I’ve seen some articles, blog posts and comments whereby people have attacked the thoughts or theories some others have which may be anti-reproductive technologies, by claiming that the person is a right wing religious nut (not that there is anything wrong with being right wing or religious). This would be all well and good but the original person who has made the anti-reproductive technologies in many instances has not even brought religion into the argument.
What I see occurring is that the respondents are incensed by what they read, but are unable to come up with logical or intellectual arguments against the original persons concepts and ends up resorting to what amounts basically to name calling. What is even funnier (although I don’t really think it is funny), is when the original person isn’t even the religion (and sometimes actually an atheist) that the respondent claims they are.
Religion has a place in society and while I don’t think that it is necessary to bring it into any of these arguments as there are plenty of ethical, legal and medical arguments that stand on their own merit, if people wish to make statements in regard to religion then they should be allowed to without being ridiculed.
I wonder how many people may have called me a right wing religious nut, without knowing that I am essentially an atheist who believes in the good of humanity (secular humanism).
3 comments:
You don't see the connection between certain mindsets, ethics and principles then?
That is a good point Von. And I think that is perhaps where most people are coming from with that argument.
However, you don't have to belong to a certain religious group to also have the same mindset, as we can see with those authors or posters who in fact do not belong to those religious groups.
They don't have to be mutually inclusive. It is possible to come to the same ethical conclusion without reference to a god or some holy book like the bible.
AMEN brother. There is humor in that statement. Thank you for that.
Post a Comment