I Agree

Lawrence M. Krauss, an atheist, gives an interesting perspective on the Kim Davies case:

The Kim Davis story raises a basic question: To what extent should we allow people to break the law if their religious views are in conflict with it? It’s possible to take that question to an extreme that even [Davis’s supporters] might find absurd: imagine, for example, a jihadist whose interpretation of the Koran suggested that he should be allowed to behead infidels and apostates. Should he be allowed to break the law? Or—to consider a less extreme case—imagine an Islamic-fundamentalist county clerk who would not let unmarried men and women enter the courthouse together, or grant marriage licenses to unveiled women. For [Davis’s supporters], what separates these cases from Kim Davis’s? The biggest difference, I suspect, is that [supporters agree] with Kim Davis’s religious views but disagree with those of the hypothetical Islamic fundamentalist.

The problem, obviously, is that what is sacred to one person can be meaningless (or repugnant) to another. That’s one of the reasons why a modern secular society generally legislates against actions, not ideas. No idea or belief should be illegal; conversely, no idea should be so sacred that it legally justifies actions that would otherwise be illegal. Davis is free to believe whatever she wants, just as the jihadist is free to believe whatever he wants; in both cases, the law constrains not what they believe but what they do.

Transformation Stories

I spent last week in Germany, and in getting ready for the trip, I wanted a book about Germany for airplane and rest-time reading.  I chose Boys in the Boat by Daniel James Brown.  Boys tells the story of the Seattle rowing team that won a gold medal in the 1936 Olympics in Berlin.  The crew team consists of young working class boys, many poor and struggling financially to stay in college.   

It is the story of their transformation into world champion athletes, but it is the story of a second darker transformation as well.  We learn how Hitler and his advisers turned Berlin into a model city.  Some of the dirt is literally whitewashed and some of it, such as signs reading “No Jews Allowed,” is removed and hidden away for later. I was moved by the first transformation and repelled by the

second.  I recommend this book though I’m not sure I recommend it for a German trip.  I was too aware of this hideous history as I traveled .  I had to remind myself that my country did not have a spotless past either.

A New Way to Talk about Science

Up until last week, I never thought I would be reading an encyclical letter, but last week, a friend shared some passages from Laudato si’ On Care for Our Common Home, and today I bought it in book form. Here is the passage that made me want to read what Pope Francis has to say:

Following a period of irrational confidence in progress and human abilities, some sectors of society are now adopting a more critical approach. We see increasing sensitivity to the environment and the need to protect nature, along with a growing concern, both genuine and distressing, for what is happening to our planet. Let us review, however cursorily, those questions which are troubling us today and which we can no longer sweep under the carpet. Our goal is not to amass information or to satisfy curiosity, but rather to become painfully aware, to dare to turn what is happening to the world into our own personal suffering and thus to discover what each of us can do about it.

My initial sense is that this pope has an interesting and effective way of writing that might be able to bring science and religion together.  I hope so.

This letter is also availableonline.