This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.

bchaffin25's Profile

bchaffin25's Avatar Joined over 2 years ago
Gender: Male

Latest Discussions Started by bchaffin25

More Discussions by bchaffin25

Latest Comments by bchaffin25

Go to: Is religion inevitable?

bchaffin25's Avatar Jump to comment 29 by bchaffin25

It would be hard for me to say that religion in the sense of something supernatural has the capacity to be completely eradicated. However, it's equally difficult for me to say that the religions of today will never fall through. In fact, as history has shown us, I believe that as more and more is learned, the religions of today will begin to alter. What must be taken into consideration, though, is that the times of religious thriving were in a moment where science and logic were of less concern than today. Nonetheless, we still see new religions coming about such as L. Ron Hubbard's creation of scientology, which exemplifies two things. One is peoples' willingness to alter their perceptions on life in a religious manner. The other is that religion has the capacity to continue to thrive. As science progresses, the first conclusion has the ability for religious belief to begin to secede. But the second conclusion shows us that even still, new religions can form as society and man's knowledge changes. And of course, we know that the blind faith of zealots will always have the ability to trump the logic of science.

Wed, 12 Oct 2011 15:52:38 UTC | #880177

Go to: O'Reilly vs. Richard Dawkins

bchaffin25's Avatar Jump to comment 18 by bchaffin25

Bill O'Reily really is one of the most annoying individuals on earth. It isn't that he's ignorant, he's stubborn and refuses to adhere to knowledge and information. He's so fixated in his own personal opinion that he doesn't allow for the possibility that he may be wrong. What really makes it bad is that he has a severe misunderstanding of the religion he continuously quotes and of the implications of what Dawkins had to say. Utterly pathetic.

Tue, 11 Oct 2011 02:07:12 UTC | #879617

Go to: The man who saved Jesus Christ

bchaffin25's Avatar Jump to comment 79 by bchaffin25

Very very very true. Unfortunately so of course. Religious thought has been, for whatever reason, the one thing with the capacity to escape jurisdiction of many types. From childcare laws to those restricting the freedoms of particular individuals, religious people have been able to essentially do that which they please (within reasonable control). This national recognition of institutional ignorance has made it even still more difficult to efficiently express to those who are religious what truth is. The first move that needs to be made is to secularize America's government, which is why Sean Faircloth's job here is of such high importance.

Comment 2 by besleybean :

Since when has truth EVER really been a concern for the gullible?!

Sun, 09 Oct 2011 04:52:18 UTC | #879102

Go to: Frustration of a science teacher

bchaffin25's Avatar Jump to comment 54 by bchaffin25

The thing to do at this point, it would seem most reasonable, would be to provide a rebuttal that religion courses are in turn confusing two different matters. One is the students themselves who cannot adequately accept the theory of evolution and other scientific teachings because of what is being learned about Roman Catholicism. Two, which derives from the first, inform the administration that you too are being censored by a particular department as a result of a mutual "confusing" of the students. Each of these cases are displaying that you are not doing to them any more than what they are doing to you. Accept (although religion cannot be considered this so much) academic equality and allow for the student to be the decision maker as to what seems most logical to them. After all, isn't self-inquiry what academia is all about?

Sun, 09 Oct 2011 04:34:59 UTC | #879100

Go to: John 3:16 for an oil change

bchaffin25's Avatar Jump to comment 5 by bchaffin25

I'd get the fill up and then in return say to the man, "You tell me about how old the earth is, and I'll pay you." My service was contingent upon my answer, ergo his payment should be contingent upon his answer. Seems fair

Sun, 09 Oct 2011 04:21:01 UTC | #879098

More Comments by bchaffin25