Just a little post today dealing with the papal visit to the UK.
I'm not going to go into any of the recent controversy surrounding pedophilia in the priesthood, or the Catholic Church's denunciation and persecution of both homosexuals and condoms. Instead I want to hollow in on one particular comment he made in a speech today regarding atheism, in particular the problem he sees with a secular society. Below is the comment,
"As we reflect on the sobering lessons of the atheist extremism of the 20th century, let us never forget how the exclusion of God, religion and virtue from public life leads ultimately to a truncated vision of man and of society and thus to a 'reductive vision of the person and his destiny'."
Now granted the "atheist extremism" he mentions, the actions and beliefs of Nazi Germany, are indefensible. I am in no way condoning the actions or ideology of that regime. BUT it should be remembered that despite its atheistic leanings, the Nazi's main anti-semitic rhetoric did in part stem from the anti-semitism which has flown out of the Vatican since the middle ages. Pope Pius XII condemned the Nazi's not because of anti-semitism, but instead for their anti-Catholic actions.
As well it wasn't truly atheist as there was a large body of individuals in the Nazi party who were involved in pseudo-religious cults, aspects of the occult and neopaganism. So in reality what the pope calls "atheist extremism", is in reality simply non-catholic beliefs.
As for the second part of the statement, concerning the negative effects of secularism, he seems to not quite understand the position of the proponents of a society based on science and reason. Far from a "reductive vision of the person and his destiny", many atheists focus on the limitless potential of man. We continue to examine the universe around us to better understand it. We create new pieces of technology, new works of art, and new ideas not to limit our potential destiny but to push the boundaries of it.
His accusation is far more akin to the religious fundamentalists around the world, who's answer to different questions is simply "gods will". As science seeks ways to understand and possibly prevent horrible natural disasters and human suffering, religious leaders explain and excuse it as god's divine plan. Science places man firmly in the drivers seat of his own potential and destiny, while religion makes him sit in the back, a passive player in his own life under the watchful eye of a mystic force beyond his control.
While I respect that the Pope has the best of intentions, he simply cannot see the forest for the trees, and chooses to criticizes a lifestyle, and a worldview, he cannot understand. Far from limiting human capacity, secularism and atheism is a driving force for greater belief in the capacity of human beings not only to improve their world but also the lives of others, even those that choose to believe in a divine maker.
Here is the article if you wanted to know more about the Pope's visit,
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/sep/16/popes-visit-benedict-arrives-uk
Thursday, September 16, 2010
Monday, September 13, 2010
Free Speech for Scientists!
Its a sad state when scientific facts have to be vetted by the government, but that is what the Harper government is all about now. The article below gives examples of how the federal government has been restricting scientists trying to do interview with journalists and other forms of media.
We got used to hearing about how the current PMO (prime ministers office) muzzled MPs and gave them strict speaking points to follow. Fair enough, that is politics, while you may not agree with it you can at least see the sense. Now though it seems that even scientist have to pass the scrutiny of senior government officials. You can read the article for the facts, it doesn't make sense for me to repeat them here, but I do need to comment about this really disturbing situation.
You could argue it makes sense, theoretically, to censor and tightly control the party message and what exactly MPs are spouting off about to the rest of the world. What doesn't make sense, and is to be blunt reprehensible, is trying to censor scientific "facts". The article makes reference to how "Orwellian" this situation is, and unfortunately it is right. This behaviour is more akin to what the Ministry of Truth would attempt, direct perversion and manipulation of facts, than what a modern democratic government should participate in.
This isn't even an issue of free speech. This isn't someones opinion, spouted off in an argument with no proof or verification available. This is fact, supported by a body of evidence. The goal of science is to enhance mankind's understanding of the universe, and while knowing a flood happened 13, 000 years ago isn't exactly crucial, it is still part of the process of understanding the wider world around us.
Now this may look like a bit of an over reaction to something which doesn't really seem like a big deal, but this isn't just about this incident, its about the growing trend of censoring science. Science is one arena where a chilling effect on speech should never be felt.
Trying to hide information and prevent people from gaining knowledge is wrong, plain and simple. Any government who tries to do this should be removed, because the minute scientists cant come forward with their findings is the minute we shrug off the progress of the past 300 years. We go back to the irrational mindset which dominated the thoughts of man when they burned Galileo, we reject the idea of rational, empirical evidence, for the kinds of constructed reality of a totalitarian utopia.
I know I don't want to live in a world like that, do you?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)