Yeah, damn her for wanting a family and hoping against hope that her children could survive and enjoy their life.
Religion, what's the point?
- Thread starter TheRedFlag
- Start date
This is not about hope. It's about hard facts and professional medical advice. What's the point in risking it over and over again if you know your children keep on dying because of the same disease? How's that even fair on the children?!
I'm not about to tell someone whether they should or shouldn't be procreating due to a genetic disorder. A horrifyingly difficult decision for any parent, I can imagine. Far harder than the one of whether to permit a treatment that can cure said disorder, which the churches have as usual stuck themselves on the wrong side of history in answering. "Moral authorities" indeed.
"But in a letter to the Guardian, 40 scientists from 14 countries said the technique offered "some affected families the opportunity to have healthy children".
They said the UK had run an "exemplary and internationally admired process" to consider the issue since 2007, and they called on Parliament to approve the proposed change.
"The UK hosts a world class team at Newcastle University developing this technology, which is ideally placed to be among the first to treat patients," they added."
My point was that these are the people I want making tough decisions on such issues. I don't see why church leaders get involved in such matters if they carry no greater moral compass than anyone else. If they think it is wrong then they shouldn't undertake the process and let those who believe it is correct get on with it.
There seems a mismatch between the way you want religion portrayed as self doubting and humble and this reality of self appointed moral watchdog which gets on my nerves.
The most odious comment is from the Catholic Church because it outlaws contraception which would be the way the poor lady in question could control the number of births if she chose to.
Sorry, I didn't get to comment on that part. Yes, no idea why 'the church' had to give their opinion on this, personally I think it's something I'm quite up for and have no issues with. My comment about the women which kept on having children despite her knowledge of the disease still stands, however.
You mean the realist in you.
I'd like to hear a religious person's response to this. @oates? (you're the only one who comes to mind)
The only possible response is 'God works in mysterious ways', which is of course a complete cop out and the reason why theism is dying a painful death in the Western world now that religion can no longer force itself on most people.
In this hypothetical scenario, does God get to answer the question?
I can't play the video for some reason. Does anyone mind paraphrasing the question and the context behind it?
Ok what would an atheist say if they met God at the pearly gates? What did S Fry say?
The weekly show features discussions about the purpose of life, religion, and afterlife. A clip released ahead of Sunday's screening saw Fry discussing his views on God as an atheist.
“Suppose it’s all true, and you walk up to the pearly gates, and are confronted by God,” asked Bryne. “What will Stephen Fry say to him, her, or it?”
The 57-year-old replied: “I’d say, bone cancer in children? What’s that about.
“How dare you? How dare you create a world to which there is such misery that is not our fault. It’s not right, it’s utterly, utterly evil.
“Why should I respect a capricious, mean-minded, stupid God who creates a world that is so full of injustice and pain.”
Byrne’s second question, “And you think you are going to get in, like that?” only served to fuel his fervour.
"But I wouldn't want to," Fry insisted. “I wouldn't want to get in on his terms. They are wrong.
"Now, if I died and it was Pluto, Hades, and if it was the 12 Greek gods then I would have more truck with it, because the Greeks didn’t pretend to not be human in their appetites, in their capriciousness, and in their unreasonableness… they didn’t present themselves as being all-seeing, all-wise, all-kind, all-beneficent, because the god that created this universe, if it was created by god, is quite clearly a maniac… utter maniac, totally selfish.
“We have to spend our life on our knees thanking him? What kind of god would do that?
"So, atheism isn’t not just about not believing there’s a God, but on the assumption there is one, what kind of God is he?”
Somewhat staggered by Fry’s answer, Byrne said: “That sure is the longest answer to that question I ever got in this entire series.”
I've always thought that if a God did actually exist, it may not have actually created all the horrible things he talks about, but could have created the basics of what we have and then everything came from there. So there could be a creator and evolution too.
You want me to compete with Stephen Fry? Well obviously in that moment Stephen has suddenly become a believer but presumably as an atheist there's no-one to question is there? Do atheists worry about why disease exists? Sure, we all know that there are diseases that seem 'evil' in a sense, we can all find ourselves saying 'that is so cruel, why should my brother/sister/wife/etc go through this?' - even religious people. We don't know, you don't know, maybe we'll find out. It'll be one of the first questions I have.
There's the good v. evil stuff, the 'we all have to die from something', the sensitive balance in our ecology, everything has its place in our ecology etc etc. I don't know which to choose and yet I still believe.
I choose not to read this thread these days tbh, I don't like some of the comments but I accept that people have a right to express themselves but the ridicule seems is a bit harsh sometimes, so be kind. I'm a believer, I'm a spiritual person, I'm not perfect as many on here would attest to however this is my contribution because you asked, it isn't a very good answer but I do believe. I still believe after my first wife died from a brain tumour, I believed through the four years it took her to die and yes, it was very very cruel. Of course I asked, demanded answers, I railed, I demanded, I begged, I demanded, I offered to swap places, I screamed, and I accepted. So one day I'll know. One day another person close to me may die and hopefully I'll still find solace in my belief because it does bring peace and hope. So, maybe people would understand that I'm just being polite and trying to answer your question, because you asked. I don't think it will change anyone's mind, not this very poor answer, I don't think forums change people's minds but in truth something that happens to you one day might change your mind.
I meet and hear about so many people, young people mostly suffering from depression, struggling to find meaning in their lives. And yet we are finding science answering so many questions about our world now, we seem to be getting closer, maybe only a bit closer to answering all of the questions. And yet people are no happier. I do wonder sometimes if the less mystery we have the more unhappier we become. I don't know if that is true though, but I suspect there may be a grain of truth in it.
God as absentee landlord? That's not the Judeo-Christian-Islamic god.
Exactly. It's deism as opposed to theism. So it would still make the meeting at the pearly gates a nonsense question.
I cringed so much watching that Stephen Fry video.
Didn't know you were a scholar of Abrahamic faiths.
I don't believe in any of the religious views of God. But I do wonder why no ever seems to think there could have been a creator at the beginning and everything since then has happened naturally. Not that I believe that either, just think that if there was a creator then it is a more likely scenario.
Plenty have thought that, it's "deism", there's just nothing to make us think it's a correct interpretation and it would also have no accompanying moral implications on the way we live our lives.
Scholar would be pushing it but I can still recite bits of the catechism and sections of the tridentine mass in Latin.
You don't need to be a scholar to know that that isn't what the Abrahamic faiths consider to be god.
I'm curious, why did you cringe?
I think you do. Does your knowledge of all 3 faiths allow you to ascertain the nature of God? To say so casually that the Abrahamic God is xyz is the first mistake because you're making too many assumptions.
I can't speak for Judaism or Christianity, but in Islam the only 'nature of God' we know is that He is One and that He has 99 attributes. Everything else scholars who have dedicated their whole life to the topic still debate it.
Edit: my post is specifically about trying to rationalise or contextualise God.
- If God exists, then God is omnipotent, omniscient, and morally perfect.
- If God is omnipotent, then God has the power to eliminate all evil.
- If God is omniscient, then God knows when evil exists.
- If God is morally perfect, then God has the desire to eliminate all evil.
- Evil exists.
- If evil exists and God exists, then either God doesn't have the power to eliminate all evil, or doesn't know when evil exists, or doesn't have the desire to eliminate all evil.
- Therefore, God doesn't exist.
So the Islamic faith doesn't claim to be the one and only god?
It doesn't claim that following certain rules gets you eternal life?
It doesn't claim that God intervenes in human affairs?
I don't know how anyone can be honest and say that a god who creates the universe and then can do nothing for billions and billions of years fits into any of the major organised religions.
And that position is tenable, logical and though I don't believe it, I wouldn't argue with it from a strong position. However it doesn't move anyone any further on because it leaves us completely on our own, which makes all the religions lies in there belief that we have an interaction with such a creator.
Sucker for punishment eh pete?
Pete, give it a rest man.I'm not entirely sure. It just seems very juvenile. For something he believes does not exist, he doesn't half appear bitter towards it. The whole 'bone cancer in children' thing too was just not needed, it was quite Daily Mail. It could be because it reminds me of let's say a 14 year old me, discovering Atheism and thinking you're the smartest person in the world, becoming very arrogant in the process. Thankfully I grew out of that, but your smarmy vocal Atheist types like Gervais really do grind my gears. Fry isn't as openly smarmy as say Gervais, but I still get that arrogant undertone from it. All in all, for a bright man I think he made himself look like a bit of a plonker.
Do you mean Islam claims God to be the only God? Then yes it does.
It does.
Nope. Following the Qu'ran and the Prophet Muhammad (SAWS), this is the end of revelation.
I haven't claimed that.
He was asked to put himself in a hypothetical scenario where it turned out to be real, and responded in kind. Plus it's not like the religions exist in vacuum without affecting people, he's gay and has probably been told he's an inhuman moral outrage by religious folk more times than you can shake a stick at, and I'm sure he does retain some bitterness in that.
Yeah sorry, I didn't think I was the first to think such a thing, just that I rarely hear it mentioned. But I guess thats because everyone is talking about religion.
Yeah, it wouldn't be related to any religion I know of. But it's certainly a lot more logical than any of them.
It sounds similar to the beliefs held by a few of the early Christian heretics, who subscribed to a sort of neoplatonic dualism.
I've said it was the end of revelation i.e what's been revealed to us (through the Torah, Bible, Qu'ran through the different Prophets and Messengers).
Predestination, and the events of time from the inception of the universe to the end of everything is entirely different, and is what Ghazali alludes to. Which is a whole different debate entirely...!
It is surely an important element of the context underlying a question such as "does God intervene in human affairs?"