Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Science attempts to explain religion and God via evolution. Isn’t that special…

For the record, this article does not reflect my beliefs.

1 posted on 03/21/2005 11:57:22 AM PST by Heartlander
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: Heartlander

Well, look at it this way, if true, God picked you before you got here.


2 posted on 03/21/2005 12:03:00 PM PST by edcoil (Reality doesn't say much - doesn't need too)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Heartlander

Interesting how the MSM are trying to hold on to their "values" while reporting more frequently about religion. It's like they KNOW they have to, but they can't quite bring themselves to do it.


3 posted on 03/21/2005 12:04:09 PM PST by Darkwolf377 (Agnostic for life)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Heartlander

""I believe God brought him to my door,"


I don't, anymore than I believe that God brought this a$$clown to slaughter 3 innocent people in the process of bringing him to her door.


4 posted on 03/21/2005 12:05:37 PM PST by Blzbba (Don't hate the player - hate the game!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Heartlander

I am looking at the name of the author, and wondering how anyone can hope to have a career as a credible journalist with a name like Amanda Onion!

Amanda B. Rekkenduith, perhaps.


6 posted on 03/21/2005 12:06:58 PM PST by Atlas Sneezed (Your FRiendly FReeper Patent Attorney)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Heartlander



This is our version of Social Darwinism. Now, it's genetics.


7 posted on 03/21/2005 12:10:18 PM PST by LauraleeBraswell ( CONSERVATIVE FIRST-Republican second.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Heartlander
My question has got to be how many Millions of taxpayer dollars were dropped on this worthless piece of scientific doggerel? This article is laughable.
8 posted on 03/21/2005 12:12:20 PM PST by SouthernBoyupNorth ("For my wings are made of Tungsten, my flesh of glass and steel..........")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Heartlander

I didn't detect any use of the "E" word at all. This article was primarily about psychology and genetics. It basically outlined the nature vs. nurture aspects of religious participation. I don't believe there was anything inflammatory or controversial about this article. Nor were there any beliefs reflected.


10 posted on 03/21/2005 12:16:34 PM PST by Redfox
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Heartlander

It would make a great book title, anyway... "The God Gene".


11 posted on 03/21/2005 12:24:09 PM PST by thoughtomator (Death to Terri! Death to Israel! Death to the Great Satan!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Heartlander
I have a tendency to believe the premise of the article.

I was adopted. Growing up I knew I was Catholic, I knew that Catholicism was the way I should express my beliefs. I wanted to go to Catholic School, but my parents said "but honey, we're Baptist".

As an adult, I converted to Catholicism. Then, due to an inheritance put back for me from my biological family, I had the opportunity to meet them and discover a bit of my origin.

They were all Greek Orthodox. I know nothing about the Greek Orthodox Church except its catholic nature.

Maybe I was genetically programmed, maybe not - but definitely worth a thought or two.
14 posted on 03/21/2005 12:44:28 PM PST by hushpad (The Slippery Slope? The Judiciary passed it a few miles back.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Heartlander
Roughly, this accords with my experience.

Many people I respect report “spiritual” or “religious” experience, while some others , myself included, seem to have the potential for this sort of experience to a only very limited extent, if at all, my impression has always been that “spirituality” was an innate capacity in much the same way that some people are profoundly moved by music, and others not.

Similarly, it’s always seemed to me that being disturbed by someone’s ability to experience (for example) “divine presence” or not makes about as much sense as being upset with someone who responds differently than I do to a particular piece of art - I may be convinced that someone with the inability to respond as I do to a painting that “speaks to me” is poorer for it, but I don’t suppose that I can convince them that my experience is somehow more “real” or “accurate” than their own – only that it’s different.

And wonder: if we are eventually able to demonstrate an underlying neurological basis for the experience of “spirituality”, will “spiritual” or “religious” people find it easier to accept the lack of such experience as a normal aspect of the human distribution of “talents”, or conversely will the “non-spiritual” find it easier to accept the reality of such spiritual experience for those who are prone to discover it.

And I also wonder how we might eventually find that a propensity to “spirituality” is correlated to a propensity for “religious belief” - for example I know people who would characterize themselves as very “spiritual” but who are not much attracted to any of the organized systems of religious belief, and adamantly “secular” who are attracted to organizations professing “belief systems” which seem to have a lot in common with organized “religions”.

The only thing I'm sure of is that such a demonstration would likely upset at lot of people of both sorts.
17 posted on 03/21/2005 1:32:43 PM PST by M. Dodge Thomas (More of the same, only with more zeros on the end.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson