So I just watched all of those videos, and I found the whole debate really enlightening. Here's my interpretation, whether it's worth anything to anyone or not:
I think that there is some credence to be given to the positive work that the Catholic Church has done in poor areas of the world. Regardless of the implementation of these improvements, i.e. the accompanying religion and what the opposition would call "brainwashing", I think it is to some degree undeniable that the Catholic Church has the ability to, and has effected, positive change in some impoverished areas.
However, I think this argument is trumped by the implication of the opposition that the Church is simply closed minded. The Church should be condemned not for it's specific practices (though in many cases these too are at fault), but for the overarching inability to act when faced with an accepted moral high ground by other people. This is evident in cases such as Rwanda, where there is evidence of perversion of Church doctrine that is recognized by people outside of the church, but is not condemned by those within it. The same issue can apply to condoms, where the Church refuses to recognize the validity of a widely accepted method of disease prevention in favor of propagating a flawed sense of morality.
I may have extrapolated the point made by Hitchens/Fry, but that's how I see it.
I summary, even a mass murderer probably helped a little old lady cross the street at some point in his life. You have to sum up all of the deeds committed by a group or person to judge whether or not they are a force for good.
You have to sum up all of the deeds committed by a group or person to judge whether or not they are a force for good.
A pragmatic approach is to only evaluate a group by what they're doing or attempting to do currently. Past deeds are immutable, but present ones are not. No matter what good an organization may have provided in the past, that is irrelevant to an assessment of its current direction.
The modern world has no use for mysticism or sky men, and the only good than can come from them is the good wrought out of the willful manipulation of the ignorant with lies.
But Rym, if we aren't afraid of God's wrath then we will all run around raping and murdering each other! It's a fact that morals come from religion, and without it we are doomed as a race! DOOOMED!
Signs that say "Pray for Obama Psalm 109:8", might look like a lovely sentiment until you read the verse ""Let his days be few; and let another take his office, Let his children be fatherless, and his wife a widow"
A bunch of us from RIT Skeptics were planning on going over to the University of Rochester where they were doing the same thing, but unfortunately it falls during our final exam week so nobody was willing or able to take the day off to protest or anything. I'm not sure specifically why they weren't doing this at RIT, though I suspect it was either 1) a lack of funds or 2) a lack of creationists. We do have our fair share of Campus Crusaders and InterVarsity Fellowshippers, but I'm not sure how many are actually creationists.
A bunch of us from RIT Skeptics were planning on going over to the University of Rochester where they were doing the same thing, but unfortunately it falls during our final exam week so nobody was willing or able to take the day off to protest or anything. I'm not sure specifically why they weren't doing this at RIT, though I suspect it was either 1) a lack of funds or 2) a lack of creationists. We do have our fair share of Campus Crusaders and InterVarsity Fellowshippers, but I'm not sure how many areactuallycreationists.
I wonder if they just view RIT as not worth it, knowing that so many people there are probably like-minded in skepticism or at the very least apathy.
Comments
I think that there is some credence to be given to the positive work that the Catholic Church has done in poor areas of the world. Regardless of the implementation of these improvements, i.e. the accompanying religion and what the opposition would call "brainwashing", I think it is to some degree undeniable that the Catholic Church has the ability to, and has effected, positive change in some impoverished areas.
However, I think this argument is trumped by the implication of the opposition that the Church is simply closed minded. The Church should be condemned not for it's specific practices (though in many cases these too are at fault), but for the overarching inability to act when faced with an accepted moral high ground by other people. This is evident in cases such as Rwanda, where there is evidence of perversion of Church doctrine that is recognized by people outside of the church, but is not condemned by those within it. The same issue can apply to condoms, where the Church refuses to recognize the validity of a widely accepted method of disease prevention in favor of propagating a flawed sense of morality.
I may have extrapolated the point made by Hitchens/Fry, but that's how I see it.
The modern world has no use for mysticism or sky men, and the only good than can come from them is the good wrought out of the willful manipulation of the ignorant with lies.
Got distracted and didn't think clearly.