Happy you feel that way ;)
> We've got to repress those urges of curiosity to appease glorious science
No, it's to appease our desire to live in a society that aligns with our morality. If you'd read the religious books for what they are and respect them for their interpretation of what it means to be a kind and loving human being, instead of using them as tools to manipulate the minds of the unwashed masses into behaving as a cohesive unit, then maybe you'd understand.
Re:100 years of whatever this will be
by CTmystery on Thursday December 02, 2021 @03:42PM
(#29422224)
I believe the parent understood more than you are giving them credit for. You don't think you're being too dogmatic when you replace one authority (scripture) for another (science) while retaining the exact same language?
Indeed, praise be to science.
It really is not a bad assumption.
More like a leap of faith.
There literally can not be a higher authority than it by definition.
How [onto]logical.
It is just that it is unethical to do so, so we refrain from it.
Amen, brother. We've got to repress those urges of curiosity to appease glorious science. Praise be to science! Amen.