choose -- commenting upon.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15566391/site/newsweek/

By Sam Harris

Newsweek

Nov. 13, 2006 issue - Despite a full century of scientific insights attesting to the antiquity of life and the greater antiquity of the Earth, more than half the American population believes that the entire cosmos was created 6,000 years ago. This is, incidentally, about a thousand years after the Sumerians invented glue. Those with the power to elect presidents and congressmen?-and many who themselves get elected?-believe that dinosaurs lived two by two upon Noah's Ark, that light from distant galaxies was created en route to the Earth and that the first members of our species were fashioned out of dirt and divine breath, in a garden with a talking snake, by the hand of an invisible God.

This is embarrassing. But add to this comedy of false certainties the fact that 44 percent of Americans are confident that Jesus will return to Earth sometime in the next 50 years, and you will glimpse the terrible liability of this sort of thinking. Given the most common interpretation of Biblical prophecy, it is not an exaggeration to say that nearly half the American population is eagerly anticipating the end of the world. It should be clear that this faith-based nihilism provides its adherents with absolutely no incentive to build a sustainable civilization?-economically, environmentally or geopolitically. Some of these people are lunatics, of course, but they are not the lunatic fringe. We are talking about the explicit views of Christian ministers who have congregations numbering in the tens of thousands. These are some of the most influential, politically connected and well-funded people in our society.

It is, of course, taboo to criticize a person's religious beliefs. The problem, however, is that much of what people believe in the name of religion is intrinsically divisive, unreasonable and incompatible with genuine morality. One of the worst things about religion is that it tends to separate questions of right and wrong from the living reality of human and animal suffering. Consequently, religious people will devote immense energy to so-called moral problems?-such as gay marriage?-where no real suffering is at issue, and they will happily contribute to the surplus of human misery if it serves their religious beliefs.

A case in point: embryonic-stem-cell research is one of the most promising developments in the last century of medicine. It could offer therapeutic breakthroughs for every human ailment (for the simple reason that stem cells can become any tissue in the human body), including diabetes, Parkinson's disease, severe burns, etc. In July, President George W. Bush used his first veto to deny federal funding to this research. He did this on the basis of his religious faith. Like millions of other Americans, President Bush believes that "human life starts at the moment of conception." Specifically, he believes that there is a soul in every 3-day-old human embryo, and the interests of one soul?-the soul of a little girl with burns over 75 percent of her body, for instance?-cannot trump the interests of another soul, even if that soul happens to live inside a petri dish. Here, as ever, religious dogmatism impedes genuine wisdom and compassion.

A 3-day-old human embryo is a collection of 150 cells called a blastocyst. There are, for the sake of comparison, more than 100,000 cells in the brain of a fly. The embryos that are destroyed in stem-cell research do not have brains, or even neurons. Consequently, there is no reason to believe they can suffer their destruction in any way at all. The truth is that President Bush's unjustified religious beliefs about the human soul are, at this very moment, prolonging the scarcely endurable misery of tens of millions of human beings.

Given our status as a superpower, our material wealth and the continuous advancements in our technology, it seems safe to say that the president of the United States has more power and responsibility than any person in history. It is worth noting, therefore, that we have elected a president who seems to imagine that whenever he closes his eyes in the Oval Office?-wondering whether to go to war or not to go to war, for instance?-his intuitions have been vetted by the Creator of the universe. Speaking to a small group of supporters in 1999, Bush reportedly said, "I believe God wants me to be president." Believing that God has delivered you unto the presidency really seems to entail the belief that you cannot make any catastrophic mistakes while in office. One question we might want to collectively ponder in the future: do we really want to hand the tiller of civilization to a person who thinks this way?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15566391/site/newsweek/

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Discussion • Score: 0 • Views: 3,584 • Replies: 78

No top replies

Quote:

more than half the American population believes that the entire cosmos was created 6,000 years ago. This is, incidentally, about a thousand years after the Sumerians invented glue.

I love the stark contrast in reality shown here.

0 Replies

littlek wrote:

Quote:
more than half the American population believes that the entire cosmos was created 6,000 years ago. This is, incidentally, about a thousand years after the Sumerians invented glue.

I love the stark contrast in reality shown here.

I find that figure really hard to believe. Do you know how it was arrived at?

Really, if true, it is quite terrifying because it betrays such an utter lack of critical thinking ability.

How can the US be so far behind the rest of the west re this stuff?

0 Replies

Quote:

One of the worst things about religion is that it tends to separate questions of right and wrong from the living reality of human and animal suffering. Consequently, religious people will devote immense energy to so-called moral problems?-such as gay marriage?-where no real suffering is at issue, and they will happily contribute to the surplus of human misery if it serves their religious beliefs.

That's SO true. I mean, come on, pick a crusade where there's actual suffering to alleviate, huh? It really gets me that there are whole crowds of people with all kinds of energy to campaign and protest and write letters complaining about tv shows and who marries who and whatever else gets them riled up, and meanwhile there are real problems and their energy could be put to real use. There should be some kind of 12-step program for these people, and everytime they had the urge to write a letter whining about Hollywood promoting smut, they'd be sent to work at an animal shelter or a soup kitchen for a few hours instead...

0 Replies

dlowan wrote:

littlek wrote:
Quote:
more than half the American population believes that the entire cosmos was created 6,000 years ago. This is, incidentally, about a thousand years after the Sumerians invented glue.

I love the stark contrast in reality shown here.

I find that figure really hard to believe. Do you know how it was arrived at?

Really, if true, it is quite terrifying because it betrays such an utter lack of critical thinking ability.

How can the US be so far behind the rest of the west re this stuff?

I have an aunt and uncle and cousins who believe that. People like that think they are using critical thinking-- they've seen right through all those lies about things like the fossil record and stuff-- and you're the dope for mindlessly believing those la-di-da scientists.

0 Replies

Quote:

This is, incidentally, about a thousand years after the Sumerians invented glue.

However, they disdnt invent the squeeze bottle for yet another millenium

0 Replies

Urim (Sumerian name--the bible thumpers tend to call it "Ur of the Chaldees," which further displays their ignorance, because the Chaldeans were much later) was probably a village by about 5000 BCE, so the metaphor which runs "about a thousand years after the Sumerians invented glue" is dramatically effective, but only technically true.

In the Ukraine, settlements of homo sapiens sapiens dating back to 35,000 BCE or perhaps even earlier, have kerfed boxes made from tree bark, leather and wood, which have been glued together on the open side with some form of glue, which was likely made from bones and hooves of game animals, given the available resources.

So the Sumerians didn't really invent glue, which had, literally, been around for tens of thousands of years before that. None of which, of course, means anything to the bible thumpers, who know nothing if they didn't read in the Bobble, and have it interpreted by Reverend Lovejoy.

0 Replies

Mr Harris has some interesting choices of words.

He decries those who are 'divisive'. What exactly would he prefer? Well, probably that EVERYONE should think ALIKE, namely, as HE thinks, no?

The 'human and animal suffering' that he makes reference to is a clear indication that he probably would grant animals nearly the same status as humans, or more practically , devalue human life to that of an animal.

This is further evidenced by his apparent willingness to allow unborn children to be produced for the sole purpose of experimentation.

The West cringed when it learned of the human experimentation forced upon unwilling subjects by German doctors during the '40s. But now the West seems completely willing to far surpass what they dared to do.

If he wants to convince us that these are 'non-persons' then he has to be able to show beyond a reasonable doubt when one DOES become attain personhood. This he has not done and cannot do.

0 Replies

real life wrote:

Mr Harris has some interesting choices of words.

He decries those who are 'divisive'. What exactly would he prefer? Well, probably that EVERYONE should think ALIKE, namely, as HE thinks, no?

The 'human and animal suffering' that he makes reference to is a clear indication that he probably would grant animals nearly the same status as humans, or more practically , devalue human life to that of an animal.

This is further evidenced by his apparent willingness to allow unborn children to be produced for the sole purpose of experimentation.

The West cringed when it learned of the human experimentation forced upon unwilling subjects by German doctors during the '40s. But now the West seems completely willing to far surpass what they dared to do.

If he wants to convince us that these are 'non-persons' then he has to be able to show beyond a reasonable doubt when one DOES become attain personhood. This he has not done and cannot do.

Example "A".

0 Replies

real life wrote:

The 'human and animal suffering' that he makes reference to is a clear indication that he probably would grant animals nearly the same status as humans, or more practically , devalue human life to that of an animal.

Oh, man. Yeah, one reference to animal suffering does say all that.

0 Replies

Sam Harris, whoever he is, writes rather cogently.

0 Replies

There are people who believe the universe was created 6,000 years ago. There are also people who believe the earth is flat. There are people who believe that mankind was created, literally, from a gob of mud. This is all fine and good. I wouldn't argue with anyone's personal beliefs, no matter how misguided. Danger lurks, however, when some of these people get elected to public office or seize power. One reason the Muslim fundamentalists tend to be dangerous terrorists is because their preferred form of government is a theocracy. I shudder to think what can happen to any Western country -- the USA in particular -- if similarly thinking Christian fundamentalists hold power.

0 Replies

real life wrote:

The 'human and animal suffering' that he makes reference to is a clear indication that he probably would grant animals nearly the same status as humans, or more practically , devalue human life to that of an animal.

Doesn't the bible talk of animal suffering?

Also, it's interesting that you don't try to argue against his point (which is that you and other Christians are more worried about Homosexuals than you are about poverty, starvation, genocide, etc) but you instead focus on two words (and animal) to create a fabrication so you can use it to argue against stem cell research. Truly amazing.

Quote:

This is further evidenced by his apparent willingness to allow unborn children to be produced for the sole purpose of experimentation.

Who is saying that we should 'produce' unborn children for experimentation?

The unborn children are already here and sitting in freezers. There is no need to produce anything. Stop trying to argue against a point that nobody is making.

0 Replies

Good for you, ma!

0 Replies

The member "real life" doesn't plump for Bishop Ussher's six thousand year exegesis, but he has stated on more than one occasion that he believes in a "young earth," on the order of thousands of years old, as opposed to a few billion.

What i thought was interesting was his remarks about "raising" animals to the level of humans, or "lowering" humans to the level of animals. This seems most likely to me to stem from embracing literally the contention that the animals of this earth were created for our use, and that they a "beneath" us--which entails an unwillingness to acknowledge that human beings are animals, and that there is not meaningful distinction to be made on such a basis. One might argue that our alleged complexity of perception makes us the pinacle of animal development, but we are still animals. To me, he simply provides an example of a species prejudice. I don't see anything wrong with preferring one's own species, but i do see something wrong with being willing calously to destroy other species based upon an unsubstantiated and bigotted belief that humans are a unique "creature" entitled to condemn other species to death on a whim.

0 Replies

maporsche wrote:

Also, it's interesting that you don't try to argue against his point (which is that you and other Christians are more worried about Homosexuals than you are about poverty, starvation, genocide, etc)

Abortion is genocide and I have strenuously opposed it. Perhaps you didn't know that.

0 Replies

real life wrote:

maporsche wrote:

Also, it's interesting that you don't try to argue against his point (which is that you and other Christians are more worried about Homosexuals than you are about poverty, starvation, genocide, etc)

Abortion is genocide and I have strenuously opposed it. Perhaps you didn't know that.

Have you done anything to stop it, or is talking about it the furthest you've been able to go? Also, is abortion the only genocide happening on earth? Have you done anything about the others? How about poverty or starvation? How about all of the other things the bible tells you to do?

0 Replies

But...what if the Christians are RIGHT??? What if the Earth IS only 6,000 years old??? And that story of Noah...what if THAT'S true too! And Adam and Eve! And...NAH!

0 Replies

maporsch, Real and his ilk are only interested in making laws to prevent women from the control of their own bodies. All other logical questions such as yours are always ignored.

They are as dangerous as fundamentalist Muslims trying to enforce their religious' beliefs on the rest of society. One uses guns, the other uses our democratic process, but there's very little difference in the results they seek.

0 Replies

Some use guns, too, c.i. It's not a novelty to hear of a birth control clinic being attacked by "Christians." Religious fanaticism is deadly dangerous, whether it's Muslim, Christian or any other misguided extremist group.

0 Replies

George W. Bush and the Almighty

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know