Editor,
This letter is in response to David Martinez's letter published in the Daily Lobo on Friday. It was my good fortune to be touring the UNM campus, and I was lucky enough to have read Martinez's piece of zealotry. I must say that I applaud the general sentiment. However, the methodology is simply atrocious.
Let me point out that a bigot is not "One who strongly opposes the views of others based not on reason but on frivolous things such as creed, race or uneducated opinion." A bigot is, according to the Merriam-Webster dictionary, "a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices." It has nothing to do with the cause of such intolerance.
Let's make one thing clear: Homosexuals do not do anything wrong. Homosexuality is no more a sin than blowing your nose. However, homosexuals are not "just like everyone else on the planet." They are homosexual where the vast majority of the human population is heterosexual. To describe the entire Christian belief system as "fairy tales" is amusing. I must admit to have once gotten myself into a fight for having referred to the Old Testament as Christian mythology, but seeing as how I made that mistake in the ninth grade, I would like to think that most college-age people would have realized the juvenility of name-calling. I do agree that the Bible is out of date, but the morality expressed in it seems to me a good way of living.
To further claim that "biblical scholars can't just pick and choose which Old Testament laws are ridiculous and which ones to continue following" is more folly. Believe it or not, there are Christians who believe the true Christian tenets, yet are well aware that most of the Bible is symbolic at best. It is possible to reconcile religion and science. Only - and I do say only - true zealots and bigots cannot reconcile faith with logic. The Bible itself contradicts itself, sometimes knowingly, sometimes tacitly. The Catholic Church says the Bible is not the supreme source of law; it is merely a set of guidelines to which the faithful should generally adhere. But now that we can, for example, hygienically cook meat, we're allowed to eat pork, though the Bible forbids it.
This brings me to my main point: Science and religion do not have to be at odds. They have fought for thousands of years, each dogma creating its own saviors and its own Antichrists. I have to ask: What is the real, rational difference between, "And God said, 'Let there be Light,'" and the concept of all matter exploding and expanding faster than the speed of light?
Get content from The Daily Lobo delivered to your inbox
In the final analysis, one gives a cause - the other doesn't. That's the sum of the difference. It may be impossible to reconcile all of science with all of religion, for biology simply does not allow for a man to rise from the dead. But then, it is impossible for all of science to reconcile with
itself.
William Byatt
Daily Lobo reader
