To: Lane3 who wrote (18329 ) 7/16/2001 11:51:35 AM From: thames_sider Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 82486 Karen, wonderful answer. I think you've proved again you're one of the nicest people on this thread... I'm somewhat more, ah, non-religious than you. Not only do I not accept religious works as the definitive statement of history (although they may, sometimes, be accurate; or sometimes hint at or derive from historical reality), but I simply don't believe the religious viewpoint that there is a god - still less that one designed and created the universe. I don't know this, of course... but I don't take it on faith. I do recognise that many people are religious, with many different and conflicting beliefs. And while I may not agree with any or all, I won't doubt their faith. As their feeling, their thought, I have neither the right to do so, nor the means - and what they believe is (presumably!) right for them, so I'd be wrong anyway. Plus, as a way of living, and of viewing the world in more than a physical sense, those with a religious spiritual side may be more correct than me. I don't, as I say, have any faith myself: but intellectually I'm actually attracted to the idea of a non-intervening, non-physical deity; who cannot alter what we do or how, but who nevertheless cares... What I will argue against is attempts to apply any religion to me, in my life and place. (If it's the national ethos or law of a country I'm visiting, obviously I'll respect their requirements as I'm able: that's different). And, in particular, I do stand against attempts to recast history, or science - the observable, logical, natural world of physical reality - to fit the worldview of some faith.