So in
terms of religious convictions, he sounds more like Richard Dawkins than Jerry Falwell
Not exact matches
They had inculcated a deep sense
of sin and a conscious need
of personal salvation; they had overpassed national and racial lines and had made
religious faith a matter
of individual
conviction; they had emphasized faith in immortality and the need
of assurance concerning it; they had bound their devotees together in mystical societies
of brethren fired with propagandist zeal; and they had accentuated the interior nature
of religious experience in
terms of an, indwelling Presence, through whom human life could be «deicized.»
Posner even indicates some sympathy for those who want to prohibit those other abortions: «I do not mean to criticize anyone who believes, whether because
of religious conviction, nonsectarian moral
conviction, or simply a prudential belief that upholding the sacredness
of human life whatever the circumstances is necessary to prevent us from sliding into barbarism, that abortion is always wrong and perhaps particularly so in late pregnancy, since all methods
of late -
term abortion are gruesome....
I would be very curious to know how or why you believe my rather sarcastic use
of the
term «the
religious» as a means
of differentiating them from people
of sincere faith (ANY sincere
conviction btw — Not just Protestant) is «specious».
Self - criticism arises from the admission that all our formulations are partial and limited, coupled with the
conviction that there are criteria in
terms of which
religious beliefs can be assessed.
I am (a) A victim
of child molestation (b) A r.ape victim trying to recover (c) A mental patient with paranoid delusions (d) A Christian The only discipline known to often cause people to kill others they have never met and / or to commit suicide in its furtherance is: (a) Architecture; (b) Philosophy; (c) Archeology; or (d) Religion What is it that most differentiates science and all other intellectual disciplines from religion: (a) Religion tells people not only what they should believe, but what they are morally obliged to believe on pain
of divine retribution, whereas science, economics, medicine etc. has no «sacred cows» in
terms of doctrine and go where the evidence leads them; (b) Religion can make a statement, such as «there is a composite god comprised
of God the Father, Jesus and the Holy Spirit», and be totally immune from experimentation and challenge, whereas science can only make factual assertions when supported by considerable evidence; (c) Science and the scientific method is universal and consistent all over the World whereas religion is regional and a person's
religious conviction, no matter how deeply held, is clearly nothing more than an accident
of birth; or (d) All
of the above.
23] Above all realize that to become or to be a global citizen requires clarity,
conviction and courage to consider all life as One, or humility to accept every life is just a similar part / particle
of whole
of life which can be
termed as «Entity
of Life or Energy
of Life» as this terminology can steer clear
of any
religious connotations or theistic debates or ideological overtones or political undercurrents.