Hello

[Aiza]

The point to it was that there is no reason to posit the existence of the teapot, because it violates occams razor.
God does not escape that violation.

Yes I know--looking back I misspoke, it wasn't replacing the teapot with God, but replacing God with the teapot. I would have zero qualms about believing in said teapot if that was the case. If billions of people had seen this teapot floating in space, up to millions at once, if ideas about intergalactic cookware were found in the farthest reaches of human society and to our earliest ancestors, then I would have no trouble entertaining the idea of a space teapot. Perhaps you still would.

Then may I inquire as to why you reject all other religions, and what reasons you have for believing them not to be true.

Oh geez. There are a LOT of other religions and its not like I rejected them all at the same time for the same reason. I almost started on a big essay here going into each religion I considered in turn but I think I got halfway through before I realized how long it would take to finish. I'll give you one example, of why I reject, say, Wicca. I am a monotheist. Both polytheism and pantheism tend to tie divinity with nature in a way I think is ultimately flawed. Nature is beautiful and lovely but I've never been able to understand it as divine. The only things the "gods" of monotheism, polytheism and pantheism have in common is the word "god" between them. Also, and here I am going to generalize, but polytheism also tends to put most of its focus on gods, whereas monotheism by its nature is human-driven, and again, I think that best reflects the world as I know it.

Now I never even considered Zoroastrianism. I understood it to be ditheist, with evil having divine origins.

Source please.

Certainly!

http://www.pewforum.org/Faith-in-Flux.aspx

53% of Americans have changed religious affiliation from childhood at least once (9% eventually go back to the religion of their childhood).

She isn't a Poe but her defense of the corruption in the vatican such as the widespread pedophilia and the aids bullshit in Africa borders on pathological.

I never defended pedophilia or aids in Africa at all! Pointing out that, say, there was no secret top down worldwide conspiracy (of which the only evidence is the gut feeling of af.com members) isn't "defending pedophilia", ffs!

Considering the LCWR’s public reaction to what the Vatican had to say I think many of them feel like they were bitch slapped even though they may have phrased it a bit differently.

It's your mixed feelings that interest me. In the past I’ve seen you talk about the good the church does. They do things like feed the poor and help the sick. These are the very things the Vatican has told the LCWR they were expending too many resources on. They were told they needed to focus more on spreading the church’s message of bigotry and discrimination (my words not theirs) and less on feeding the poor. How does it make you feel knowing that the church thinks it is more important for the sisters to expend resources teaching children to discriminate against homosexuals instead of feeding hungry ones?

Some may be upset, though others are submitting to the changes with humility and patience. We will see.

I'm not sure where you are getting your information, and the media is sort of really bad when it comes to discussing Catholic issues. The CDF didn't criticize the LCWR for using too many resources on helping the poor, in fact they spent a page praising the charity work that the LCWR does: Here is the 8 page report from the CDF. But there are issues with heresy, with keynote speakers who talk about "moving beyond Jesus", not assenting to the bishops, criticizing "patriarchal religion" and desiring female ordination etc. These sorts of opinions were definitely present at the LCWR religious communities I went to along with a general dismissal of bishops as being "clueless", etc. If anything they waste a lot of money in that they don't live in community, and they really do stretch the definition of "vow of poverty" at times.

I think thats why the LCWR is shrinking and aging while the more traditional CMSWR is growing in spite of a more liberal population--when the women in the LCWR were younger, they didn't have as many options. But young women today can easily join a Christian church which allows for "female ordination" if that is what is important to them, or even just become a generic Catholic social worker if they want to do religious charity work. When you become a vowed religious, I think that implies a certain life of sacrifice, obedience, poverty and devotion. And hopefully these elements are strengthens in the LCWR in the months to come.

You know what causes an intense emotional feeling for me? Learning how things work. From gravity, to energy/matter to the very making of the cosmos. To grasp and understand something that I didn't before, getting wiser and wiser about my surroundings. For me, that is an amazing feeling. Somehow, I don't find it at all amazing to say 'goddidit' because I don't know any better, I'm none the wiser, I would of learnt nothing and I would of done nothing. But if something as simple and non progressive as that gives you that 'wow' feeling, then I can't help but compare your level of intellect and drive to learn as that of an uninterested 5 year old child. Someone who'd state that santa did it and leave it as that.

I enjoy the same thing. Religion is not about saying "god did it". It isn't a coincidence that Big Bang was first proposed by a Catholic Priest.

Similarly, I think only an atheist would talk about religion in terms of "believing in" God. I adore God. God is love, there is nothing for me not to believe in. I suppose you can say what sent me over that edge was understanding the nature of God (so much as I am able), learning about humanity's relationship with God, as well as my own experiences.