Sunday, April 4, 2010

Stuff and Nonsense?

The ABC News reported that Sydney Anglican Archbishop Peter Jensen told his congregation atheism is not the rational philosophy that it claims to be.

Apparently, Dr Jensen told the congregation that atheism is as much of a religion as Christianity.

They quote him as saying, "It's about our determination as human beings to have our own way, to make our own rules, to live our own lives, unfettered by the rule of God and the right of God to rule over us," he said.

Elegantly put, indeed. Not extraordinary, in the least, that rational humans should reject the concept of supernatural supervision.

However, Jensen's first claim is extraordinary. If religion is premised on belief (ie. you believe something and this then manifests itself in a moral position, a practice or a spirituality), then the belief is central.

If belief is not central to religion, then the religious could simply abandon it, as, apparently, it sheds no light nor influence on their pracitces or moral codes. Is Jensen actually admitting what many suspect about Anglicans - that belief in God is optional?

If not believing something and believing something are equivalent (ie. belief = unbelief), then, of course, the Anglican Church must accept my application for a position in their church, as an atheist.

I applaud the Archbishop for articulating the new reformation within the Anglican church - abandonment of belief. Long live the cultural icon!

Rowan disappoints again

The news is that the Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, has virtually retracted his statement that the Roman Catholic Church in Ireland is losing all credibility following the surfacing of child-sex-abuse allegations. This while Benedict remains silent.

The papal reaction is predictable. Why would the head of such a corrupt, soulless and evil institution be ready to draw attention to its "frailties" (quote from a catholic emerging from an Easter service).

But what of Rowan? His first reaction was bold, appropriate and moral. Stand by that morality, Rowan.

Or have you been sucked so surely into the vortex of ecumenicism that you can no longer criticise the obvious immorality of others? Do you feel so under siege from atheism that any enemy of my enemy is my ally?

At a moment when the Anglican Church could have differentiated its morality and faith from the mob, it has lost its nerve.

Conversation on moral well-being

She: What makes you think that science will ever be able to say that forcing women to wear burqas is wrong?
Me: Because I think that right and wrong are a matter of increasing or decreasing well-being—and it is obvious that forcing half the population to live in cloth bags, and beating or killing them if they refuse, is not a good strategy for maximizing human well-being.
She: But that’s only your opinion.
Me: Okay… Let’s make it even simpler. What if we found a culture that ritually blinded every third child by literally plucking out her eyes at birth, would you then agree that we had found a culture that was needlessly diminishing human wellbeing?
She: It would depend on why they were doing it.
Me: Let’s say they were doing it on the basis of religious superstition. In their scripture, God says, “Every third must walk in darkness.”
She: Then you could never say that they were wrong.

(Sam Harris)