Recently, I heard a scenario that completely changed the way I look at life. I would like to share that scenario with you now and explain how deeply it has affected me.
If you could study 200 infants who were separated into 2 groups: those growing up in (reasonable) Fundamentalist, Evangelical Christian homes (group A), and the other half in Muslim homes (group B), you would find a very consistent result when they are 21. If you were to ask the children what religion they held to at 21, about half would be Christians, half would be Muslims, and the majority of their answers would be consistent with the beliefs of their parents.
Does the outcome of this scenario surprise you? It did not surprise me. Do you see anything disturbing about this scenario? I did. What I realized was that when children are young, they do not possess the reasoning capacity to make informed decisions regarding any complex topic, including religion. Would you expect parents to teach their 4-year-old's about the best economic policy? Why not? Well because they would not understand it, right? Why then is it acceptable and normal for parents to teach their young children about a topic as complicated and multivarious as religion? Shoot, even Christianity has dozens of different viewpoints on the Bible alone, and many of them are mutually exclusive!
Out of this, a reasonable conclusion can also be drawn. When children are young, they are very impressionable. So much so that they believe that there are monsters in the closet and under the bed, that Santa is real, and that if they put a baby tooth under their pillow, a magical fairy will give them money for it. Is it then unreasonable to say that a child, any child will be greatly impacted by the religion of their parents (given that the parents are not gibbering idiots, of course...)? I do not think that this is an unreasonable claim. If this were not true, we would find that the religion of the parents would not have a significant impact on the religion of the offspring. When parents teach their children about religion at a young age, the effects are essentially the same as those of brainwashing. No matter the religion (within reason), the children are very likely to follow it to some extent for their whole lives.
From this, I think that it is also reasonable to say that the reason that the vast majority of Americans claim to be Christians, yet so few of them show up for church services on Sunday mornings is that they were raised Christians, believed it for a while, then "fell away" when they matured and their subconscious realized that they didn't really believe it. Consciously though, they still felt connected to Christianity, but they were too worried/busy with other things in their life to sit down and really think about it.
From this reasoning, I had a revelation. For quite some time, I have felt like a hypocrite. I lived the life of a Christian, but I never felt drawn by God, or really known what He wanted me to do (specifically). Yeah, I know what every Christian is supposed to do, but there is also supposed to be the voice of God in your life (ironic though that Christians hear a voice in their head and it makes them close to god, but schizophrenics hear voices and it makes them crazy...) and I have never had that. Ever.
Don't get me wrong. I believed (and still do) that the bible is true, that Jesus was God, and that He died for my sins, etc. etc. etc. I also know that had my parents raised me as a Muslim, I would be a Muslim right now. If they had raised me an atheist, I would be an atheist right now. That should make you think. I am an adult with fundamentalist, evangelical Christian views, and these are what I was taught since I was very young... Should it be surprising that this is the condition that I find myself in? How much were my religious view affected (adversely or otherwise) by what I was taught when I was young?
I. Do. Not. Know.
Can I know? I mean can I really ever know how much my religious views are skewed by the indoctrination I recieved as an impressionable child? Can anyone ever know? I'm not sure, but it sure made me think.
So, given all of this, I have decided to take a "religious vacation" and really examine Christianity (and other faiths) and decide whether or not it/they really is/are worth my unwavering faith. I have always thought that blind faith (or faith without reason) is fundamentally flawed and essentially worthless. I'll leave you with that and close with this quote from Thomas Jefferson:
"Question with boldness even the existence of a God;
because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason,
than that of blind-folded fear...
Do not be frightened from this inquiry
from any fear of its consequences.
If it ends in the belief that there is no God,
you will find incitements to virtue
in the comfort and pleasantness you feel in its exercise..."
I had an extra hour to spare a couple of days ago so I thought, “Why not install Jaunty?” Why not indeed! Well, now my laptop is running jauntily through its paces under Ubuntu 9.04 RC.
Unlike other releases, this one was a pretty easy upgrade. Not quite as easy as installing the 9.04 remix on that Eee PC, but close.
The only problem that I ran into was that my Broadcom wireless driver was not working out of the box, but after a little tweaking, it was fine. Ubuntu recognized that there was a Broadcom driver available and downloaded it, but for some reason, it wasn’t being used. The Hardware Drivers dialog showed that the Broadcom driver as “This driver is active, but is not currently in use.” Well, after deactivating the driver, then reactivating, it was fine.
Other than the wireless driver, the rest of the install and initial setup went quite smoothly. The new themes are quite slick, and the wireless drivers now connect to WPA2 corporate networks without a problem (yay campus secured networking!).
Check out some screenshots below and let me know if you have tried 9.04 yet in the comments.
[gallery link=”file” order=”DESC” orderby=”post_name”]
Related articles by Zemanta
- Jackalope sighting: first look at Ubuntu 9.04 beta (arstechnica.com)
- Ubuntu 9.04 Includes Popular Themes from the Community [Themes] (lifehacker.com)
- Boot Ubuntu 9.04 in 18 Seconds (With a Solid State Drive) [Video Demonstration] (lifehacker.com)
- Microsoft, FUD and the netbook market (canonical.com)
Basically, people have 2 views on evolution... yes or no. It seems that the choice tends to be segregated on religious lines (sometimes). Those with more liberal religious views tend to approve of evolution and integrate it with their religious views (ie: agnostics or Christians that say that the creation story was not literal). Those with more conservative religious views disagree with evolution and believe that there are fundamental flaws with evolution theory (ie: fundamentalist Christians who say that since the earth is only ~7000yrs old, evolution can't work).
Growing up in a very conservative christian family/community, I have been taught about the "dangers" of evolution and on the various flaws of the theories. As such, for much of my life, I have been opposed to the idea of evolution completely. More recently, however, I have begun to logically review and challenge my religious & philosophical views.
After much thought, I have come to the conclusion that evolution is correct... AND the Bible is correct. I believe that the earth was created in 6 consecutive days by the God of the Bible as described in the Bible. I also believe that evolution as accepted & researched by the world's scientific community is correct (or at least as correct as any current scientific theory can be).
How can I reconcile these usually conflicting views? Easily! If God is smart enough to create millions of species of animals, multi-trillions of stars, thousands of galaxies, etc. etc. etc., why must we say that he created the earth, but not evolution? I believe that God created everything in 6 consecutive days and he created it "in the middle of the story." When he was done, the universe appeared to be ~13billion years old and the evidence on the earth shows how evolution works. There was oil in the ground, fossils to be found, and some species were extinct that never really lived. If the universe is allowed to continue for millions of years, animals will evolve. It will happen because evolution is accurate and correct. There is no logical reason that evolution and a literal view of the Bible cannot coexist. (edit: see my comment here for a better explanation)
Any questions? Logical mistakes to point out? Let me know in the comments.
evolution vs creation
(edited 8:29am March 9, 2009)
First, there is a disparity between some of our legal rights and responsibilities in the ages between 18 and 21. Young men have the responsibility to register to fight for their country, but they are considered too immature to drink alcohol. Your country can send you out to die, but you cant have a drink. If you can fight & die for your country, there should be nothing that it is illegal for you to do that it is legal for someone else to do. By 18, you should be able to drink alcohol. Therefore, solutions would be to either raise the service age to 21, or lower the drinking age to 18.
Second, it is theorized (and I agree) that lowering the drinking age to 18 would temper dangerous binge drinking on college campuses cross country. If alcohol was legally available to college age individuals (maybe only in bars?), perhaps they would be less likely to go to parties & drink as much as possible before the party gets busted...
Let me know what you think in the comments.
Photo by Saquan Stimpson/monstershaq2000 through Creative Commons