Dawkins loves to stir things up as it were but he’s not alone. The pontiff’s comments have prompted widespread criticism around the world from health activists, medical professionals and politicians. Dawkins later stated his position was actually mis-quoted and in fact he had said “stupid, ignorant or wicked“.

The Pope also urged Africans to give up superstitious beliefs and adopt the catholic faith [LINK]. But isn’t that just exchanging one set of superstitions for another? E.g. Why is a man who came back from the dead or bread that turns into flesh or wine that turns into blood any more credible than a witch doctor? Let’s call a spade a spade.

The Pope is getting a lot of bad press these days. A nine year old girl was raped by her step-father in Brazil and impregnated with twins [LINK]. Being only nine the poor girl was physically too small to successfully deliver these babies, even by c-section. So the family and doctors organized an abortion.

The catholic church under Pope Benedict promptly ex-communicated the entire family, except the girl. The Church excommunicated the doctors who performed the procedure as well. The abuse had gone on since the girl was 6, authorities said. Now get this, they did NOT ex-communicate the step-father who raped the 9 year old. Amazing.

There’s also new information coming to light of an official papal bull from 1962 which “The Vatican instructed Catholic bishops around the world to cover up cases of sexual abuse or risk being thrown out of the Church.” [LINK]

You can read the document yourself “PDF HERE“. This document was sent out to every bishop in the world. If you really can’t stomach it, skip to the blue-outlined bits.

“The Observer has obtained a 40-year-old confidential document from the secret Vatican archive which lawyers are calling a ‘blueprint for deception and concealment’. One British lawyer acting for Church child abuse victims has described it as ‘explosive’. “

There have been 12,000 confirmed cases of child abuse within the catholic church to date. The true number is believed to be much larger.

Let’s take the word “church” out of the equation. If this was just a group like any other, we’d all be outraged beyond belief.

The Murphy Report which came out in 3Q of this year shows us just that.

“Ireland’s police colluded with the Catholic church in covering up clerical child abuse in Dublin on a huge scale, according to a damning report on decades of sex crimes committed by priests.”

“One priest admitted abusing more than 100 children. Another said he had committed abuse every two weeks for more than 25 years.”

“I read the report as justice minister. But on a human level – as a father and as a member of this community – I felt a growing sense of revulsion and anger at the horrible, evil acts committed against children.”

A key trait of dogma and religion is that it never changes. Religions are not set up to accommodate new information or cultural changes in society as that would require admitting that God had to be updated. To draw a parallel from Astrology which refused to update the astrological signs when it was discovered that there are many many other planets of equal size to Pluto. How come these new planets don’t effect my horoscope? Or how about the 13th sign of the zodiac (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ophiuchus) which appeared when the earth’s axis shifted? Just leave that one out. It’s very hard to update any system which doesn’t base itself on evidence, logic and reasoning.

Law and Science on the other hand constantly evolve based on new information.

In summary:

1. AIDS will kill you but don’t use a condom. This applies even if you’re married.
2. Rape of your step daughter for 3 years straight is ok but abortion even in the case of rape is NOT ok, even when the mother or kids or both would likely die.
3. Child abuse is ok, just don’t talk about it.
4. Superstition is not ok but men who rise from the dead and transcend into heaven are totally believable. And if you don’t believe it you’re going to Hell.
5. Earth now rotates through 13 Constellations but there are still only 12 signs of the Zodiac.

My point in this post is not to attack the Catholic Church but simply to highlight that any system based purely on an ideology is inherently bad.

To quote Richard Feynman talking about his father:

…there was a picture of the Pope with everybody bowing in front of him. And he’s say, ‘Now, look at these humans,’ he’d say, ‘here’s one human standing here, and all these others are bowing. Now, what is the difference? “

“This man has the same human problems; he eats dinner like anybody else, he goes to the bathroom, he has the same kind of problems as everybody, he’s a human being. Why are they all bowing to him? Only because of his name and his position, because of his uniform, not because of something he especially did or his honour or something like that.”

I would not say that I am anti-religion, it is true that faith and religion help billions of people cope with every day life. I can say that I do not share that point of view and strive all the time to better understand it.

What history shows is if you disengage your critical thinking, forgo reason, stop asking questions and just go on “faith” you no longer have a system of checks and balances.  When this deals with moral, developmental, health and cultural issues it becomes very dangerous indeed.

The article is filled with logical fallacies, the most basic being the redefinition of “God”. Most faiths define god as a sentient super being, who hears our every thought. Something who must constantly be glorified. Who, when we die will weigh up the good deeds vs the bad deeds and punish us or reward us accordingly, for all eternity. The article re-defines god as “that which is not limited by whatever limits the universe”.

Religion is a rigid set of traditions, beliefs and dogmata which have been informally handed down from generation to generation. Most religions have splinter groups which split off when the core group gets too large. There’s almost always a single authoritative leader in the group who lays things out for others to follow. Religion rejects new information and anything incompatible with the established practices is labeled “doubt” and ends up in the “sin” column.

Science on the other hand presents a means by which we can examine the world around us. It claims no final answers and there are no single authoritative leaders. There are no hard and fast facts, only theories which vary by the degree to which there is evidence supporting them. In some cases the evidence is overwhelming yet it’s still a theory (e.g. The Theory of Evolution). As new information is uncovered it’s evaluated, tested, documented and peer-reviewed. In fact science itself is already a meta-system! Unfortunately most people are not clear on what science actually is or how the community operates.

If evidence supports the re-writing of a theory then that theory is re-examined, re-tested and in some cases thrown out and replaced with a better, more encompassing theory. In this way science evolves and moves forward. Religion can never move forward as it would require admitting that the definition of god or the belief system is inaccurate.

Taking a closer look at the neurology behind it you might ask well why do we even have religion if it makes such little sense? First you must realise you’re an animal and your actions are governed by your brain. Just as you can’t touch your elbow to your nose due to how you’ve evolved physically, in a neurological sense you cannot resist the urge to make sense of the information you’re presented with. It happens automatically.

The human brain has evolved to make sense of the world. It uses the constructs of beginning, middle and end as an aide. When the brain lacks information it readily makes it up, there’s plenty of examples of this in patients with partial memory loss or dementia. They fill in the gap. On a grander scale that’s one possible theory as to why we have religion, because man lacked a systematic means to make sense of the world. Too much information, too fast, so we created the various religions we have today as a basic means to explain it all. That’s essentially what the author is doing in this case.

Even if you buy into the statement that god is “that which is not limited by whatever limits the universe” it doesn’t help. It’s like saying “everything I don’t understand is god”. If I took that definition and applied it back in the 1800s you would’ve said the “power which causes birds to fly is god” or “that which causes lightning is god” etc. It’s a fruitless exercise and as time goes by, understanding increases, we’ll find less and less of a need for a bucket labeled “god”.

One final note which must always be called out in discussions such as this; the presence or lack thereof of a religious set of beliefs is in no way tied to the morality or ethical behaviour of the individual. Just because you require evidence and question the world around you doesn’t make you a bad person. I certainly don’t have all the answers but I’m willing to present my thoughts in an open manner in an effort to further the discussion.

"Central Florida student Webster Cook, …is facing suspension after removing a communion wafer from a Mass held on-campus. Once blessed, these Eucharist wafers must be consumed immediately and Church leaders have said that Cook’s actions were offensive."

It continues..

"Regardless of the reason, the Diocese says its main concern is to get the Eucharist back so it can be taken care of properly and with respect. Cook has been keeping the Eucharist stored in a plastic bag since last Sunday."It is hurtful," said Father Migeul Gonzalez with the Diocese. "Imagine if they kidnapped somebody and you make a plea for that individual to please return that loved one to the family.""

It’s hardly comparable to kidnapping, now it is? I have actually witnessed this happen at my own local church whereby a parishoner put the wafer in his shirt pocket. In that case, the priest stopped what he was doing, followed the guy back to his seat and asked him to eat it.

Cook seemingly woke quite a bees nest when he did this to the point where he began receiving threats on his life.  More tangibly the University threatened to suspend him for not eating the wafer.

PZ Meyers is an outspoken biologist and associate professor at the University of Minnesota. He came to Cook’s defense on his blog [LINK].

Now PZ seems to be quite the sh1t stirrer as his post reads…
"if any of you would be willing to do what it takes to get me some, or even one, and mail it to me, I’ll show you sacrilege, gladly, and with much fanfare."

It didn’t take long for PZ to begin receiving threats of violence from folks around the net, all under the auspices of upholding Christian beliefs. What happened to turn the other cheek?

PZ then published one of the emails on his blog, complete with the sender’s email address and IP address headers. At which point folks track it to…1-800-flowers! Yes, the moron had used their work address. She was promptly fired [LINK].

PZ continues to get threatening letters: [LINK] and [LINK].

Sort of ruins the whole "love thy neighbor" thing but presumably this is just a small segment of the religious population making the others look bad.

Meanwhile the SGU points out; whilst all of this furor is going on over wafers…the Pope is merely "considering" an apology for the sex abuses in Australia. What’s that mean? He’s sitting around going "Hmmm..should I apologize? Well I didn’t do anything wrong…still maybe I should…ah feck it…"?

The church is guilty of sexual abuses in many countries, the UK, Ireland (where a Bishop actually fathered a child), the US, Australia and on and on. Why would the pope need more than 10 seconds to decide whether an apology is warranted? And moreover, what good is an apology when your life’s been ruined by a priest? To quote George Constanza "you can stuff your sorries in a sack".

It’s all about priorities. I’d place sexual assault a little higher on the list over cracker theft. Shouldn’t folks be up in arms over THAT rather than taking wafers out of a building? Makes me wonder why folks bother with any of it. The net result is a wasteful expenditure of energy.