In respect to religious claims, the burden of proof rests solely on the person or persons making the claim. If a person were to make an extraordinary and improbable claim. Their claim, would be subject to immediate scrutiny and ridicule and in turn, would be responsible for the burden of proof.
The scientific method requires evidence supporting a hypothesis or the reverse (A hypothesis that supports evidence) before it can become a theory, and even more, irrefutable evidence to make it a law. It, however, does not say that if a person says “pigs can fly.” Now, prove me wrong. Or that the people who didn’t make the claim have to provide evidence to the contrary, and if they can’t, then the former must be true. This is circular reasoning and it is the basis of every theological debate. Theist know the burden of proof rests with them. They don’t have any proof, nor could they, because their whole proposition is based on faith. This is why they always try to pass the buck when it comes to the burden of proof. Theologist have the ability to reason just like anyone else, they just refuse to do so in this one area of faith. For example:
If I were to say to them: “ Pigs can fly! ” And they said: “Did you see them?” And I said: “Well, uh, no.” And they said: “Do you know someone who did?” And I said: “Well, uh, no.” And then they said: “Do you have any evidence?” And I said: “I don’t have any evidence but, (wait for it) what I do have is a collection of books. These books contain many stories of miraculous things. Some of which are virgin births and resurrections and other suspensions of the laws of physics and of nature. Which are also without evidence. These books were written by numerous unknown authors two thousand years ago. These authors did not witness or have first hand knowledge of the events but, instead, wrote down folklore accounts, passed down by word of mouth for generations after the supposed events took place. They were then translated into many different languages over the next two millennia and picked through by various groups of people who added or subtracted from the already inaccurate accounts.” Then to have the audacity to say, “Take my word for it because I know it in my heart to be true.”
They would think I was a crackpot, and rightly so. This is precisely what religion asks of it’s followers. I think that all unfounded claims and especially these extraordinarily unfounded claims deserve the utmost scrutiny. But, somehow in our credulity, society has given license to these claims in the pretense of not “offending” anyone. The Constitution of the United States of America grants people the right to believe in whatever they choose. It also affords and protects the right of people to not be made to believe as others do. It also grants freedom of speech and of the press. It, however, does not grant the right of people to not be “offended”. This is one of the greatest amendments if not the greatest (probably why it’s the
first) and that makes it different from any other constitution in the world. The men who wrote this infallible document were fighting against a totalitarian, despotic regime where the monarchy was, and still is, the head of the church. A church that oppressed all other beliefs or disbeliefs and was founded on the morals of Henry VIII. The authors of the constitution were well aware of the dangers of allowing the ruling class into religion and religion into politics. This is explicitly why we must keep religion out of government and schools and courts. It should have no influence on medicine or science or politics. Humanity and solidarity and science should be the only principals “preached”. For without these, the species is doomed to extinction. Remember the “Golden Rule”: Do unto others as you would have done unto you. (One of many ideas plagiarized by the Bible from centuries before it’s time)
The scientific method requires evidence supporting a hypothesis or the reverse (A hypothesis that supports evidence) before it can become a theory, and even more, irrefutable evidence to make it a law. It, however, does not say that if a person says “pigs can fly.” Now, prove me wrong. Or that the people who didn’t make the claim have to provide evidence to the contrary, and if they can’t, then the former must be true. This is circular reasoning and it is the basis of every theological debate. Theist know the burden of proof rests with them. They don’t have any proof, nor could they, because their whole proposition is based on faith. This is why they always try to pass the buck when it comes to the burden of proof. Theologist have the ability to reason just like anyone else, they just refuse to do so in this one area of faith. For example:
If I were to say to them: “ Pigs can fly! ” And they said: “Did you see them?” And I said: “Well, uh, no.” And they said: “Do you know someone who did?” And I said: “Well, uh, no.” And then they said: “Do you have any evidence?” And I said: “I don’t have any evidence but, (wait for it) what I do have is a collection of books. These books contain many stories of miraculous things. Some of which are virgin births and resurrections and other suspensions of the laws of physics and of nature. Which are also without evidence. These books were written by numerous unknown authors two thousand years ago. These authors did not witness or have first hand knowledge of the events but, instead, wrote down folklore accounts, passed down by word of mouth for generations after the supposed events took place. They were then translated into many different languages over the next two millennia and picked through by various groups of people who added or subtracted from the already inaccurate accounts.” Then to have the audacity to say, “Take my word for it because I know it in my heart to be true.”
They would think I was a crackpot, and rightly so. This is precisely what religion asks of it’s followers. I think that all unfounded claims and especially these extraordinarily unfounded claims deserve the utmost scrutiny. But, somehow in our credulity, society has given license to these claims in the pretense of not “offending” anyone. The Constitution of the United States of America grants people the right to believe in whatever they choose. It also affords and protects the right of people to not be made to believe as others do. It also grants freedom of speech and of the press. It, however, does not grant the right of people to not be “offended”. This is one of the greatest amendments if not the greatest (probably why it’s the
first) and that makes it different from any other constitution in the world. The men who wrote this infallible document were fighting against a totalitarian, despotic regime where the monarchy was, and still is, the head of the church. A church that oppressed all other beliefs or disbeliefs and was founded on the morals of Henry VIII. The authors of the constitution were well aware of the dangers of allowing the ruling class into religion and religion into politics. This is explicitly why we must keep religion out of government and schools and courts. It should have no influence on medicine or science or politics. Humanity and solidarity and science should be the only principals “preached”. For without these, the species is doomed to extinction. Remember the “Golden Rule”: Do unto others as you would have done unto you. (One of many ideas plagiarized by the Bible from centuries before it’s time)
