|
From: <or...@vp...> - 2004-01-28 17:29:36
|
Hi all! Michael C Urban wrote: > I didn't say you did. I was simply responding to the thing about > prejudice. You can call it prejudice if you want. But I call it reasone= d > anti-christianity, and I have a lot of reasons for being against > christianity. As a biologist who has leared from experience that humans > and other animals are really not different from each other except in > certain evolutonarily developed traits, I find christianity's idea that > humans are above all the other animals to be morally repulsive. I also = am > not very fond of the fact that christians are always sticking their nos= e > in places where it doesn't belong, so that we have to fight tooth and n= ail > just to get anything done or accepted in science because christians who > don't know what they are talking about, and don't understand even basic > biological concepts, have powerful lobbying groups that try to undermin= e > science. (Did you know that as late as the 1960s, it was still illegal = in > some areas for teachers to teach Darwin's concepts of evolution in > classrooms?) >=20 > So call it whatever you want. But I don't call it prejudice when I can > historically document my reasons for being opposed to christianity. I don't think this is the right list to express your hatred against=20 christianity. If you think science is the privilege of anti-christians, I should point=20 out that a good majority of great scientists was, and even today are=20 religious (at least in Europe). Even I study on a religious University,=20 where we learn molecular and neural biology, and computer science (or IT=20 for short). You might take a look at the site of my University and read some of it's=20 papers to understand how Fides et Ratio can work together: http://www.itk.ppke.hu/index_e.html -- Greetings, Bal=E1zs John 3:15 |