(August 11, 2016 at 10:22 am)Crossless1 Wrote:(August 11, 2016 at 10:14 am)Drich Wrote: No, no I get the definition and I get that it a metaphor... I also get that it is still apart of the definition of the word religion, as it describes the works and dedication absent deity worship. Which again is compared to those who do worship a deity, but minus the deity which makes it a "Form of religion." (works and dedication minus the god)
Or do I need also define the word form??
So why not simply dispense with the metaphor and use plain English, such as "work" or "dedication"? Of course, that's a rhetorical question. Doing so would deprive you of the false equivalency you perversely thrive upon.
Because on the oppsite side of the coin there are those who blindly follow their gods of 'science' out of sheer faith much like the faithful of anyother religion. Also because these paralells that you are all so quick to condemn by the religious swell your ranks as well. But yet you all pretend they do not. that somehow worshiping theory and culture of constant one ups-man-ship that 'science' is based on protects it's followers from blind faith. Which again is not true. Only the completely deluded and brain washed can possibly think that their 'faith' whatever it is 'lukewarm follower proof.'
