Religion
In reply to the discussion: Religion a mental illness? [View all]nil desperandum
(654 posts)I appreciate the response, as your post specifically used the words non-existence (13. You have no evidence for the non-existence of a god.) I posed my question accordingly.
I do not believe stating it is a mental illness benefits anyone attempting to unify a voting coalition. I also do not believe it's a mental illness.
My question is how do we take claims of space aliens, bigfoot, and a host of other unproven life forms less seriously than those of god if the only pre-requisite is no evidence to support or disprove their presence at this time? If the people who believe they see aliens aren't harming anyone does your previous response suggest we accept them at face value as we do believers in a god or gods?
If we do that and accept them as having the same equal weight as religious believers does that help or hurt a political cause? I believe that a belief in the existence of space aliens would be problematic in a general election. That's interesting to me because a belief in god has no more or no less supporting evidence, but is accepted as evidence of the good character required to serve a political office.
Clearly, the existence of god is given far more deference than the existence of aliens without anymore evidence. Often times those who believe in the existence of aliens and are convinced Roswell was the first contact point are viewed as not quite right intellectually. Is that fair if the criteria is only no evidence to disprove or support their belief?