True Marshall. It is good evidence to offer: Sanyal, Charu, Guevara. For sure, justice, social justice. And faith to live and work and shape through justice.
+ On any way of being: too often we are impressed by the reasoning laid out by any given proponent. Often it’s because our perceptions are bolstered, not to mention, awareness. That is, an awareness commensurate to the point in time we have arrived at. Fair enough. But we rarely point out our journey to awareness which may have gone through various insecurities, anxieties and of course great mentorship, stellar genes / DNA, education, erudite parents, and other important environmental factors. Besides, all the smarts guarantees us good place, in our cohort. Or, a good reason to not feel shunned. Still, that is a whole other probability. It is also worth contemplating what one may do, if the choice has to be made between life and death. Not via angels, or demons. But say, that one is given the ultimatum to recant atheism or die. Not between atheism and belief. By whom? Come up with someone. But I am now surely digressing, or am I. Hey, why not speculate? In my way of seeing, one should avoid raising concerns about beliefs; but celebrate the life of other, or see what can justly regarded. Hopefully, that would be still considered a fruit of being enlightened.Of course its a whole other thing if one is working out a book of essays or simply testing ones argumentation. And while at it or otherwise, picking at brains. Thank you all. —Venantius J Pinto On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 8:10 AM, Marshall Mendonza <mmendonz...@gmail.com> wrote: > Frederick Noronha: > Marshall, for a change I'm not in agreement with you. > > Charity is just one of the criteria on which someone's "goodness" could be > judged. If the criteria were changed to, say, fighting for justice, and > giving up one's lives for that, then the non-believers might come out > leagues ahead. > > Response: > > Frederick, when I see posts and articles extolling the virtues of atheism > over religion, as a student, I am eager to find information / answers to > validate the same. And unfortunately, the answers I find simply do not hold > good. I have asked in the past to name prominent atheists who have worked > among lepers like Fr Damien or Dr Ruth Pfau or Graham Staines or looked > after society rejects like the mentally and physically challenged, the old > and the infirm, HIV and AIDS patients, destitutes and generally touching > human lives. Till date I cannot find a single name. Roland did name Edhi of > Pakistan. But reading about him, I find that he does not belong to that > grouping. He was a religious man though not an overtly practising one.On > the contrary, I find that persons who subscribed to atheism committed the > greatest crimes in the last couple of centuries. > > Normally when atheism is discussed it is people like Richard Dawkins, Sam > Harris, Christopher Hitchens, Stephen Hawking, Daniel Dannett and others > who are revered and quoted. Not people like Che Guevara or Charu Muzumdar > or Kanu Sanyal who did enormous work for the deprived or the downtrodden at > great cost and sacrifice. The atheists often quoted are armchair > intellectuals with no contribution to humanity. > > No human being is completely bad. Everyone has good and bad in him. But > there has to be some motivation for a person to keep on doing good for very > often it is a thankless job. > > Regards, > > Marshall