Remembering our pasts: 11-7/8-09

 
It astonishes me in some ways to realize that, had he lived past 1992, my father would have turned 100 on Saturday.

Born Nov. 7, 1909, in Delavan, Ill., W.H. (for Wilber Harold) Tammeus, also known as Bill, lived through the bulk of a remarkable century. The grandson of German immigrants and farmers, he grew up on a farm -- the same farm his younger (87) brother still lives on today. And he had a degree in agriculture from the University of Illinois, where he met my mother, both of whom are pictured above. He spent some of his life in the ag field but not all, later becoming a financial advisor and a map company owner.

Dad grew up a Methodist but became a Presbyterian when he married a Presbyterian. (The photo at the left here shows Mom and Dad on their wedding day, Aug. 15, 1937. Eventually Dad grew into his ears, and so did I.) Both my parents served the church faithfully as elders, but I wouldn't call either of them profound theologians. Rather, both of them tended to live according to some words found in the New Testament book of James, "Faith without works is dead."

I used to joke that later in his life my father survived on all the dollar-a-year jobs he acquired in doing his civic and religious duties.

I mention my father's centennial this weekend not because any (well, many) of you knew him but because I want to make the point that again that we lose our way if we lose our memories. Our personal history creates the story that shapes us. But, in the end, we also can shape that story. We can change the future of the story, even if we can't change the past.

One of the thing faith communities help people do is to reimagine their futures, to see that better, brighter, more productive and beautiful futures are possible. But those futures should honor what was good in our past. My father -- a funny, dedicated, hard-working, trusting, honest man -- is part of what is good about my own past. So as I continue to imagine my future, I will do what I can to remember that and to bring that with me.

(The photo at the bottom right may be my favorite of Dad. My nephew Mark took it one day while Dad was busy hauling nothing, apparently, in our old wheelbarrow from a small storage shed at the back of the house in which I grew up. Dad often laughed, but not in this picture. And, no, my mother did not -- repeat, not -- buy him those overalls or that hat.)

* * *

CLERGY IN CRISIS SITUATIONS

When a catastrophe like the shootings at Ford Hood occurs, one of my first thoughts if for the on-duty clergy who must help people get through all the associated trauma. Catholic News Service has done this intriguing story about one priest at Fort Hood and what he experienced on that awful day on Thursday. Army chaplains receive lots of training, but probably nothing really can prepare someone for a massacre. Still, I'm glad the military has chaplains.

* * *

P.S.: You can follow me on Twitter at www.twitter.com/BillTammeus.

Comments

[Just Thinking]

It appears that the gunman at Fort Hood may have developed a persecution complex, and wanted to silence the voices that he didn't like. He wanted certain people to shut up ... permanently.

It's a serious warning sign when someone begins to insist that others shut up who do them no harm. When a person's attitudes switch from being bothered or annoyed to believing that they must silence their opposition, then something has snapped in that person. At that point there is no way to predict what they may or may not be able to justify as 'necessary' in order to modify the behavior of others. Whenever you see someone reach such a breaking point, then it's important to seek professional help in dealing with the person. That was the signal before the Columbine disaster, too.

Some people have absolutely no tolerance for discomfort of any kind, or they may be so paranoid or sensitive that even the slightest hint of disapproval can send them over the edge, whether imagined or real. Others have such a low self-image either due to persecution. ridicule, or gross misperception, that they may become unstable at the drop of a hat. Reactions vary wildly. But one thing is for sure: if the person's reactions are way out of proportion, especially tending toward insistence, violence, or bullying to silence you, then it pays to be cautious.

The Fort Hood attacker illustrates how people from other cultures may have serious trouble adapting to the freedoms and lack of structure that exists in this country, especially when they're used to living under dictatorships or other tightly-controlled situations. Fragile wounded egos of those who were once in controlling classes or controlled environments can snap when they can't order others around any more.

Christians should reach out to, befriend and help fragile/broken people.

[IGGY - www.KCFreeThinkers.org]

Stand up, stand up, against Jesus - Guardian UK
Civility has its uses, but we should not be afraid of satire and mockery as weapons against religious power

Here is a comment I picked up on a blog about Santa - 100% applicable to religion and mockery in my opinion .... The actual article is below.

Parent: Honey, I have something to tell you.

Child: What, Mummy?

Parent: There isn't a Santa Claus.

Child: What? You're MOCKING ME! You know how much I love and depend on Santa Claus! He sees me when I'm sleeping. He knows when I'm awake. He knows when I've been bad or good... so I'm always good, for GOODNESS SAKE, Mummy! But without Santa, I might as well go steal an I-Pod Shuffle from the Apple store. Plus, you can't prove he doesn't exist, Mummy!

Parent: Your father and I give you presents because we LOVE you, honey. That isn't going to change.

Child: Um.... yeah, then screw Santa.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/belief/2009/nov/06/religion-atheism

[memberofKCFreeThinkers.org]

Old photos are fun to look at. Society and technology have evolved greatly since these pics.

We have lots of photos in my family, too. Life moves forward. Learning from the past is good. Moving forward is even better….

I noticed yesterday gay rights moved ahead in Maine. Still not equal, but better. Why not equal? Because of religion. That’s why.

Fort Hood. What a shame. I am sure there is so much about this story we do not know. Maybe we will never know. The chaplains?, I’m sure they will make everything right. A few prayers and everybody will be okay.
It is sad what happens in life sometimes. God sure is mysterious. Perhaps reading the bible will help. Or maybe the holy ghost will help. Or not. Somewhere at the same time someone is praying for some money, will get it and say god sent it to them. Meanwhile in Fort Hood several are dead and many are in the hospital. What a loving god we have…

This makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside.

Shake the blanky off and face the real world. Prayer does not work. Just a thought.

Symptoms of Schizophrenia
Click to Check

0. Hallucinations - most commonly hearing voices
0. Delusions - incorrect and irrational beliefs that are deeply held and genuinely believed to be correct.
Delusions of grandeur
Paranoid delusions
Michio Kaku on Life After Death, Creationism and Scientific Evidence of Geological Time
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DrLtGDc2724

Peace For the Sake of Goodness Cole

[Will Graham]

Bill, good points about Chaplains in the Military. Of course, the largest "Free"thought group in the United States, FFRF, is trying to eliminate them.

Sure, believers pay taxes too and have the Constitutional right to be protected from have their own freedom of religon restricted, but what does Dan Barker, the leader of the FFRF, care?

He never served the country (and in fact had a ministerial deferment during the Vietnam era!) but lawsuits are the bread and butter of the FFRF.

[Will Graham]

Amusing, revealing, meeting last night! (Advertised here yesterday.) The Kansas Citizens for Science, in alliance with the so called Amercians United for "Separation" of Church and State...although the goal seems to be the "elimination" of the Church from the state...had a trio of speakers, with some fillers, over at the tax payer funded Johnson County Community College.

The first two speakers were pretty standard, and superficial, cheerleaders for evolution. Professor Decelles, while stating that he was a Roman Catholic, and not going to be talking about religion, sprinkled his little talk with jabs at religion in general.

Josh Ronsenau, who we met at a KU meeting a couple of years ago was much more concerned with science, and although he is an atheist he doesn't push it.

The last speaker, Retired Professor Burress, was the real piece of work. He had all kinds of labels to pigeonhole believers with, often in a generalizing inaccurate fashion (he joked that was making some of this up but he wasn't really kidding), and had instructions on what kinds of names to call people. For example, he said that it is best to label people with a Radical Religious Right label rather that just "Religious Right" as the latter term can backfire on the propagandist using it...as can outright insults.

(Interestingly, the KCFS several years ago BRAGGED about how they strove to marginalize the opposition with labeling.)

Any way, this Burress guy said a key method was to "Divide and Conquer" and use various religious groups against each other by pretending to have common goals with some of them.

He could have been using the playbook of one of President Obama's mentors, Saul Alinksy and his "Rules for Radicals". Take a good look at rules 5 and 13:
http://www.uwosh.edu/faculty_staff/barnhill/ES_375/alinsky_rules_power_tactics.html

[Dolores Lear]

Bill:
"Army chaplains receive lots of training, but probably nothing really can prepare someone for a massacre. Still, I'm glad the military has chaplains."

The Military Has Chaplains. Why? Why are they a part of the Killer Military?

God/Us, in our Image in Genesis, Made a Female from the Male Rib, (Genesis 2:21,22.) Perfect Human Helpmeets, not Mates.

Genesis 2:23. KJV. "And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man."

This was handed down from Body Birth Ancestors as 'Supernatural Birth'. The Equal Clones started Reproducing Unequal Misbred Male and Female Children. Why?

Down through Time, many Religious Males became Celibate, and became known as Monks. Females became Celibate and became Nuns, but this does not make them Purebred Born Again like Adam and Eve.

Until our High Tech Revolution, when the Female could be Artificially Inseminated, by Immaculate High Tech, like some Females in the Old Testament, and Elizabeth and Mary, Cousins, in the New Testament.

Humans in the 1900s, Relearned how to do Artificial Insemination, and also Learned how to Clone Same Sex Animals. But the Religious Protests, made it Illegal to Clone Same Sex Humans.

During this same Time, Humans made Atomic and Nuclear Bombs, and the USA Christian Nation, used Two Atomic Bombs on Japan. Why? For the Love God/Us and Jesus? Or our Country?

What does it mean, "Remembering our Past"? Just our Family Ancestry? Does our Genetic Memory still Remember our High Tech Past?

Does Evolving up to the High Tech Knowledge, for the past 100 years, Help Remember Our God/Us Clone Male and Female Ancestors in our Human Image, Recorded in our Holy Scriptures?

[Will Graham]

"we should not be afraid of satire and mockery as weapons against religious power."

Weapons? An odd choice of words.

http://www.uwosh.edu/faculty_staff/barnhill/ES_375/alinsky_rules_power_tactics.html

see rule number 5; this is straight from the radical playbook.

[Will Graham]

What is amusing to me is that atheists keep telling us that this is NOT a Christian nation (like the FFRF does in its attempt to eliminate Chaplains, the free exercise clause of the Constitution be damned), but when "atomic bombs" are mentioned in a prrevious post (and the bombs were built by atheitic scientists) this suddenly is "A Christian Nation".

Double standards are fun to play with, aren't they? HAhahahahaha!!!!

[IGGY - www.KCFreeThinkers.org]

I don't have a problem with Army Chaplains as long as they don't get paid by tax payers and don't have a military rank. In service rank matters. If they want to draw a salary from donations of their church, it's OK with me but not government.

I am sure if the government put out a call to ministers/pastors/imams/rabbi's to come and work for free in the military (in US, in Europe, Asia, Iraq and Afghanistan) there will be thousands of people who'd like to come, see the world and also tend to the flock for free.

Separation of church and state will be observed this way - I also don't mind giving the ministers and their families full medical benefits and meals when they live on base - just like regular soldiers can get at the chow hall.

Interesting thing, one of the speakers last night at the Darwin even reminded us it was "Baptists" who insisted on calling it "the wall of separatoin". I recall Jefferson's letter to Danburry Bapitsts where he went over this with them.

How funny things change.

[IGGY - www.KCFreeThinkers.org]

Will Graham wrote>>>>>>>>>.(Interestingly, the KCFS several years ago BRAGGED about how they strove to marginalize the opposition with labeling.

Creating "models" and "group concepts" is helpful in identifying the "enemies of reason/science " as as as "friends of reason and rationality"- Radical Religious Right is a great label but is too "detailed" for most people.

I prefer Christian History Deniers - this works very well and generic enough to pigeonhole all kind of irrationalist theists.

Interestingly, James Christensen several years ago was banned from KCFS discussion board for his irrational views on "rational conversations" about science.

Every now and then his posts (under different names) pop up online somewhere when Kansas Citizens For Science are mentioned, especially Jack Krebs. He keeps bringing up the same arguments "science doesn't equal atheism", "alienating", "labeling", "disrespect for religion".

Some things just never change!

[Susan]

Bill, I'm really sad to know that the man who allegedly committed the Fort Hood murders was a devout Muslim. This just makes it so much harder for the Muslim people. Just Thinking, I am curious where you learned that this man grew up unaccustomed to our freedoms, or was accustomed to being part of a ruling class and bossing others around? From my understanding, this man grew up here in the U.S. and has been part of the highly-successful, educated segment of American society.

But then he has the brother in Jerusalem ... I hate to automatically tie in the killings with his religious beliefs, or even with any political affiliations he may have developed due to his brother living as a Muslim in Jerusalem. I almost wish he'd shown some signs of mental instability, because I'd rather attribute the crimes to some chemical imbalance than think what I am thinking.

I guess time will tell what this was really all about.

[Dolores Lear]

Bill. Nice looking Parents. I think you favor in looks, like your Mother.

Who were our Human Ancestors on Earth? Humans 'in our Image'? Algae from Space up to Animals?

I accept, with My Genetic Memory, that our High Tech Human Ancestors Colonized Earth, and made more than One Clone Couple,'in their Image, in the beginning'.

Where did the Universe Elements Come From, and When did the Invisible Elements Evolve into Visible Elements? Did Visible and Invisible Elements Begin at the Same Time?

How Humans can Know 'How' the Elements made LIFE in the Universe, is impossible today. Humans can Know LIFE Species on Earth were Colonized, as Recorded in Genesis by our Human Body Birth Ancestors.

A Colony of Clone Male and Female Human Caretakers were Reproduced, to be the Caretakers of our New Colonized Planet. Why would High Tech Clones put One Couple on a New Planet?

My question: Did the Original Human Purebred Male and Female Clones Reproduced 'in the beginning' by High Tech Science have a 'Defect'? Why did they start Reproducing Misbred Children, by Flesh Lust?

Do Religious Scriptures and Myths have the Information?
Evolution Theory says they Evolved on Earth, not Reproduced by High Tech Cloning.

Why would the Perfect Clones decide to start Reproducing Children by Body Birth with Genetic and Physical Defects? These Defects in the Human Seed, were handed down when Life Species Began/Evolved on another Planet.

Why did the Original Colony fall to Lust Body Birth Reproduction? Before our High Tech Reproduction today, Body Birth needed the Male Lust for Reproduction.

Can Humans made from Elements ever Know how Elements began? High Tech Humans today Know Humans can Colonize a Planet, and Reproduce in a High Tech Lab.

Most Body Birth Humans can go back to 3rd or 4th Generations of Ancestors, or more since Humans live longer. The Only Way Humans can go back to the Original Human Ancestors on Earth, is to Translate Religion and Myth with High Tech Science.

[Susan]

In my previous post, I neglected to say that I'm hoping the Fort Hood murders won't negatively-impact Muslim Americans who want to serve our country in the military, from being able to do so. I think our service-people have been doing an astounding job of overcoming their prejudices in the wake of September 11. And I hope we can keep on becoming better people, and not regress into discriminatory behaviors.

What is so hard about this case is that there seems to have been no real warning that this man was about to go over the edge and start shooting. When something like this happens, there's a natural desire to make absolutely sure that it can't happen again.

This is where I can understand Daniel Dennett's assertion that our world needs people who will be loyal to upholding democratic freedoms, and put freedom for all ahead of promoting a particular religious agenda. This is easier for me, because I don't equate religion with God. And I feel that God is displeased with any kind of tyranny, even and especially tyranny in His name. But I think it's harder for some who might feel they were being asked to choose between God and country.

When I say that I think our service-people have been doing a great job, I'm not talking about our leaders' choice to punish whole groups of people who never did us any harm. And it's heartbreaking to see all the deformed babies that are now being born in Iraq, due to the genetically-damaging chemicals that our country inflicted on their parents. I hope our nation assumes full responsibility for these atrocities and for making restitution.

[Just Thinking]

"Our personal history creates the story that shapes us. But, in the end, we also can shape that story. We can change the future of the story, even if we can't change the past." -- Bill Tammeus

We have free will. Without free will then we could not change our story at all. Without free will, we could not be held responsible for our choices and for our actions. Free will is fundamental to existence, and free will cannot be explained by Science. If free could be explained by Science, predicted in advance, then every choice you make would be determined in advance.

Scientists used to tacitly assume determinism, but this led to contradictions, which ultimately resulted in a complete overhaul of Science and the "Scientific Method." Science no longer insists that "If A, then B happens". Now it is, "If A, then B or C or D or E ...". Nobody knows which one. :)

We do have free will; we can affect our environment; and we are held responsible for our own choices in the matter. The first choice that we make is whether or not to believe that there is such a thing as free will which transcends Science. If we believe that there is such a thing as free will, then we can further chose to accept our responsibility in the decisions that we make by asking, "What is the right thing to do?" If we do not believe that there is free will, then we believe that we are merely spectators in our own lives, and we do not hold ourselves responsible for our own actions. It becomes a cop-out for bad decisions.

Those who deny free must ultimately resort to coercion and force in order to change minds. I believe minds are changed by offering *choices*.

[Lynne - www.kcfreethinkers.org]

Will,

You seem rather upset that the opposition to you and your Radical Religious Right friends is on to your political machinations, and that we're effective in promoting the democratic ideals of pluralism and diversity. What, only the RRR is allowed to be politically active?

I also noticed that Jim and your other friends did not disrupt our event as you said you would. Turnout far exceeded our expectations. We had a PACKED room! We had to put up extra chairs, there were so many people! This event, co-sponsored by the Greater Kansas City Chapter of Americans United for Separation of Church and State - and by Kansas Citizens for Science - was a roaring success, and you just can't stand it Will, can you?

Poor Will. You and your friends must be really depressed right about now. Maybe you need some ice cream to cheer you up. You know, Ben & Jerry's makes some really good ice cream. My favorite is Stephen Colbert's Americone Dream. Better watch which store you go into, though, or you might just see one of our fliers still up on the bulletin board!

[Just Thinking]

Atheists on this blog have boxed themselves into irrational inconsistency by demanding that everything which happens can be explained and predicted based on magical physical 'laws.' They have written free will and free choice out of the equation of humanity. Everything which happens to them must be explained entirely by magical physical 'laws' and, so, choices do not exist. Choices would necessarily transcend the natural, and so they deny that choices exists.

They don't believe that there can be free will or free choice, and yet they insist on holding people responsible for whether or not they believe in God. That is the pinnacle of irrationality. You can't hold people responsible for beliefs if you don't believe that they have choices. Morality has no meaning if you don't believe that you make choices. And yet they judge morality according to some nebulous and changing standard that they have invented for themselves. But how can they hold anyone responsible for 'wrong' when they don't believe people have choices? Yes, this is the pinnacle of irrationality.

Atheists here on this blog constantly claim that God is immoral. They always point to such experiences when discussing God. Where do they get their morality? Morality is inconsistent with their thinking, because they don't believe in choices. Yes, this is the pinnacle of irrational thinking.

As I mentioned before, free will and morality are inextricably linked. You can't have one without the other, no matter how hard you try. There is nothing moral or immoral if there is no choice. That is irrational thinking at its worst.

Atheists here have no choice but to believe that the gunman at Fort Hood had no choice to make. That's their irrational view of the world. There are intelligent atheists who escape these Philosophical inconsistencies. Just not the ones posting here.

[Lynne - www.kcfreethinkers.org]

>Choices would necessarily transcend the natural,

BZZZ! Wrong! Humans are part of the natural world. Therefore, nothing we do is supernatural.

[Lynne - www.kcfreethinkers.org]

Lack of free will doesn't mean we can make choices. We make choices all the time. Free will is the idea that we can make choices absent of any reason for us making those choices. We have REASONS for everything we do, whether it be a genetic predisposition, events in our lives that influence who we are or a learned pattern of thinking that leads us to make the decisions that we do. "Free will" is the idea that the choices we make come from nowhere - that it's just magic that we make one choice over another.

[Lynne - www.kcfreethinkers.org]

Oops, I mean it doesn't mean we CAN'T make choices. We make choices, but those choices are not based on mysterious free will. They are based on who we are - which is a combination of our innate tendencies, our experiences and our learned patterns of thinking.

[Susan]

Will, a while back I had understood you or Adam to say that you agree with Darwin's theory that we all descended from a common ancestor. I tried to do a search to pinpoint which one of you, but couldn't locate the comment, so maybe it was Adam, and if this is one area where you guys happen to think differently, then I apologize for thinking that you've said you DO accept evolution.

So I'm wondering why you would have a problem with evolution being taught (and not just taught alongside religious myths, but taught as the best explanation we currently have)? I understand that evolution has only ever claimed to explain the "origins of species" and not the very beginning of life itself -- and I agree that it's unscientific and unprofessional when people like Dawkins insist that evolution and Atheism go hand in hand.

I'm just saying that since you seem to agree with Evolution being taught in science classes -- don't you agree with those who are trying to get it taught, that it's just wrong for people to try to get in the way of kids learning the scientific truth, simply because the truth doesn't line up with their parents' interpretations of Scripture?

I agree with you that the labeling is mean and unnecessary -- but it just seems rather silly that so many science teachers are having to side-step the whole issue because of the Creationists' and ID proponents' insistence that their opinions get equal time in science classes.

[Susan]

Lynne, thanks for clarifying about free will. I'd been wondering where Just Thinking had got the idea that anyone here had said "that the gunman at Fort Hood had no choice to make."

Perhaps this also explains why some Christians here have sometimes accused me of "making excuses" for other people, simply because I attempted to understand someone's point of view. I guess if someone can only think in the black-and-white extremes of absolute free will versus absolute absence of choice, then those of us who can see varying shades and extenuating factors, are just seen as rather wishy-washy makers of excuses.

[Dolores Lear]

JT:
"..free will and morality are inextricably linked. You can't have one without the other, no matter how hard you try. There is nothing moral or immoral if there is no choice."

'In the Beginning God/Us had a Free Will High Tech Human Moral Choice to Colonize Earth or Not. Our Human God/Us 'Ancestors', had the Free Will Human High Tech Moral Choice for the type of Eco System to Create on Earth.

They had the Free Will High Tech Human Moral Choice to Reproduce Human Purebred Males and Clone Females from the Male Rib.

The Male and Female Human Clone Helpmeets had the Free Will Moral Choice, to Return to Animalistic Body Birth Reproduction. God/Us does not want to Force Humans to Be Moral. It has to come Willing with Free Will.

Are Humans ready to accept that the Original Colony of Male and Female Higher Clone Humans, Choose with their Free Will, to Began the Heterosexual Birth Lower Animalistic Reproduction Lifestyle?

Just like the Army Major that choose from Birth, the Muslim Religion. He did not want to go to Afghanistan. Was he part of a Muslim Terrorist Plot?

JT:
"There are intelligent atheists who escape these Philosophical inconsistencies. Just not the ones posting here."

All Humans Asexual Purebred Clone Helpmeets, or Heterosexual Misbred Mates, Religious or Atheists, have Philosophical Moral Choices constantly in their Lifestyles.

How many more Religious and Civil Killer Divisions, can Body Birth Humans with Free Will, Morally make on One Planetary Home?

Bill:
"Army chaplains receive lots of training, but probably nothing really can prepare someone for a massacre. Still, I'm glad the military has chaplains."

What are Chaplains and Believers in the God of Peace, doing in the military?

[adam harrison]

Lynne, when did any of us say we were going to disrupt your meeting?

All we did was pass out material to the younger people in the last four rows. No one complained, and a number of people said they plan to call us.

What WAS funny was that although we submitted FOUR question cards, none was picked.

But I actually enjoyed the meeting! I like Josh, because he is not an evangelist for atheism, and I liked especially the part were the last speaker explained how to label people and call them names...it was a real exercise in PROPAGANDA TECHINQUES but it had NOTHING TO DO WITH SCIENCE. As for us, we are not members of the Radical Right or any such groups; you are speaking out of ignorance.

And none of us have a problem with evolution being taught, what we have a problem with is evolution being used as a front for atheism, which you frequently see done on the KCFS discussion board and in the articles they link to at "Talk Reason".

So thats my main beef, Lynne and Susan; that this is not just about "science" education as KCFS maintains but also about fronting for atheism.

YOU KNOW ITS TRUE Lynne, don't try to kid us, it ain't gonna work.

And what scientific "Truth" are you referring to, Susan? Science is constantly subject to change; as the atheists here keep telling us there is "No Truth"...you of course say the same thing, since although you claim to believe in some kind of Truth you have previously said that you are always searching for it and could be wrong about ANYTHING and EVERYTHING.

Thats called "relativism", Susan.

And Lynne, that ice cream is bad for you! LOL!

[adam harrison]

KCF, whats this about KCFS banning James? That would have been hard, since he never posted there. True, that last name was used a lot, and bandied about, but back then he didn't have dealing with them.

But as to BANNING, that happened all the time over there. That is why the board is not visited like it used to be. Jack apparenlty didn't have an open view of discussion like Bill does.

And its still going on.

You are right! Some things just never change! LOL!

[Just Thinking]

Sorry, Lynne, if you're going to assert that everything which happens can be explained purely by natural processes and laws of Science, then choices don't exist. In that wrongheaded scheme, choices are inevitable consequences of natural processes and Scientific 'law'! But, clearly and obviously, something which is an inevitable consequence is not a CHOICE at all!

It's a common mistake that those who put too much faith in Science often make. They go too far. In their desparate desire to exclude God and the superantural, they explain away the ability to choose. You don't have free will if you cannot make a choice. And you cannot make a choice if that choice is really just an inevitable consequence of natural processes and magical Scientific 'laws.' Sorry, Lynne, but that's logic. That's rationality. That's reality.

The atheists in this blog have wound themselves up into a knot that cannot be untied. They've discarded free will by declaring that everything which happens is an inevitable consequence of only natural process and magical Scientific 'law.' And then they turn around and blame people for choosing to believe in God! Or they blame people for immoral choices! You can't have it both ways, guys. Either there are things which you can do which are not inevitable consequences of natural processes and magical Scientific 'laws,' or you have absolutely no control over your life whatsoever. One or the other is true. That's a genuine dichotomy, a real Truth.

Philosophers addressed such nonsense hundred of years ago.