<p>
</p>
<p>Yes, basically. The separation of church and state has become a fantastic political achievement.</p>
<p>not mutually exclusive
both important</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I don’t understand why people think that a lack of religion is equivalent to being detached, heartless and loveless.</p>
<p>Religion AND science.</p>
<p>And by religion, I mean Catholicism, not the other fako ones. :p</p>
<p>
I think that has an unintended alternate interpretation.</p>
<p>Only because of my egregious typo. Consider a comma ex post facto inserted between the two modifiers.</p>
<p>Is the conflict between science and religion only in Christianity or does it exist in other religions as well? As far as I know, there is no conflict between science and Hinduism</p>
<p>GOD: The creation of a sick fantasy. Inhabitant of senile and impotent brains. Companion and comforter of rancid spirits born to slavery. A pill for constipated minds. Marxism for the faint of heart. </p>
<p>HUMANITY: An abstract word with a negative connotation, long on power, short on truth. An obscene mask painted on the mean face of a shrewd vulgarian for the purpose of dominating the multitude of sentimentalist idiots and imbeciles.</p>
<p>COUNTRY: Penal servitude for the semi-intelligent, a cowshed of imbecility. A Circe who transforms her adoring fans into dogs and pigs. A prostitute for the master, a pimp of the foreigner. Child-eater, parent-slanderer and scoffer at heroes.</p>
<p>FAMILY: The denial of love, life and liberty.</p>
<p>SOLIDARITY: The macabre altar used by capable comedians of all sort to display their priestly talent for reciting masses. The beneficiaries pay nothing less than 100% humiliation.</p>
<p>FRIENDSHIP: Fortunate are those who have drunk from its chalice without having their souls offended or poisoned. If one such person exists, I urge them to send me their photograph. I’m sure to look upon the face of an idiot.</p>
<p>LOVE: Deception of the flesh and damage to the spirit. Disease of the soul, atrophy of the brain, weakening of the heart, corruption of the senses, poetic lies from which one gets ferociously inebriated two or three times a day in order to consume this precious but stupid life more quickly. And yet I would prefer to die of love. It’s the only swindler, after Judas, that can kill with a kiss.</p>
<p>MAN: A filthy paste of servitude, tyranny, fetishism, fear, vanity -and ignorance. The greatest offense one can commit against an ass is to call it a man.</p>
<p>WOMAN: The most brutal of enslaved beasts. The greatest victim shuffling on earth. And, after man, the most responsible for her problems. I’d be curious to know what goes through her mind when I kiss her.</p>
<p>^You seem the cheerful sort.</p>
<p>You don’t have to choose between the two.</p>
<p>^^^ OMG OMG OMG The Devil’s Dictionary! That place is hilarious. Ambrose Bierce was awesome. He has a cool sounding name too.</p>
<p>
Expand on that please. I don’t believe it’s possible.</p>
<p>The answer is me. I win.</p>
<p>Realistically, imo, Science Wins.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I see no true conflict between Christianity and Science, assuming that fanboys from either side do not mindlessly go about it at each other for no real reason other than to spit out boiled arguments. But once again, lots of people would tell me that I’m not a real Christian either.</p>
<p>I value pragmatism above many things in life, but for me, religion gives my life a purpose and is therefore much more important.</p>
<p>^ Christianity conflicts with Atheism, which is the worldview of a lot of the academic community. But not with science itself.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I concur. </p>
<p>btw, what happened to the notion that Aero was God around these here parts?</p>
<p>^People are more into Tsen these days. And I guess newer posters don’t remember/aren’t aware.</p>
<p>Shameful. btw, I finished Dead Souls and am now reading Remembrance of Things Past/In Search of Lost Time</p>
<p>I feel like quite the intellectual</p>
<p>Quite frankly, I don’t feel that there is a legitimate conflict between most aspects of science and religion. The personal beliefs of many in the scientific community may run counter to those of the mainstream, but the science does not.</p>
<p>Both. I am very religious, and science does not conflict with my beliefs at all. One needn’t exclude the other.</p>
<p>Science doesn’t conflict with Christianity? Religion used to shun science, now aware that science is far advanced, the religious try to mix oil with water. Here are a few points that contradict the claims made by the last few posters.</p>
<ol>
<li><p>Christianity says the world was 5000-6000 years old but radioactive dating begs to differ.</p></li>
<li><p>Evolution contradicts with the claim that God created all the creatures of this earth at one time.</p></li>
<li><p>Science has found no proof of an immortal “soul”. All evidence shows that we are like all animals, an advanced form of carbon based life and our life ends when brain activity ceases. This point is particularly important since the main motivation behind religion is the fear of death and our own mortality.There are also a thousand false claims and contradictions in the Bible (like Noah carrying all the thousands of species of animals in his “ark”).</p></li>
</ol>
<p>The temptation (to attribute the appearance of a design to actual design itself) is a false one, because the designer hypothesis immediately raises the larger problem of who designed the designer. The whole problem we started out with was the problem of explaining statistical improbability. It is obviously no solution to postulate something even more improbable.I do not claim to disprove God with absolute certainty. Instead, I suggest as a general principle that simpler explanations are preferable , and that an omniscient and omnipotent God must be extremely complex. As such the theory of a universe without a God is preferable to the theory of a universe with a God</p>
<p>In the words of Richard Dawkins- all of us are atheists (atheists with respect to the thousands of Gods created since ancient times) but I go one god further.</p>