ext_7628 ([identity profile] kateorman.livejournal.com) wrote in [personal profile] dreamer_easy 2004-12-30 11:17 pm (UTC)

Hmmm... I'm not sure how to answer that. Here's the full letter:
___

Edward Spence's theological conclusions are without fault in the first half. But after concluding that the tsunami tragedy means there can be no God, he starts to tie himself in knots by stating the opposite.

We don't need to resort to God's morals to have our hearts broken at the stories of children torn from their parents' arms, relatives finally found dead, some who might never be found. Even those of us with no connection with the tragedy weep over the blind indifference of nature. For those who have lost family members, believing in God will be of no comfort.

It's time to recognise religion as being often unhelpful, and at worst dangerous, divisive and violent. It's time for atheists to start defending humanism, with the core tenets of compassion, scepticism and scientific logic, with the same fervour that Billy Graham pushed evangelism in the 1950s.

Cathy Bannister, Kaleen (ACT), December 30.
___

She's responding to an opinion piece, Waves of destruction wash away belief in God's benevolence. I think she mischaracterises it.

Post a comment in response:

This account has disabled anonymous posting.
If you don't have an account you can create one now.
HTML doesn't work in the subject.
More info about formatting