Sometimes I just scratch my head and wonder at we humans. We want so hard to have a "belief system", that contrary to logic and science we ignore and discount facts and truths. Are we afraid of what happens to us after we die? Do we put so much stock in there being someplace like a lake of fire we will tossed into if we don't accept some "belief system"? Does that fear of eternal damnation so scare us that what is reality around us is of a lesser value? I don't know all the reasons for why we must have a "belief system" but it seems to be so ingrained into our psyches that it is difficult to extract it using just logic and science, but here is an attempt by me.
I choose the subject of birth control because it is simply explained using the Catholic church's own dogmatic stance. They say they are against using birth control and that it is an offence against their religion. http://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/nov/21/condoms-birth-control-catholic-church-short-history. Yet I want you to imagine a world where there is no birth control. Let us say that at some future date there are so many children being born that every square foot of dry land on Earth is now occupying a human being. Now here is where my argument takes place. The Catholic church would then be presented with a dilemma, either continue the practice of not allowing birth control or change the practice in order to stop the influx of new births.
If the Catholic church continues with it's no birth control stance then deaths from over population will inevitably follow. Not enough space for humans to occupy which would result in a survival of the fittest scenario. Or if the Catholic church does decide to change it's policy on birth control and allow it then the dogma that was against birth control is only as holy as it fits particular scenarios. So, at least one rule of the church is subject to environmental factors. Which is what logic and science base most all of it's reasoning, analysis and concluding upon. Being so afraid of some afterlife scenario shouldn't be why we refuse to just accept that we don't know and live the rest of our lives trying to figure that out without some myth, more or superstition to obscure the reality that logic and science are quite capable of answering.
I choose the subject of birth control because it is simply explained using the Catholic church's own dogmatic stance. They say they are against using birth control and that it is an offence against their religion. http://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/nov/21/condoms-birth-control-catholic-church-short-history. Yet I want you to imagine a world where there is no birth control. Let us say that at some future date there are so many children being born that every square foot of dry land on Earth is now occupying a human being. Now here is where my argument takes place. The Catholic church would then be presented with a dilemma, either continue the practice of not allowing birth control or change the practice in order to stop the influx of new births.
If the Catholic church continues with it's no birth control stance then deaths from over population will inevitably follow. Not enough space for humans to occupy which would result in a survival of the fittest scenario. Or if the Catholic church does decide to change it's policy on birth control and allow it then the dogma that was against birth control is only as holy as it fits particular scenarios. So, at least one rule of the church is subject to environmental factors. Which is what logic and science base most all of it's reasoning, analysis and concluding upon. Being so afraid of some afterlife scenario shouldn't be why we refuse to just accept that we don't know and live the rest of our lives trying to figure that out without some myth, more or superstition to obscure the reality that logic and science are quite capable of answering.
No comments:
Post a Comment