Ongoing Replies to Mr. Jager
[should Mr. Jager modify or clarify a position, I will modify the following as I see fit - suggestions are welcomed.]
Mr. Jager has been polite and fair (and also helpful - providing me with some photos of Alaska) - I hope to follow that example.
Mr. Jager starts by agreeing with me on church/state separation issues.
He does not address at all my two main points:
His only specific response to me says that I miss the point on his use of "mind virus" - and we seem incapable of even agreeing on where we disagree in this area. I suggest the following spectrums of religious opinions (using Christianity as a frame of reference):
I KNOW there is no god and anyone else is superstitious,
weak, mentally ill, etc.
I doubt there is no god
I don't know if there is a god
If there is/was a god - it does not care about us or has died
(Death of God theology after the Holocaust)
...
I believe or hope there is a god and respect the teachings of
Jesus
I believe in something like the Christian God but have many
doubts about the details
I worship the Christian God and accept the Bible as a tool to
guide me
I KNOW the one true God and know the answer to every
difficult question and anyone else
is following Satan, evil, unenlightened,
etc.
My discussion of Mr. Jager's use of the term "mind virus" was based on the observation that he focuses on the last group (and, in particular, the large subgroup that inherits their "knowledge" from their parents and other religious indoctrination). I assume (because there is no elaboration available in his writings) that the term mind virus is used to describe something that can spread rapidly from person-to-person, something that may gain an advantage by playing on a weakness of the "host", something that weakens the host, etc. Mr. Jager describes the symptoms of this virus as being unreasonable, closing oneself to facts or other ideas, etc.
My observation was and is that on either end of the spectrum above, you find virtually identical behavior. The people on the ends of the spectrum KNOW they are right and believe that anyone who believes differently is a) evil / stubborn / ignorant or b) illogical / superstitious / stubborn / ignorant. Applying a pejorative like "virus" to one group and not the other is illogical. Arrogant atheism (my term for "I KNOW there is no God") spreads from person-to-person, takes advantage of a person's cynicism and/or over reliance on the self and closes them to experiencing spirituality.
Mr. Jager's only guidance to resolving our differences is to refer me to a website hawking a book describing "mind viruses" and "memes" ( a best-seller! spreading like a virus! ). Sorry, if the author defines his terms in such a way that unreasoning by one group is good while unreasoning by another group is bad - I don't have much interest.
Mr. Jager added:
"And, a person may ask, "What does all this ranting have to do with the separation between Church and State?"
He goes on to explain that (some) Christians attempt to get money from the government, etc. and "As long as, Christians continue to force their religion onto the public, I and others like me, will continue to point out the absurdities of the Christian religion."
Well, he is welcome to try - I believe that my arguments on
this and other pages make it clear that religion is only absurd to those who
have their own religion (faith in themselves and the lack of a God). I
cannot hope to convince every Christian to stop pushing religion into secular
areas - so I guess I'm stuck with reading Mr. Jager's wild interpretations, exaggerations
and generalizations of Christianity.
He specifically links to something covering RLUIPA which, in part, protects
churches from land-use decisions that other organizations are subject to.
It shows that while we may agree on church/state separation - we may disagree on
how that is managed. I believe that religious organizations need
protection from secular authority (a church wanting to open a soup kitchen
should not be treated the same as a McDonald's) AND that churches need to be
sympathetic to their neighbors. I'm sorry, Mr. Jager, but separation of
church and state was not meant solely (or even primarily) to protect the
government from being used by churches - but also to protect churches from
government interference. And that does imply that churches have a
different relationship with the state than other organizations (which is a large
part of what the American Atheists page objects to). So if you want to be
an atheist who fights the government treating religion as a special area - fine
- just don't pretend you value the Constitutional separation of church and
state.
One last observation...
"I want that meme (to) help me to think logically and apply some reason in my thinking process. Morality based on reason is by far superior to morality that is based on the superstitious emotion of religion."
Any morality based on reason is superior? Is that a statement based on logic or reason?
email me at doug@hardts.net