Damned if you do, damned if you don't
Mar. 22nd, 2006 09:03 amI have mixed feelings about Pharyngula. Lots of nifty science, but Myers' attitude towards religion irritates me more than a little. Sunday, he posted this:
I'm afraid the kooks and RaptureReady folks and Left Behind fans and Christian Reconstructionists and Dispensationalists and Bible Belt prudes are the face of American Christianity. Don't complain to me: it's the Christians who ought to be deeply, shamefully embarrassed about this…but as usual, I expect they'll find it easier to complain about those damned godless people who dare to hold up a mirror.
In comments below, he expanded on that:
As I said, I know all Christians aren't like that...but it is simply the case that your religion has acquired a serious PR problem. And I am going to be mean and tell you that the moderate, sensible, rational Christians who have let this go on should bear a good part of the blame.
And then today, referring to the Archbishop of Canterbury's recent support of evolution, he said:
On the one hand, it's good to have a religious authority figure coming down on the side of sense. I applaud the sentiment of his statements, and hope they have some positive influence. On the other hand, I don't give a flying firkin what the Archbishop of Canterbury thinks, and would question his authority to even make such a pronouncement.
This is exactly what I was talking about a few weeks back. If you don't want people to bring religion into the public discourse on creationism/sexual freedom/whatever, don't complain about the religious moderates just because they're not bringing religion into it. You can argue that religion should keep out of these debates, you can argue that moderates ought to leap into these debates to answer their extremist coreligionists, but arguing both at once is kinda inconsistent.
I'm afraid the kooks and RaptureReady folks and Left Behind fans and Christian Reconstructionists and Dispensationalists and Bible Belt prudes are the face of American Christianity. Don't complain to me: it's the Christians who ought to be deeply, shamefully embarrassed about this…but as usual, I expect they'll find it easier to complain about those damned godless people who dare to hold up a mirror.
In comments below, he expanded on that:
As I said, I know all Christians aren't like that...but it is simply the case that your religion has acquired a serious PR problem. And I am going to be mean and tell you that the moderate, sensible, rational Christians who have let this go on should bear a good part of the blame.
And then today, referring to the Archbishop of Canterbury's recent support of evolution, he said:
On the one hand, it's good to have a religious authority figure coming down on the side of sense. I applaud the sentiment of his statements, and hope they have some positive influence. On the other hand, I don't give a flying firkin what the Archbishop of Canterbury thinks, and would question his authority to even make such a pronouncement.
This is exactly what I was talking about a few weeks back. If you don't want people to bring religion into the public discourse on creationism/sexual freedom/whatever, don't complain about the religious moderates just because they're not bringing religion into it. You can argue that religion should keep out of these debates, you can argue that moderates ought to leap into these debates to answer their extremist coreligionists, but arguing both at once is kinda inconsistent.