That big speech by that Vatican guy toward the end was awesome.


Humans and monkeys evolved from a common ancestor, not from each other.
Maybe if you understood evolution a little better, you would agree with it.

Im not saying religion isn't true. Honestly only the dead could tell us if religion is true =)

Religion is only an organisation, an institution.

Its the supernatural aspect they push which has never had any evidence.

More both, I believe in science as in waht life is, but what created life (Big bang and such) I belive god put in order

For me: science; just because of the facts and all.

I'm still open minded towards different theories, and encourage others to think for themselves.

Science, religion doesn't influence me at all, except by manipulating other people and thus affecting my social interactions with them.

In regards to evolution:

To whoever said that Evolution was a theory: you're wrong. Evolution is as proved a natural process as condensation needs to be proven to become 'fact'. I'm not being hostile; this is being direct: you don't know what you're talking about.

Things evolve. Exactly how this progresses in intricate scientific detail falls down to the 'Theory of Evolution', which is quite seperate from 'Evolution'. This is a scentific distinction people don't understand, perhaps understandbly so.

Furthermore, to attain the status of a 'Theory' in science, is not merely to simply posit an idea and for it become popularised (perhaps through propaganda - see 'Intelligent Design'). Rigorous, objective, unprejudiced scentifiic peer review and scrutiny by religious and non-religious scentists at the top of their field, filter out any chance of a hypothesis gaining any undue acclaim. The mere fact we can now call it a theory is testamony to its immense credibilty. At the moment there is no reason to believe that there need be any alternative. However, scientists would of course readily embrace the oppurtunity to follow the truth wherever it leads - Evolution or not.

Suggesting alternatives is fine, but presupposing that your particular religious scriputure holds anything other than circular logic in serious debate cuts deep the vein of serious discussion. No, nothing is an absolute - and neither is the concept of God. No, they are not mutually exclusive. No, theory hasn't remained static since Charles Darwin and his grandfather. Yes; there's more objective truth in scentific theory than religious beliefs of any kind. Stop dismissing hundreds of years of scientific endevour

In regards to the thread topic:

Whilst it's hard to discredit the plethora of religous symbolism in literature and history, any influence I've ammased from religion has undoubtedly been less useful than the impact science has had on my life. I'm grateful for the artistic majesty of countless religiously inspired masterpieces, for instance, but rationality holds far more of a future than putting faith in any one idea. Religion is without doubt a facinating phenomenon, but its status as progressive has long since been overrun. I find science far more exciting than religion.

this has been posted 50,000 times by me and others. You're wasting your time typing all that out. No one is gonna learn about it that really needs to.

I swear everything here has already been mentioned several times.

How about you wait up all night to see if Santa comes, because you believe in him.
You are faithful and have reason you will get a reward because you've been good all year.
Come morning, no one comes, and no presents are delivered.
You are sad and depressed and realize Santa does not exist.

Now you should act this towards religion.

Done. Next?