I am not declaring an heavy-fire rebuttal, nor am I doing a aggressive counter-attacking critique. By position and standards, I am no way on par with his credentials, nor expeirience he has within the academic realm. Thus, I do not suppose I am academical ready to attempt such a feat unto such an article, nor do I suppose the case is academically appeaseable in the first place - that shall be my main crux - so, it is not a point-by-point debunking to the raised propositions, as of course, I would like to explore the implicit mindsets and views behind the prose, and speak on the issue rather than the article. By no means am I trying to put up a stance for any side, although personally, I have no qualms nor shame about admiting that I am belong to the ones cited by Dawkins as the 'religious lobby' - I am a Christian, and one who believes that christianity is not something to live with, but to live for. Of course, the arguement will be that christianity is not a lobby, nor an opinion to be considered by the same barometers attached to assesments and perspectives - but lest I infuriate by the skepticism that will inevitably come through the observation of such as 'mystical' and in Dawkins' terms, 'unscientific', I shall have no dispute with that.

A truth will go through a few stages of skepticism - Laughther. Mockery. Violent Objection. Ending finally with the nice ending of meek acceptance through an a-ha revealation, or an ending that sees a rejector that floats around agressiveness to fear. Not limited by any boundaries - it can be a domestic truth. A historic truth. A scientific truth. A truth that has major consequences, a truth that doesn't really matter if anyone knows about it. However, possiblities and doubt have reduced humans into being creatures uncapable of such attainment - reducing them into creatures that can only believe . We all have indicators for such a phenomena to happen, we have our justifications: structures, systems, models, senses, observations, experiences.. Justifications have been placed into the jars sometimes and then assessed on have strong they are, and within that scope, we have built up another perpection to what is justified-justified, and what is not-really-justified, to what is ridiculously-justified. We have used some abilities (abilities, which I will question how they came to be constructed in the first place) we have to do this - the power of common sense. The strength of reasoning. Logic. Rationalising. Thinking. Working it out. These handles are perfect to hold onto because everything makes so much sense (a deeper construct that was crafted within us that respond towards the excercising of these abilities) when we apply them to situations.

But what are these abilities really about? What is logic? What is reason? What is working it out?No, I am not moving into the sceptic's arguements and fuzzing out the justifications that are by 'observational standards' concrete and hard truth. By no means am I saying science contridicts religion, nor am I saying that they are at odds at each other - they can fit perfectly without any dispute over the fundementals of science, besides a few infuriated scientists that may cry heresy due to their immediate assumptions of the associations it will have to higher beings, and that that can't be - but to adopt such a framework, if A's mental capacity is appeased by a certain forumulation of logic and reason, while B is only able to accept another type of logic by his 'mental standards' - which is the one who is higher on the intellectual bar? If both justifications are reasonable, and can be explained to the point of logical soundness, why should we favour one faith over the other? Why would we want to be only appeased by a certain way of academics, but not another way - when one cannot claim a superiority over the other, unless man enters to impose it?

Perhaps, a speical 'respect' is dealt to religions. Maybe, a particular aura of prejudice is allowed because one claims that his or her religion says this and this. But, we can't really help it if people don't question the rationales and claims behind them and instead, hold an assumption of the rationale and claims. But then again, thats not my point in this, afterall the ones involved in 'religion' as we see it today, are people = humans = man. Religion can be but a structure and a system, rather than a philosophy adopted based upon one's mental acceptance of reasonable justification. One can blame religion for the pain if he is allowed to be removed from the gel of political corretness. My point is really, why assume that we assume a certain manner of approaching the situation. Religion in today's context is not playing its politics well, I agree. Some insistutions and organisations and people that weave their way in it are not doing a healthy job, I agree. But it is behind all these 'organisations' that the cruxes of the religious beliefs exist. Behind all interests, intentions and actions that all the meanings behind the beliefs stand for.

There is more behind the facade of religiosity - and I were to do my own 'Time to Stand Up' I'd do it against just that. Why does religion get the stares? Why do such beliefs get thrown into a corner and considered 'narrow-minded', unthinking or the easy way out of things? Why does the 'religious resoultion' and the looking-towards God get considered as not wanting to think, when it is probaly easily appeaseable in many's mental capacity that man are unable to help himself in things he doesn't have control over. Why does it suggest laughter and ridicule? Why does it get looked upon as bothersome, and then ignored?

Yes, religion probaly looks very cheesed up now, and as much 'respect' that it may get, such is only a surface swipe to appease. The inner sentiments, the deeper appreciation and actual thinking-over-it is really what matters. And in such a case, I don't think the popularity polls will generate good results.

In any case, what I suggest here is not to assume that another party is assuming something, and thus attach a label to it. Really, it can work the other way anytime.



Now - for a breath I tarry
Nor yet disperse apart -
Take my hand quick and tell me,
What have you in your heart.

Speak now, and I will answer;
How shall I help you, say;
Ere to the wind's twelve quarters
I take my endless way

... a mind forever
Voyaging through strange seas of thought, alone

-- Some poetry by A.E. Housman which was in the book a Devil's Chaplain by Richard Dawkins

Though I never did the entire 'action' of joint sticks presentation (I did hold onto a few for awhile..) the world still seemed like it was engulfed from smoke by burnt incense in the span of those 3 days.

Like the smoke and dust that hint so strongly at delusion and attempt to blind harshly so one can close their eyes and silence their visibility to what will happen next, the rituals seemed to be trying so hard to serve such a purpose.

And so is Respect, the purpose's representative concept. Excuse, till the coffin is burnt away in the fires.

So eventually, humans do attempt to convince themselves to accept....
Or at least, they try to.

Man, the rational creature. Man, the emotional being.
Thousands of times, the creature has mused over himself.
Thousands of times, the being has questioned its being.
To live by purposes. Abide by directions. Order
to dictate choices.
Sakes
to dominate decesions. To find value. Assume standards.
Wants to satisfy. Needs to appease. To discover truth.
To align paths. Rules to follow. To break. To recreate.
Moronic ironies like respect after death. Finding
appeasement. In culture. By tradition.
Excuses.
Vital. Peripheral. Confusion.

---

_Past

June 2004
July 2004
August 2004
September 2004
October 2004
November 2004
December 2004
January 2005
February 2005
March 2005
April 2005
May 2005
June 2005
July 2005
August 2005
September 2005
October 2005
November 2005
December 2005
January 2006
February 2006
March 2006
April 2006
May 2006
June 2006
July 2006
August 2006
September 2006
October 2006
November 2006
December 2006
January 2007
February 2007
March 2007
May 2007
June 2007
July 2007
August 2007
September 2007
October 2007
November 2007
December 2007
February 2008
March 2008
April 2008
May 2008
June 2008
July 2008
August 2008
September 2008
October 2008
November 2008
December 2008
January 2009
February 2009
March 2009
April 2009
May 2009
June 2009
July 2009

---