You're right, I did run off-topic, more so considering the individuals in question are far from "sincere, thoughtful religious" people. I was thinking more about the perceived conflict between evolution and Christianity, or science and religion generally, from which this debate largely stems (except in the case of rare birds like Mystic).Quote:
Originally Posted by Universal Mind
In my experience, most people in Western culture who consider themselves Christian or simply believe in God do not reject evolution. I suspect more are coming to do so because of the insistence of vocal minorities that the two must conflict, a reflection of equally extreme and rigid views on both sides.
Your response to my request for "a sincere, thoughtful religious person's outlook" is a good case in point. I would characterize your summary as an unexamined, dogmatic, and literalist outlook, suggesting that you can't even conceive of a "sincere, thoughtful religious person." Most people who derive their views in whole or in part from the canonized Bible do not treat the text as an infallible history book. They have some ideas of their own about the meanings of different stories and passages. And, like you and I, most Westerners, Christian or otherwise, view religious crusaders as, in Tony Blair's words, "nutters."
Promoting the idea it's religion vs. science, all or nothing, just does the nutters' work for them.
