Why are Battle Against Faith

by Jonathan Drake 24 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • Jonathan Drake
    Jonathan Drake

    If any are willing, share your fact based reasons for viewing faith as dangerous.

    Viewing faith as dangerous is the reason for almost all of my posts recently. What seems constant is that theists are too focused on there own little world to realize how and why faith is so damaging to society. The thought occurred to me that it may be helpful to lurkers and frequent visitors to understand why passions against faith are so hot at times. After all, a common facet of being a theist is a closed off world where they are ignorant of the very real harms done by faith.

    for any believers who read this thread, please remember that the bible, and the interpretation of it (regardless of if it would be how YOU interpret it) is directly responsible for the things posted in this thread.

    I must stress, because of that last remark, that any post in line with this thread be done by citing the source and merely letting the information lay to be read as is.

    im going to begin by sharing an example i recently read.

    Ashley was the only child of Catherine and John King, prosperous middle-class Christian scientists in Phoenix ( John was a real estate developer ). In 1987, at the age of 12, Ashley developed a lump on her leg. Her parents sought no medical aid, and the lump continued to grow. When it became too large and painful to allow her to go to school, they withdrew her, and although Ashley was supposed to receive in-home instruction by teachers, her parents refused it.

    Ashley's lump-a tumor-kept growing, and the Kings continued to ignore it. In May 1988, a detective, alerted by neighbors who hadn't seen the child for months, managed to enter the Kings' home, and saw that the problem was quite serious. Although Ashley tried to cover the tumor with a pillow, the detective immediately realized that she was in fact dying. A court order put her in custody of child protective services, which sent her to Phoenix Children's Hospital. But by the time she got real medical attention, it was far too late. Her tumor was and osteogenic sarcoma - bone cancer- and had metastasized to her lungs. Her heart was dangerously enlarged from trying to pump blood to the growing tumor, and since she couldn't move because of the pain, her genitals and buttocks were covered with bedsores. Her tumor had grown to 13 inches across, larger than a basketball, and stench from her rotting flesh permeated the hospital floor. The doctors recommended amputating the leg-not to save her life, for her condition was terminal-but to ease her pain and give her a bit more time. One doctor said that Ashley was experiencing "one of the worst kind of pain known to mankind."

    The Kings refused amputation, and on May 12 moved their daughter to a Christian science sanatorium where there was no medical care, not even pain medication. Instead, there were 71 calls to Christian science practitioners for Ashley's "treatment": prayer alone. When she cried out in agony, she was told that she was disturbing the other patients. Actually died on June 5, 1988, a martyr to her parents and delusions. At the subsequent trial of her parents, a prosecutor described her tumor at death as "about the size of two watermelons. "The doctors believed that had she been diagnosed early, there was a 50 to 60% chance she could have been saved.

    - Jerry Coyne, Faith Versus Fact pg 230, 231

  • Jonathan Drake
    Jonathan Drake
    Also my apologies, my phone turned "why the battle against faith" into "why are" not sure why
  • Jonathan Drake
    Jonathan Drake
    Also my apologies to any who saw how Siri failed to dictate my post properly, I've fixed the quote
  • Phizzy
    Phizzy

    The battle against "faith" is the battle against ignorance, lack of evidence, and the anti-progress that faith engenders in Science and even the Arts.

    It is a Battle Worth Fighting.

  • LoveUniHateExams
    LoveUniHateExams

    share your fact based reasons for viewing faith as dangerous - in a roundabout way you've highlighted the problem.

    Faith is dangerous because it's not based on fact. It's as simple as that. The obvious example is JWs and blood transfusions.

    I think it's a waste of time 'battling' faith - people will believe what they want to believe. However, I do think Government should monitor faith.

    People who put their faith above the law should be in very serious trouble. Saying "but it's my religion" is no answer.

  • FusionTheism
    FusionTheism

    The only point I would add is that whether something is dangerous has nothing to do with whether something is true, at least not necessarily.

    Take, for example, the atomic bomb:

    The science behind the atomic bomb is the truth, yet, it is the most dangerous thing ever invented in all of history.

  • Finkelstein
    Finkelstein

    Why for this particular religion ?

    How about thousands of people letting themselves die needlessly for not taking a blood transfusion or the millions of families broken apart by disfellowshipping certain individuals or the few suicides this has caused .

    Or maybe all the lying and deceiving about the world coming to an end and that humanity should be alert and prepared, when this propagating had much to do do with the proliferation of literature the WTS. published ?

    Kind of a stupid question to ask , unless you really have your head deep up your ass or you have a cold apathetic heart.

  • Jonathan Drake
    Jonathan Drake

    What other harms spring from the morality claims of faith, claims that flout both science and reason? One is opposition to assisted dying. It's hard to believe that a world without religion would have any problems with your regulated system to help the terminally ill end their lives. After all, most of us consider it merciful to euthanize our dog or cat if it's suffering terribly with no hope of respite. Nobody would consider it a moral act to let such animals suffer because only God has the right to end of their lives. And yet this is precisely how many religions behave toward humans, for humans are exceptional-the special creation of God, and uniquely endowed with souls.

    If you had your animal "put to sleep," then you know the process is humane and painless. And now science has ways to allow humans to end their lives painlessly as well: an overdose of pentobarbital works effectively, and is used in European countries, like Switzerland, that permit assisted dying. Who would prohibit a terminal patient, suffering from cancer or a neurodegenerative disease, from deciding to take that route rather than suffering needlessly four months?

    Many religious denominations would.

    Jerry Coyne, Faith Versus Fact pg 243

  • Jonathan Drake
    Jonathan Drake

    In support of the fact that religion purposely and knowingly would prefer and allow a person to suffer horrible slow deaths to terminal illness rather than a humane death by euthanasia:

    According to Christian teaching, however, suffering, especially suffering during the last moments of life, has a special place in God's saving plan; it is in fact a sharing in Christ's passion and a union with the redeeming sacrifice which He offered in obedience to the Father's will.

    The Vatican's Declaration on Euthanasia, found here

  • Jonathan Drake
    Jonathan Drake

    In support of the fact that religion purposely and knowingly would prefer and allow a person to suffer horrible slow deaths to terminal illness rather than a humane death by euthanasia:

    According to Christian teaching, however, suffering, especially suffering during the last moments of life, has a special place in God's saving plan; it is in fact a sharing in Christ's passion and a union with the redeeming sacrifice which He offered in obedience to the Father's will.

    The Varican's Declaration on Euthanasia, found here

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit