Kim O'Hara wrote:Religion is typically devotional, science isn't....
False dichotomy: there's plenty of devotion "in science."
Kim O'Hara wrote:Science is always open to debate and improvement, religion isn't...
Always? Quite the contrary. Have you read The Tyranny of Science
Kim O'Hara wrote:Science is systematic and analytical, religion is mystical and non-rational....
Kim O'Hara wrote:Edit: this is just another away of saying what Bhikku Pesala has just said, "Avoiding words like "Buddhism," "Buddhist," "Converting," or "Religion," are mere sophistry..."
It's worse than that. It's politcal correctness. It's not hip to be religious. Hence, you get stupid sayings like, "I'm not religious, but I am spiritual," or crap like, "I'm against organized
religion." Maybe it's just Portland, Oregon, but most of the Buddhists I"ve met around here have welfare liberalism blinders on and dare not call bull-crap on such Groupthink. It's no coincidence that the words "polite" and "politics" are linguistically related.