Not certain from here, but taking occam's razor to the question: it does look as if the non-rational aspect of the religious folk's belief is, with their zealotry, pushing the rational into a corner. I don't know about you, but for me Darwinism (of a particular kind) seems more rational than intelligent design. Much as I can understand the need to be comforted by believing that there was a paternal all-father figure who cared especially for me, it won't do for my intelligence. And if I were a teacher of science, it might piss me off right royally. Also, as I'm never going to get pregnant, I don't feel I've got a right to an opinion as to what women do with their bodies, even if I might not like the idea of abortion. (I would, however, hope to be consulted if I were a putative father, and would hope that I could offer support of whatever kind required. I imagine that there are very few zealous anti-religious folk in comparison with the religious folk, and the impetus behind the polarisation is led by the religious right - but I accept my analysis may be coloured by my own opinions, and may be plain wrong, because I don't know all the details about the numbers involved in the debate, and their respective stances.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2007-01-18 09:58 pm (UTC)I don't know about you, but for me Darwinism (of a particular kind) seems more rational than intelligent design. Much as I can understand the need to be comforted by believing that there was a paternal all-father figure who cared especially for me, it won't do for my intelligence. And if I were a teacher of science, it might piss me off right royally. Also, as I'm never going to get pregnant, I don't feel I've got a right to an opinion as to what women do with their bodies, even if I might not like the idea of abortion. (I would, however, hope to be consulted if I were a putative father, and would hope that I could offer support of whatever kind required.
I imagine that there are very few zealous anti-religious folk in comparison with the religious folk, and the impetus behind the polarisation is led by the religious right - but I accept my analysis may be coloured by my own opinions, and may be plain wrong, because I don't know all the details about the numbers involved in the debate, and their respective stances.