Alexandra,
Girl, when I wrote those words, I knew that I'd be hearing from you!!!
The "intelligent design" movement is actually a good case in point (even astrophysicists dance on religious grounds when they come up with concepts such as the "anthropic principle"). Whenever a religious person seeks (or finds) scientific proof that will (or may) confirm the "truth" of her spiritual beliefs, she's guilty of question-begging. As most scientists well know, the questions you ask determine the answers you get. We cannot but interpret and see the things of this world through our own glasses darkly (or "pinkly," for some of us
).You're absolutely right, of course, the relationship between a person and her Goddess (if Goddess there is), is a personal one. And we have no business wanting to impose that relationship as a model on others. Yet, "personal" doesn't mean "hidden." We, as a species, were religious even before we stood fully erect (okay, so I exaggerate a bit). The impulse for transcendence and meaning is in our very bones--and this is where spirituality and science have their common origins. I'm just not so certain that seeking to destroy another person's Weltanschauung, her worldview, (by highlighting its inconsistencies) is the best way to foster tolerance and understanding; doing so too often leads to resentment and ressentiment. I plead for tolerance. When, and where, another person's way of looking at, and being in, the world brings no harm to others, let that person be.
I don't know if this makes any sense to you, Alexandra. I hope it does. By the way, girl, I'm thankful that you're not afraid to express your own dissent or disagreement--this is how we eventually come to better understand both each other and ourselves.
You rock!
Love,
CJ
