"God is not the problem"
A "guest columnist" (e.g. a local citizen with a gripe) published in today's Seattle Times makes the following assertions:
Rather, I wish to point out to people of faith, especially of the Christian faith, that it is articles and sentiments like these which leave the rest of us stunned. Lack "allegiance to anything that smacks of virtue"? My first sentiment is that I wish something that smacked of virtue had a reason aside from greed and dominion.
The article counts among the things I find offensive about religion. Ms. Kane-Wood has, in fact, at least part of a point: God is not the problem. She's right. It's myopic, selfish believers such as herself who refuse the logic of civil virtue.
At present, I'm waiting for Bill Maher's website to post the transcript from the August 22, 2003 show. Bill addressed a simple fact about the "ten commandments as the basis of law", when pointing out that, in America, less than half of the commandments come to law.
But in the end, I feel like I'm looking at a single, central issue: Is the only reason to behave in what society deems is a virtuous manner truly your obligation to God, or is it perhaps possible that there are more logical considerations--including a degree of greed--that compel us toward virtuous behavior?
Edit: I highly encourage people, in addition to considering participation in this topic, to visit the Seattle Times website and let them know what you think. The article link should get you close enough.
A "guest columnist" (e.g. a local citizen with a gripe) published in today's Seattle Times makes the following assertions:
The author "chimes in from Auburn". Strangely, in my youth, we had a bad joke about "Auburn girls". To me, this article is so Auburn, Washington that I can't quite explain it to you. Nonetheless, this is not about location or stereotypes of people from a podunk backwater with a stick in its ass.
Rather, I wish to point out to people of faith, especially of the Christian faith, that it is articles and sentiments like these which leave the rest of us stunned. Lack "allegiance to anything that smacks of virtue"? My first sentiment is that I wish something that smacked of virtue had a reason aside from greed and dominion.
The article counts among the things I find offensive about religion. Ms. Kane-Wood has, in fact, at least part of a point: God is not the problem. She's right. It's myopic, selfish believers such as herself who refuse the logic of civil virtue.
At present, I'm waiting for Bill Maher's website to post the transcript from the August 22, 2003 show. Bill addressed a simple fact about the "ten commandments as the basis of law", when pointing out that, in America, less than half of the commandments come to law.
But in the end, I feel like I'm looking at a single, central issue: Is the only reason to behave in what society deems is a virtuous manner truly your obligation to God, or is it perhaps possible that there are more logical considerations--including a degree of greed--that compel us toward virtuous behavior?
Edit: I highly encourage people, in addition to considering participation in this topic, to visit the Seattle Times website and let them know what you think. The article link should get you close enough.
