Oh, I don't disbelieve you. But Santorum claims to be a Catholic at least.
The guy seems to forget he's not Protestant whenever it suits him.
I'm becoming convinced that Santorum's not actually Catholic. I've seen the video as well (though it's been a while), and he seems quite comfy with the idea of the rapture. Plus, look at who Santorum had open one of his recent addresses, and how he responded to JFK's famous speech about how his (JFK's) Catholicism would not affect his ability to be a good President. If Santorum was a Catholic, he's certainly quietly converting over to Protestantism now, though strictly for political reasons.
I wouldn't abandon mine. I can see Pagans, Wiccans, Hindu's, Buddhists being around still. Correct me if wrong, but Hindu's...aren't they kinda athiest in a way? And Buddhists are like...one with the Earth...monks...Imma wiki those two.
As far as I know, Buddhists are closer to being atheists than Hindus, who are mostly Polytheistic, although I did end up in a debate (on either Political-Forum or City-Data) which showed me that I know very little about Hinduism, so I could be wrong.
Pagan religions, Wicca, Buddhism, and Hinduism would adapt quite easily, but I think the adaption would cause wild enough changes that they'd barely resemble what we think of them now.
Islam, Christianity, and Judaism would be gone. There's no way they could survive... at least, not in their current forms.
I think you're pretty much correct.
Anyway, I discovered this on twitter today.
http://www.allvoices.com/contributed-news/11837410-why-evolution-is-still-a-theory
Possibly the dumbest attempt to refute evolution I have ever seen. I registered there for the sole purpose of leaving a comment on that article.
It's really so stupid that I am bamboozled as to how someone can be that dumb.
I commented under my usual handle, NateHevens. I'm convinced this article is a Poe.
You are looking at it logically instead of emotionally. Faith fills a need a lot of people have, a need to believe that there is meaning in what is the seemingly meaningless.
This is true, but it bothers me a bit, because I don't understand how scientific facts like the fact that we are made out of stars, or the fact that the set of DNA that makes up one person actually allows for the possibility of billions upon billions of people to exist, which means each individual exists despite extremely large odds against their existence, can be considered "meaningless"...
When I was 16, I was diagnosed with a rare autoimmune disease, and suffered from kidney failure, and during those years I met a lot of terminally ill kids and their parents, including parents who lost their children. A great deal of these parents could only get through their daily lives believing that what happened has some sort of purpose, even if it was one they couldn't understand, and that they would be reunited with their children in the next life.
Again, I find this viewpoint odd. It's like the people who turned to God after losing loved ones in 9/11. How come not one of them turned around and questioned why God allow(ed)(s) this in the first place?
I'm an atheist, but I completely understand why people need to have faith in something bigger that can provide meaning when dealing with meaningless horror.
I don't understand. I don't think these reasons are legitimate. As Tim Minchin asks in his beat poem "Storm":
Isn't this enough?
Just this world?
Just this beautiful, complex
Wonderfully unfathomable
Natural world?
How does it so fail to hold our attention
That we have to diminish it with the invention
Of cheap, man-made myths and monsters?
So I don't accept that people
need faith to cope. I think they
think they need it. I think they
want it. But I refuse to accept that religious faith is a
legitimate need. It isn't.
