We all debate and discuss issues on this board, and could be prejudged into two camps(or more)...the "irrational" believers of fixed ideas vs the "rational" open to change scientists and logic thinkers. As for me, I am a definite Theist. Some of my beliefs appear irrational, as they can not be "proven." Some of my ideas are also fixed. I see the world this way:
5% of the people own or conrol 90% of the wealth. Dubya may or may not be a moral man. He sees the world as a world where the U.S. is a benevolant empire. As such, this empire must be allowed access to the resources which guarantee a cash/asset flow for our capitalist interests. The argument would be that without access and control of this power, our national economic power base will diminish. I disagree. I think that many of the domestic wealthy would suffer, but that the nation as an entity would survive. Now...although I profess not to be a strict fundamentalist, it is interesting to analyze the supposed end-time scenario proposed by the fun-die Christians. An "Antichrist": comes along and declares that old, fixed religious ideas are passe, and that the world needs to wake up and realize that god is us...that our inner potential as humans is the only ideal worthy of respect. (He desecrates the Temple and proclaims himself to be God.) Now...from a pure logic perspective, the Antichrist makes sense! In fact, this is the supreme irony of History. The Absolutist fixed thinking has always stifled human progress and has been rescued by the science humanists, first with the Renaissance, and later with the Enlightenment. For myself, I chart a course that incorporates the best of either extreme. I am a Believer in a source of wisdom beyond myself or my fellow humans, yet I am grounded enough to lighten up a little and let nature take its course. After all, if God did create us, He knew how we would be anyway! Lets allow the humanists to be involved in the process and defeat the evil emperor with us, fellow fixed thinkers!.