religion and stuff

Max Fausnight
English IV
Kevin O’Brien
March 6th, 2013
Science Versus Religion
 Over two thousand and thirteen years ago a child, the son of “God,” was born to a virgin mother. This has been the belief of billions of people who have lived from the time that Jesus was born to people of the present. This belief is a religion that we today know as Christianity. For the next one thousand and eighteen hundred years this belief would dominate the minds of people everywhere. In 1859 after studying animal adaptation on the galapagos islands, scientist Charles Darwin first came up with the theory of evolution. In Darwin’s theory he talks about the concept of survival of the fittest, and what not. Religion and Science have an interesting relationship. Everybody has a unique opinion about each of them. Our opinions are based off of our experiences, background, culture, and relationships. The clash between science and religion has been a controversial debate for centuries.
 Despite the fact that Darwin was not anti-religion his discoveries opened up an opportunity for the long trusted ideas of religion to be questioned.. These observations created an entirely new culture challenging the forever popular institution of religion. Today, there are fundamentalist groups of atheists or on the other side of the spectrum, god loving folk. These groups of people cause controversy that has an impact as far as supreme court decisions as seen in their decision to keep or rid the use of God in the pledge of allegiance. Some people passionately battle over which side is superior but in truth both can coexist very simply.
 In Cat’s Cradle by Kurt Vonnegut many major aspects of the plot sarcastically criticize issues with both religion and science. For example, the actual concept of Bocanism is completely asinine. Vonnegut took very elaborate steps to subtly add all of his qualms with modern religion. The issue of people blindly following an idea that they have no true understanding is clearly represented with this pseudo religion in the book. This blind following is represented in the idea of people killing themselves. He continues his mockery with the politics of the book forbidding the actual practice of the religion. Despite this law everyone still practices is which mirrors the silly battles of politics in religion throughout history. In addition, the fact that science and man's overwhelming curiosity destroyed the world is a complete mockery of institution. He shows how foolish man could be and has been with this new power and that science has the potential to completely overwhelm man in an instant. Vonnegut craftily shows both negatives to each side.
 In conclusion, I believe that both institutions can live in peace without problems. The actual concept of literal interpretation of the bible is a modern adaptation to religion. The arguments science uses to discredit religion involve the facts unimportant to the lessons taught in the Bible: its true purpose. If science rescinded its hostility then religion surely would also. In short, the problem with these two powerhouses of culture can be solved in time.