Okay, I'd like to say some things. And let's get this clear now, I'm not arguing for or against anybody's viewpoint. I argue my own, and where it dovetails or deviates from another, it is still mine.
I believe what we have here is a False Dichotomy
. We're arguing statements that aren't necessarily exclusive of one another. As stated before, I don't believe in any secret cabal of scientists that got together and decided "We're going to topple religion once and for all, and we're going to start by breaking their hold on sexuality." It does make for a good plot of a movie about mad scientists taking over the world; and while there very well may be a few that think that way (few as in 1 out of 10,000) I don't find it plausible.
Flipping that around, I also find this idea that many here and elsewhere peddle of all powerful cabal of Christians who are secretly trying to discredit scientists and want to eliminate the deviants and are willing to tinker with the Holy Book to do it is likewise an imaginative fiction, but still a fiction. I'm sure many here will read that statement, and will be quick to pull out their shiny bag of links that show it's not so.
But it is. As usual these arguments derail (not from the topic, but I mean from meaningful understanding) because we're making this Red vs. Blue, when it's about humanity. We all
do it. Nobody is free from Confirmation Bias
and other flavors of Logical Fallacy
. Getting on a high horse and saying you are demonstrates ignorance.
Scientists can and do get things wrong all the time. And this retort of "But science is always striving to check and recheck itself". First of all, so does religion. Yes, it's true. Many people here are so antipathetic to religion, it doesn't dawn on them that many Christians, as I've stated before, are dedicated to constantly checking and rechecking their interpretations. Christians belief that salvation doesn't make one perfect and the journey of perfecting your Christianity is a constant life-long process of trial and error. Simply put, the Bible itself says the Christian who becomes comfortable in his/her knowledge and beliefs is no true Christian.
On the flip side, yes, science
seeks to correct and refine it's knowledge. But *some* scientists
can, and sometimes are, less sanguine about having the theories and findings that they've been taught, that they've taught others, and that they've made a career out of questioned. There are scientists who, like some Christians, are about the truth, and constantly seek to know if they are correct.
But a scientist is a human being before she's a scientist. And human beings IN ANY field and vocation known to man has a natural tendency to accept the rightness of their cause, the unassailability of assumptions, and sharpness of their intellect. They are all
prone to fear anyone who challenges a deeply held belief.
There are flag officers who don't believe the up-and-coming young OF-3 might actually know what she's talking about. There are people who've been lawyers and judges for 10 years who are slow to think they may have examined a case wrong. There are detectives who are brilliant investigators, but they can't accept that their police work might not be the best way.
I do not think we should make blanket accusations against any group without some evidence. But at the same time, I think the same way we assume our
guys are noble and reasonable and that the conclusions they come up with rational and free of agenda, we should assume those
guys are likewise.
And if we're going to harp on how the "other" guys are misguided or got it wrong or let their assumptions cloud the findings, then we must be adult enough to accept "our" guys do it too. If we do that, then rather than climbing over each other like crabs in a fucking barrel, we can pool
our knowledge and join forces. It's staggering the leaps and bounds in knowledge humanity would achieve if we worked together in such a way.