Quote:
Originally posted by Little Lee132
YOU SAY RELIGION HASN'T BEEN PROVEN TO BE A FACT, WELL NEITHER HAS EVOLUTION AND YET MANY PEOPLE STILL INSIST UPON PUTTING
|
Please, if you want to insist upon that debate, let's look at this fact: Gravity is a theory, it has not been 'proven', since there's no way to test every theoretical spot where gravity can apply to see if something might magically float away; but, you don't see many people questioning gravity.
If you want to use religion as a deciding matter, do your research like the scientists that have toiled over laboratories to find out methods of cloning, and how to benefit mankind. See how scientists have worked day in and day out only to have their dreams basically dashed upon the rocks of religion's ego.
My point of view is: If you want to include religion in science, then science should have a say in religion. If you don't like it, then simply keep your matters to yourself. Believe what you want, pray to who you want, but give people a chance before you nullify it on an agnostic 'truth' like religion.
Personally, I don't think Bush should have the right to even speak of religion in any of his bills, it puts an automatic bias on all his decisions. Either way, he excluded every other culture/ethnicity/belief besides his own selfish desire to ban it, because his parents assumed it was wrong, and taught him no other way.
I wrote a term paper not too long ago on the matters or religion's impact on science, I'll post it after this, if you wish to see some more of my opinion (with actual textbook gibberish
instead of my non-sensical ramblings, please, read on [it touches on some other subjects as well.])
--------
http://www.unidan.com/scienceresearch.htm
--------
By the way, some of the information there might be updated, and if anyone wants my sources (calling all uber-nerds
), just ask.
Thanks for reading
