Seeing dead people?

[H&R]

There are many more cases of losing limbs than soldiers losing legs. I want to say this again. Throughout the years there have been many, many recorded miracles of recovery in different ways. Supposedly by the work of god. But not a single one of them have been someone regaining a limb. By looking at the facts, can't you at least agree that it is the slightest bit strange? Sure, it's the unknown, and you would say that god works in mysterious ways. But if all

you are going to say is that what happens happen because it is god's will, then I'm done here.

And by the way. You don't need to pray for patience. If you really believe that you are patient, then you are patient. Tell yourself that you HAVE to be patient. Try it Works for me anyway.

[KRins]

You misunderstand H&R. It is not about what you deserve with from god. It is what God deserves from you. Why would someone unwilling to accept god's judgement be given god's favor? God will constantly test his disciples. Look at the story of King David. He ruled over a massive kingdom' date=' but god allowed the devil to test him, to test the limits of his faith. The devil WAS able to corrupt him, and he lost everything. His kingdom, his wives, everything. It was only when he lost it all that he gave up and began living as a man of god again, where he was rewarded for enduring it all, and renewing his faith.[/quote']

Secondary example: Book of Job.

[Reccum]

How can anyone say with certainty their God is the true one? That's what boggles me the most. We have evolved as a species for millions of years yet some people genuinely believe that humanity was created in some garden where a man and a woman were made by god, what less than 3 thousand years ago?!?. Civilizations which predate Christianity and Islam and Judaeism or any other Monotheistic religion often had multiple Gods. Who is right? Why are you so sure that YOUR God is the true God? Some religions even tell their followers that anyone who worships "false Gods" is going straight to hell when judgement day comes. Now that is closed minded. Any religion whose starting point is that they follow the true and only God has lost me immediately, I don't need or want to hear anymore.

Even though religion and the supernatural are interwtined it doesn't mean they have to be. I am Agnostic yet I believe in the unexplainable and untangeable. Things like karma, mass consciousness, serendipity, fate, destiny, etc...I have a tremendous amount of faith, but not to any God that people worship en masse. I thnk it is very likely that some part of us, like a soul, could live on after we pass. Maybe we are reincarnated, maybe we go to heaven, I dunno. But I live for what I know, and if there is a God I am pretty damn sure I won't be punsihed for this. You can be a good person without being religious. And if somehow one religion got it right and the rest of us are gonna burn, well so be it. I'll take my chances

[Reccum]

Well, I wouldn't.

While in one sense I would agree with you that the possible supernatural is not confined to any religious notions of it, in another I would say that a large part of why people tend to be willing to believe in the supernatural is because of religion and its influence on philosophy and society, so to a fair degree they are entwined.

su·per·nat·u·ral   /ˌsupərˈnætʃərəl, -ˈnætʃrəl/ Show Spelled[soo-per-nach-er-uhl, -nach-ruhl] Show IPA

–adjective

1. of, pertaining to, or being above or beyond what is natural; unexplainable by natural law or phenomena; abnormal.

2. of, pertaining to, characteristic of, or attributed to god or a deity.

3. of a superlative degree; preternatural: a missile of supernatural speed.

4. of, pertaining to, or attributed to ghosts, goblins, or other unearthly beings; eerie; occult.

–noun

5. a being, place, object, occurrence, etc., considered as supernatural or of supernatural origin; that which is supernatural, or outside the natural order.

6. behavior supposedly caused by the intervention of supernatural beings.

7. direct influence or action of a deity on earthly affairs.

8. the supernatural,

a. supernatural beings, behavior, and occurrences collectively.

b. supernatural forces and the supernatural plane of existence: a deep fear of the supernatural.

Seems it can be tied to religion, but not exclusively. At least from dictionary.com.

I am suprised Pali, I would think anyone who plays an RPG would have some belief in the supernatural

So there you have it, even though Pali and I do not share the same opinions I can still say that his arguments in this thread have been well structured and articulated. I have agreed with most of what he said, and I certainly would not try and sway him away from his beliefs, nor would I anyone else here. I still don't think he is being harsh, or intolerant, or even aggressive.

I am curious what you, The Nameless, think about other religions and other Gods.

[Pali]

Again' date=' people, if you can't prove it, it doesn't mean it isn't true. Again, hate to pick on your Pali, but the way you see the after-life as untrue, simply because you cannot prove it, or that god isn't real because once again, one can't prove it with conventional MORTAL means, doesn't mean he isn't there, or the after-life doesn't exist.[/quote']

Quite right. It just means we don't have good reasons to think that they exist, and should not yet believe that they do. Again, however, I would argue that modern science has given quite a good deal of support to the position that human beings are entirely physical creatures.

The point of the why won't God heal amputees site is not to complain that God won't give soldiers or kids their limbs back. It's meant to be a counter to all the people who believe that God will intervene and heal them if they pray hard enough or are good enough believers or whatever (whether you personally believe this or not is irrelevant - people die from treatable conditions because of their attachment to notions of faith healing all the time, even in the USA). These people love to point to examples like someone healing from a disease or cancer going away as an example of God's intervention - but they fail to note that every single one of those instances is a case where it is possible that the person just got better on their own, even if that happening was statistically unlikely. For all the supposed medical miracles that God's performed, never have we found a case where a limb grew back, or some other form of healing was accomplished that would not have been possible except for divine intervention - pointing this out is the point of the website.

EDIT:

I mean, the scenario stated above.. basically states: So this little girl got cured from rabies (a previously incurable disease) for no scientific reason. There was absolutely no way to explain this, scientifically, so we pointed toward god or the divine.

Just wanted to point out that this is a misreading of the website. Rabies was incurable, but the girl healing from the disease is well within the realm of natural possibility - our immune systems evolved specifically to fight infectious diseases, and it is entirely possible that she possessed a mutated gene that made it possible for her to fight it off (before anyone thinks that this is the same as claiming miracles... the average person has well over a hundred novel mutations in their genetic code, and there are numerous human populations that are better at fighting off certain diseases than others - west Africans and Mediterraneans tend to be better able to fight off malaria, Europeans and Central Asians tend to be better able to fight off HIV, etc... this is also one of many observable instances of evolution in progress ).

A picture of Jesus with his arms open' date=' seemingly walking towards me with a large smile on his face. You can say Irony, you can say anecdotal.[/quote']

Or you can say that this was an act of human kindness that was, in all probability, motivated at least in part by their Christian beliefs (note: this does not lend any credence to those beliefs being true). There's no need to attribute divine intervention to your story - people tend to be decent. If the motel you had walked into had a Qu'ran instead of a picture of Jesus, would you be a Muslim now?

However, I do not want to let you off the hook this easily from my previous questioning: I would really like to know what you think could possibly change your mind on this subject, if anything.

I am suprised Pali' date=' I would think anyone who plays an RPG would have some belief in the supernatural[/quote']

In my experience, most atheists tend to have an appreciation for sci-fi and fantasy stories and games. It's really not that we hate the idea of the supernatural, far from it... it's just that we're not convinced that any of it is real.

I certainly would not try and sway him away from his beliefs

No, please try. If I cannot support my beliefs against criticism, then they are shown to need serious refinement - that's the whole point of having discussions like this, to argue our ideas.

I am Agnostic yet I believe in the unexplainable and untangeable. Things like karma, mass consciousness, serendipity, fate, destiny, etc.

Congratulations, you're an atheist (like I mentioned before, all this word means is that you lack belief in deities). You're just an atheist who maintains certain non-theistic supernatural beliefs... which, in my experience, tends to be the group of people who refer to themselves as agnostics. I would define myself as an agnostic atheist with respect to most gods (there is not evidence in favor of these gods, nor are there logical arguments that contradict the possibility of them, so I maintain a tentative, if fairly strong, non-belief), a gnostic atheist with respect to a handful of gods (these ones are the ones I would argue are internally inconsistent or contradict reality - the Christian god, depending on what Christian you ask for a definition of him, often fits here).

Secondary example: Book of Job.

The Book of Job is, to my mind, one of the greatest examples of the Christian god behaving as a prick. God allows Satan to torture the guy to win God's bet with Satan that Job will not lose his faith in God. Never mind that Job was supposed to have been a wonderful person who didn't deserve to go through that kind of crap in the first place - far more important it was that God show Satan how much faith his followers have in him.

If you ask me, the Book of Job is one of the best examples in the Bible of placing loyalty to and faith in God as more important than alleviating real human suffering. I find that morally abhorrent in the extreme. But then, I find Christianity in general morally abhorrent, so I'm not surprised by it.

[The-Nameless]

There is not a whole lot that is going to change my mind honestly Pali. It is

simply that in my eyes God has revealed himself to me, and the quality of life I have had since my revelations has drastically improved. Some people will say people find religion during their hard times for hope. I really cannot say that is the case. I never had a sense of faith, I just woke up one day and it was different. I was in a life style that was fun, fast paced, and let me do literally anything I wanted. The funny thing is what I wanted to do was quit that life. I was not trying to get off the hook, I just did not realize that was a question that you required an answer for.

I cannot really say, it would have to be something undeniably ground breaking, but I am fairly confident that anything big enough to shake my faith will be monumental at the very least. I am not saying I need Buddha, and Muhammed to tie me to a cross or anything. It is just that faith is different from factual science.

[CurbsideProphet]

blah blah blah...

Does anyone have anymore ghost stories to share? Real or not, I still enjoyed reading about them. :-P

[Pali]

There is not a whole lot that is going to change my mind honestly Pali.

Then again I must ask you to reconsider which of us here has the more open mind. I have stated exactly what my requirements are for me to accept an idea about the nature of reality, and if those are met I will change my mind. You leave open only the vague possibility of something "monumental" happening, whereas my requirements are much more mundane and are met by all sorts of things. Your mind seems sealed shut with your beliefs inside it.

[Ali_gmud]

This is a excellent thread, but I think we should change the title from "Seeing dead people" to "Pali handing out spanks" Ooooooooooo..

EDIT: I predict several hundred people that google "Seeing Dead people," Will probably pick up on this thread, and will get to enjoy it as much as I am.

[The-Nameless]

Then again I must ask you to reconsider which of us here has the more open mind. I have stated exactly what my requirements are for me to accept an idea about the nature of reality' date=' and if those are met I will change my mind. You leave open only the vague possibility of something "monumental" happening, whereas my requirements are much more mundane and are met by all sorts of things. Your mind seems sealed shut with your beliefs inside it.[/quote']

But I never claimed to be open minded. I am accepting of your ideas, but it is not going to enter my head that they are possible.

[Ali_gmud]

I thought the last few centuries would be proof enough that science is taking it's toll and is changing the way we live today, it can be a slow process but it's process nonetheless.

Some queries may take longer than others, it's all a matter of time and patience. Having all the worlds answers and problems answered by faith alone isn't the most productive way of thinking, and I think that if the entire human race thought like that it would certainly slow down if not halt our advancement in technology.

[Pali]

But I never claimed to be open minded.

Then criticizing me for not being so either is fairly hypocritical, don't you think?

I am accepting of your ideas, but it is not going to enter my head that they are possible.

Again, was it not your perception that I think this exact same way about your beliefs, and was that not the main thing you were criticizing me for?

[KRins]

I just want to take the opportunity to lighten the mood by declaring myself king of signatures! Twinblades and Ali Gmud recognize my sovereignty, when will you?

[The-Nameless]

Yea Krins, we get it. Your France in our little game of risk.

[Raargant]

The reason these 'religion vs science' arguments tend to be pointless is because each boils down to a specific viewpoint: For religion, the fundamental viewpoint is that there are some things which man will never be able to understand, explain, or quantify (ie, supranatural); for science, the viewpoint is that eventually, everything can be understood.

Here's the rub; both viewpoints are neither provable nor disprovable.

The existence of the supernatural can never be proven by its very nature. On the flip side, the existence of the supernatural can never be disproven either, because absence of proof is not proof of absence; until the time comes where absolutely everything in the universe is 100% fully understood (don't count on it), you cannot disprove God/Allah/Buddha/whoever's existence, just like you cannot disprove the existence of the Flying Spaghetti Monster. So long as there is anything which science cannot answer, the supernatural cannot be disproven. Science can only disprove specific supernatural claims; it cannot disprove the existence of the supernatural as a whole.

That there is nothing supernatural, and that everything can be explained by science, cannot be proven either; as any investor knows, past performance is no guarantee of future performance. Just because science has been able to explain many things to date does not mean that it will be able to explain everything, and the more that science has revealed, the more questions there are that are unanswered (but which we have begun studying). Even if science becomes capable of explaining ghosts (and even if it is able to quantitatively measure a soul) in the same way it has explained lightning, there will still be things that it cannot explain, at least at that point in time. You cannot prove that science can explain everything, until it has explained everything.

Both faith in the supernatural and faith in 'total science' (ie, that science has the potential to explain everything) are just that; faith in something that cannot and will never be proven or disproven. It has nothing to do with an 'open mind' or a 'closed mind'.

[Ali_gmud]

I just want to take the opportunity to lighten the mood by declaring myself king of signatures! Twinblades and Ali Gmud recognize my sovereignty' date=' when will you?[/quote']

When I was adding it in I was thinking to myself, when did Krins become so funny when did he become a little more than just the guy with silky purple boxing shorts, that doesn't know if hes coming or going.

[Pali]

for science, the viewpoint is that eventually, everything can be understood.

...

Both faith in the supernatural and faith in 'total science' (ie, that science has the potential to explain everything) are just that; faith in something that cannot and will never be proven or disproven. It has nothing to do with an 'open mind' or a 'closed mind'.

Nowhere in any of my posts will you find me saying that science will eventually explain everything. I fully agree that this would be a ridiculous statement to make. What I am saying is that faith is not a good reason to believe something, and that we should be accepting of the many areas where "I don't know" is the only intellectually honest answer - we should not be making magical things up to cover gaps in our knowledge of how the world works. I do not have faith in science - I find it to be a useful methodology for determining the nature of the universe, and I would say that it is the most (only?) useful one we have when it comes to that... but that doesn't mean I think science will make us omniscient some day. Quite the contrary, I think there are many questions that we will likely never be able to answer scientifically... but that does not mean we should default to faith and fantasy as answers for them. That you cannot use good reasoning to find an answer doesn't excuse you to use bad reasoning to come to one.

The open/closed minds debate started when I was accused of having the latter - those kinds of accusations are ones that I will defend myself against, particularly when the accusers are being hypocrites in the process.

EDIT: Your statement "For religion, the fundamental viewpoint is that there are some things which man will never be able to understand, explain, or quantify (ie, supranatural)" is another that I would dispute. Many religions seem to argue that yes, man can understand these things, through the religion. Buddhists meditate in an attempt to gain enlightenment, Hindus seek advancement to the highest stages of the karmic wheel, the Abrahamic faiths just slap a God label (or sometimes sin/Satan labels) on everything unexplained as an explanation (yes, these are simplifications of more complex concepts, but in essence this is what they are doing). Many religions purport that they alone have the answers to these questions, not that there aren't any or that we'll never understand them. My problem isn't that they are trying to answer these questions... my problem is with the magical thinking they are using in an attempt to do so.

[f0xx]

You know what, I declare my chair making strange noises as supernatural.

I've tightened and oiled every connection on it, and it still does.

[Pali]

Work on the molecular bonds, see if strengthening them helps.

[KRins]

When I was adding it in I was thinking to myself' date=' when did Krins become so funny when did he become a little more than just the guy with silky purple boxing shorts, that doesn't know if hes coming or going.[/quote']

1. I would never wear anything both silky and purple. I am a man's man... it is silky or it is purple... never both.

2. I am absolutely hilarious when I am not being my usual small man complex furious self... it has just taken like... 4 years for a gap in the raging tempest that is the KRins!

As my final statement regarding the topic, there are just certain things in this world you have to either believe or not. Someone had to believe human flight was possible. Someone had to believe mold could be made into medicine. Someone had to believe pepperoni + pizza = piping hot glory. I have personally experienced too many "coincidences" to not have faith in a higher power. Pali might not have come to the same conclusions as me. Maybe he has taken the time to understand things I see a divine hand in. This is just one of those fights that will go to the scorecards every time. My personal bias (since we are all human, we all have some flavor of bias) makes it impossible for me to more than hypothetically consider that everything in the universe just kinda happened. Another person could spend his entire life laughing at the "faithful" and never once seriously consider that there just might be a Supreme Being. There's no reason for tempers to flare... there can't be a winner. The short and long of it is, we are all gonna die eventually and until then we can have whatever opinions we want but they won't change too terrible much in the long run.

[Pali]

I would say that it does matter what people believe and why they believe it. I would say it matters a great deal. People of faith are undermining science education that contradicts their faith-based beliefs across the USA and large parts of the rest of the world, are blatantly rewriting history in the Texas State Board of Education, are killing their children by not taking them to the hospital and relying on prayer for healing, are preventing homosexuals from having equal rights, are undermining sexual education, have created a black market around prostitution by outlawing it, are teaching people in AIDS-ridden parts of Africa not to use condoms... the list of faith-based problems goes on and on. Yes, this stuff matters. What we believe and why we believe it matters.

P.S. KRins, if you find it hard to understand how the universe could have just happened to exist... why did your god just happen to exist?

[KRins]

I would say that it does matter what people believe and why they believe it. I would say it matters a great deal. People of faith are undermining science education that contradicts their faith-based beliefs across the USA' date=' are blatantly rewriting history in the Texas State Board of Education, are killing their children by not taking them to the hospital and relying on prayer for healing, are preventing homosexuals from having equal rights, are undermining sexual education, have created a black market around prostitution by outlawing it, are teaching people in AIDS-ridden parts of Africa not to use condoms... the list of faith-based problems goes on and on. Yes, this stuff matters. What we believe and why we believe it matters.[/quote']

You do realize that idiot and religious aren't the same things right? You can twist anything into a dangerous something if you look at it from a crazy enough angle. I mean... we can take examples of complete insane scientists and make science an INCREDIBLY dangerous thing. You think those nazi scientists who killed people because they needed lab rats were a good idea? I mean... at some point you have to separate the nearly criminally stupid from your actual target group. The 'scientist' who invented crystal meth has ruined countless lives forever, should we declare chemistry an abomination? Like almost everything in this world, faith can be used for great good or great evil depending on the person wielding it.

EDIT: I guess I can believe that my preferred version of God exists because people who have taught me useful secular lessons taught me He exists. Then as I got older I observed things that neither scientists or I can explain. Maybe it is completely baseless and maybe it is even completely stupid for me to think that way, but I sleep at night and outside of the standard 'There's so much I still want to do', I'm not afraid to die. Like I said... when we are both dead and gone, the scorecards will be read and we'll either be wormfood or I'll get the pleasure of saying I told you so. I see the logical flaws in faith, but I also see that many things cannot be explained with the fanciest computers so I'll keep my fragile mind from completely collapsing with my faith.

[Pali]

You do realize that idiot and religious aren't the same things right?

I certainly do... but these are not isolated incidents. Suppression of gay rights? That is world-wide. Suppression of science and sexual education? World-wide. Prostitution being outlawed because of religious objections to such sinful behavior? World-wide.

Science is not an ideology, it is a methodology, and as such can be used by anyone - it has no philosophy for how one should live, it is only a tool we can use to investigate and describe what we find about the universe. The findings of science are certainly used by people to do terrible things in the name of some ideology, and sometimes we do get entirely unethical people conducting scientific research in ways that the rest of us consider horrific - but that is not because of some flaw in what science is, that is someone who just wants to know as much as possible and doesn't care about how he finds it out. Just because people can write racist propaganda doesn't mean that we take issue with pens and paper - they are the tool, not the motivation. Religion, all too often, IS the motivation behind these behaviors.

EDIT: As a way to perhaps explain this better... the people who used eugenics were not motivated by evolutionary theory, or rather their usually bastardized understandings of it. They were motivated by a utopian ideology, the idea that eventually through this process of evolution they could purge humanity of its negative qualities and create a paradise. Evolution became a tool, but it was not the reason they did it - absolute faith in an ideology and a belief that the ends justified the means caused the eugenics movements.

How would replacing faith-based beliefs with "I don't know yet" cause your mind to collapse?

[KRins]

I don't know man. Prostitution cannot be a good example in my mind. Irresponsible sex has WAY too many consequences... even before you consider how the money changing hands is untaxed making it inherently illegal in most countries. You have to realize that MANY religious people consider their holy book to be the absolute word of god. I personally don't go that far in my faith. I mean, what was good for people 3000 years ago isn't what is good for people today. I happen to believe that if two homosexual people want to be married, adopt, or skydive into a pool of chocolate pudding that they should be able to do it. I am not sure how you can claim suppression of science is world-wide. I can remember multiple times leaving Mass then studying physics or brushing up on 10th grade health (which was half driver's ed and half sex ed in my particular school). Just because certain people of religious persuasion make questionable decisions to rational people doesn't make religion a bad thing. Hell, even if 99.9% of religious people made stupid decisions it isn't a bad thing. The religious person is being motivated by their desire to make people a certain way, not the religion itself. You won't ever catch me telling someone condoms are a stupid thing. You'll never hear me say that homosexuals don't deserve the same rights I enjoy because I like women and random homosexual man X likes men. I am concerned you are still stuck in absolutes and painting all religious people one color. At some point, a person has to pick and choose where they draw the line as far as how they decide to live within their religious preference.

As far as ideologies... we can both agree that walking up to someone and shooting them in the face is wrong, right? Thou shall not kill. We can both agree that if a person engages in a homosexual act, that we shouldn't stone them to death. Multiple places in the Bible DEMAND just that. Just because certain people used a tool (yeah... religion is both a tool and an ideology to me) one way in the past doesn't make it right for today. I mean... we used to keep slaves and it was very commonplace. Now it is completely abhorrent to even consider the idea of owning another person. Have issues with the religious idiots all you want, but my belief that doing the right thing is both secular and divinely right is beyond debate... its an opinion when you boil it down and trying to convince me otherwise is about as likely as convincing me that preferring pepperoni pizza is wrong.

I don't mean it would literally collapse my mind... but I am the sort of person that will turn something over and over in my mind forever if I can't answer why. If the greatest minds in the world can't explain something... it just might be beyond this world.

[Pali]

Prostitution cannot be a good example in my mind. Irresponsible sex has WAY too many consequences... even before you consider how the money changing hands is untaxed making it inherently illegal in most countries.

The money changing hands right now in places where it is illegal isn't taxed because it is illegal - were it legal, it could be taxed. And I am of the position that what you or I judge to be responsible or irresponsible sex is irrelevant when it comes to whether or not we should allow legal consenting adults to engage in an activity that directly harms no one and is an activity that is curiously only made illegal if money is exchanged - it's perfectly legal to sleep around with people you don't know, unless one of you is paying the other. EDIT: It's also perfectly legal to sleep with someone because they bought you dinner and a movie, or a nice gift, or did you a favor... aren't these fairly equivalent exchanges? At what point did it become your business to tell other people what sexual activities they can engage in and under what conditions beyond requiring that they involve legal consenting adults?

You have to realize that MANY religious people consider their holy book to be the absolute word of god.

I do. It scares me.

I am not sure how you can claim suppression of science is world-wide.

Do some Googling on creationism around the world and its impact on science education, particularly when it comes to the teaching of evolution (EDIT: NOVA did a good program on the Dover, Pennsylvania trial on the subject [an attempt to insert creationism into biology classes and weaken the teaching of evolution] less than three years ago... you may also want to look up what the Texas State Board of Education has recently done). Right now it's largely a problem in the US and the Muslim world, though creationists in Europe have started piping up again recently.

Just because certain people of religious persuasion make questionable decisions to rational people doesn't make religion a bad thing. Hell, even if 99.9% of religious people made stupid decisions it isn't a bad thing. The religious person is being motivated by their desire to make people a certain way, not the religion itself. You won't ever catch me telling someone condoms are a stupid thing. You'll never hear me say that homosexuals don't deserve the same rights I enjoy because I like women and random homosexual man X likes men.

YOU may not, but lots of other people do. EDIT: And yes, a lot of these people are directly motivated by their religion to do what they are doing. You may not tell people condoms are bad, but Christian missionaries all over Africa ARE (and proponents of abstinence-only education are doing the same thing here in the USA), and they are doing it because of the specific tenets of their faith.

I am concerned you are still stuck in absolutes and painting all religious people one color. At some point, a person has to pick and choose where they draw the line as far as how they decide within their religious preference.

You need to read my wording more closely - it is very carefully chosen. I have made no all-inclusive statements regarding the behaviors of religious people. EDIT: In fact, if you re-read my posts, you'll find that I very rarely use absolute terminology in these kinds of discussions.

The underlying point is this: how can you use your faith to convince someone else that their faith is wrong? You have no more justification for your position than they do. You may not believe that God hates homosexuals, but your justification for why you believe that is the exact same justification that the people who think God hates gays are using to support their position. How can you tell them that they are wrong? And if you cannot argue to someone else that they are wrong when you disagree, how do you know that you are right? And if you do not know why you should think you are right... then why do you?

As far as ideologies... we can both agree that walking up to someone and shooting them in the face is wrong, right? Thou shall not kill. We can both agree that if a person engages in a homosexual act, that we shouldn't stone them to death. Multiple places in the Bible DEMAND just that. Just because certain people used a tool (yeah... religion is both a tool and an ideology to me) one way in the past doesn't make it right for today. I mean... we used to keep slaves and it was very commonplace. Now it is completely abhorrent to even consider the idea of owning another person. Have issues with the religious idiots all you want, but my belief that doing the right thing is both secular and divinely right is beyond debate... its an opinion when you boil it down and trying to convince me otherwise is about as likely as convincing me that preferring pepperoni pizza is wrong.

I fully agree that morality is a subjective take on things and largely an emotional response, which makes it extremely difficult to actually argue morality.

I don't mean it would literally collapse my mind... but I am the sort of person that will turn something over and over in my mind forever if I can't answer why. If the greatest minds in the world can't explain something... it just might be beyond this world.

Yes, but how do you make the jump from "might" to "is"? That's my problem with the way people keep phrasing the "science doesn't know everything yet" objections - the implication is that faith can answer those questions science currently can't (and if you do not think this, then why do you believe this stuff?), and I want to know how that implication is justified.