- Sep 6, 2011
Quite true. Think of all the good stem cells could be put to. All the potential cures that could be made, but no, because it's banned, largely due to religion. But....even if religion makes us behind, would you rather there be no religion, and therefore far less ethical debate? The way I veiw it, science can be cold and hard with logic, while religion can be reasoning and focus more on ethics. If we didn't have religion to keep the ethics of certain scientific ideas in check, then would it be fair?I completely agree. Christianity discourages innovation, science, free-thought, and in my opinion it teaches a lot of bad morals. All of the abrahamic religions are univeralist. They claim that their dogma is the only truth; and that everything else is blasphemy. In my opinion this is very detrimental to the advancement of our society. Revering Jewish mythologies more than science and reason, is sad, and demonstrates how backwards our society still is. Perhaps if the pope hadn't persecuted so many great scientists, we would be far more advanced in our technology today. Poor Galileo And sadly, It even continues to this day, example, Stem Cell research, the open denial of the big bang theory and cosmology in general, the denial of evolution, etc.
To overrule the uses of science with religious ethics is unfair, but so is overriding religous ethics with the uses of scienctific advancements.
The two keep each other in check.
So, in this respect, I think we wouldn't be better off without religion. Anybody agree?