N O N S E N S E | me

● religion ●

oof heavy subject amirite?

this is less about criticising other religions more than explaining how going to a catholic school ruined my experience of religion (more specifically my gcse r.e. teacher/form tutor)

so basically, i have been at a catholic school since i was like 4 (now 18 and in 6th form), and went to church for a good portion of my life and loved it - religious communities are often inclusive and at the right times, important support networks

being at a catholic school, gcse r.e. was a requirement so in comes a teacher and hours of lessons where i develop an understanding for the religion i was baptised under (i also had holy communion).

just a side note, i got an a* in r.e.

but part of the subject was an 8 marker at the end of each topic where you argued each side of a statement (i.e: "abortion is wrong, discuss"), so naturally, we had class debates which i would have enjoyed

if the non religious argument weren't constantly dismissed

i understand that my teacher may have had a very strong faith, but if i am respecting your beliefs you should respect my choice not to believe what you do

she used to frustrate me with the argument of gay relationships, and how they aren't allowed to have sex

okay, before you all scream, there are points in the faith which say the point of sex is to produce children and solidify the bond between man and wife (because you mustn't fornicate obvs), which i deem reasonable and that she's entitled to her view - assuming she doesn't inhibit anyone else's freedom to do otherwise

but she also used childish analogies such as saying gay sex is akin to "stuffing a bagel in your ear" (direct quote) and so i lost all respect for her

and the stupidity goes even further, but first, some background:

no surprise, i love animals; i've delivered lambs, ridden horses since i was a kid, been around dogs since forever, and had the general childhood pets (hamsters/fish)

so when the argument of whether or not animals have souls, you bet your ass i'm choosing to argue that they do

from what I remember being taught, catholics believe a soul gives you memory, creativity, emotion and something else (this is just what i was taught at gcse, a friend that studies philosophy, theology and ethics has since made me aware there is a secondary soul for animals)

but my brain, not informed of the secondary soul, had no reason to state that animals did in fact have souls

why?

because animals have memories

which i still believe to be a valid argument, because if you're saying said thing gives you a memory, and animals have memory, animals must have said thing, right?

evidently it was decided my teacher very much believed the opposite when she said, "oh, do they?"

now i'm no expert, but when i call my horse, he will neigh; but no, he doesn't remember my voice

when we ask our dog if he needs to go for a wee, he doesn't go to the door because he remembers what it means, that would be ridiculous

i think everyone one can agree that animals do have memories, whether it's down to a soul or not

that is what i would call a fact

but if you completely ignore fact to make your own point seem more plausible, you aren't being rational - a fact can't be argued

it still frustrates me that she refused to see the truth for the sake of making her view seem even more valid, personally, i don't care what she believes but i just wish she had accepted my point for what it was - the truth

the soul is subjective, of course, but you cannot deny fact for the sake of religion - ever

whether i choose to be atheist, agnostic or theist doesn't mean i don't respect your decision to do something else, i just wish she wasn't so blind to different arguments - ironic for someone who claimed she didn't hate gays

i liked her as a person, but not in attempts to have open discussion

moral of the story, you can still have beliefs without denying cold hard truths, and if you do, then that's not very clever