anonymous asked:

Sorry, but that's kind of a stupid comparison to make considering the scientists who got us to the moon and got us those photos of Pluto are overwhelmingly unaffiliated with religion. Meanwhile, the religious are the ones who got Trump elected.

um…. are you implying that minorities aren’t religious? because boy howdy do i have news for you 

also the institutions that got us into space aren’t affiliated with a religion bc they’ve been federal agencies and hail hallelujah separation of church and state, but the individual scientists working in those institutions could belong to any religion. there’s gotta be more muslims, hindus, christians and on and on and on than we can even count that we owe for getting us to the moon/out to pluto. never mind everything before that, every breakthrough and advancement.  

my entire point is that this notion that somehow humans will “evolve” past religion is absurd because it hinges on the idea that religion is a threat to science and vice versa. but it’s not. they have virtually no affect on one another. there have been atheists for all of human history, well before cars and sky scrapers, and there will be religious people involved in the founding of the first extraterrestrial human colony. if we make it to mars i can guarantee we’ll build some kind of church or temple there to suit the religious needs of the community, and bill maher can suck my blue silicone dick over it. 

The control of education is the arena in which political fights between religious believers and civil authorities become most bitter. In the United States these fights are made peculiarly intractable by the legal doctrine of separation of church and state, which forbids public schools to provide religious instruction. Parents with fundamentalist beliefs have a legitimate grievance, being compelled to pay for public schools which they see as destroying the religious faith in their children. This feeling of grievance was avoided in England through the wisdom of Thomas Huxley, a close friend of Charles Darwin and a leading proponent of Darwin’s theory of evolution. When public education was instituted in England in 1870, eleven years after Darwin’s theory was published, Huxley was appointed to the royal commission which decided what to teach in the public schools. 

Huxley was himself an agnostic, but as a member of the commission he firmly insisted that religion should be taught in schools together with science. Every child should be taught the Christian Bible as an integral part of English culture. In recent times the scope of religious instruction in England has been extended to include Judaism and Islam. As a result of this policy, no strong antagonism between religious parents and public schools has arisen, from 1870 until the present day. The teaching of religion in public schools coincided with a decline of religious belief and a growth of religious tolerance. Children exposed to religion in public schools do not as a rule take it seriously. WE do not know whether Huxley foresaw the decline of religion in England, but there is no doubt that he would have welcomed this unintended consequence of his educational policy. 

It is unfortunate that Huxley’s solution of the problem of religious education is not available to the United States. Every country is different, especially in matters concerning religion, and no single solution to the problem of religious education fits all. In each country, a workable solution has to be found by political compromise between conflicting views, within the rules imposed by the local culture. To be workable, a solution does not nee to be scientifically or philosophically consistent. When I was a boy in England long ago, people who traveled on trains with dogs had to pay for a dog ticket. The question arose whether I needed to buy a dog ticket when I was traveling with a tortoise. The conductor on the train gave me the answer: “Cats is dogs and rabbits is dogs but tortoises is insects and travel free according.” The rules governing religious education should be administered with a similar freedom of interpretation. 

Freeman Dyson  |  The Scientist As Rebel (2006)

Trump wants to “totally destroy” the Johnson Amendment barring religious groups from politics

  • At the National Prayer Breakfast on Thursday,  Trump vowed to “destroy” the Johnson Amendment – a tax provision designed to help maintain the separation of church and state.
  • The Johnson Amendment prohibits organizations like churches and charities from participating in campaigns for or against specific political candidates under threat of losing their tax-exempt status.
  • Trump has not said how he plans to scrap the Johnson Amendment, but doing so would allow religious leaders to endorse candidates from the pulpit and churches to pour money into campaigns. Read more

i’m just sitting here in awe of what is actually happening in this country right now.

it’s hard to imagine just how quickly this has all taken place. just 9 days ago, Obama was still in office and people of any religion could travel freely to and from the US.

have a green card and coming back from a vacation? nope. sorry. too bad for you. you can’t come back home. instead you get to be detained at the airport, denied entry into the US, have your social media “reviewed”, and actually asked about your views on 45.

never mind the fact the amount of money and YEARS it takes to even get a green card. gone. useless.

the US visa waiver program has even been suspended from countries that are ALLIES to the US.

the fact that this was announced on Holocaust Remembrance Day did not go unnoticed except by the actual administration. there was no mentions of Jews, anti-Semitism, or the murder of 6+ million people; a first for any White House.

dick cheney doesn’t even agree with this. dick. motherfucking 9/11. cheney. although, i’m sure 45 will come out (i mean, he’ll send spicer) and try to rip apart cheney and his role in our government just like he does with ANYONE who disagrees with him. i’m calling it now: the main focus will be the alternative fact that 45 ALWAYS opposed the war in Iraq, so clearly he knows better than cheney.

it does always give me hope when everyone comes together to protest against this man and his nazi cabinet (none of this ‘alt-right’ bullshit). the PEACEFUL protesters in new york at jfk international are there chanting “let them in! let them in!” “resist! fight back! this is our new york!”

if there is one thing that isn’t completely and utterly terrifying and horrible that has come from 45’s EIGHT days in office, it’s the fact that he has united everyone against him. people are putting aside their differences and fighting together to stop this dictator.

“There is more power in unity than division.” - Emanuel Cleaver

“In unity there is strength; without unity we are victims. stay united.” - Bill Bailey

“You can’t have unity without diversity.” - Richard Twiss