Actually, I do. I was raised by Baptists, and a large part of my family are Jehovah's Witnesses. Every one of these people disbelieves the theory of evolution. Discussing it ends up in histrionics at best, or condemnation at worst. I've also had extended discussions with Mormons who came to my door, about science.

*That's* your sample set? You're talking about the most literal-minded and conservative end of the Protestant spectrum. How much experience have you had with oh say, Jesuits? Or Quakers, if you still want to stay on the Prod end of the stick? You need to go read some Thomas Merton.

99% of my discussions with religious folks about scientific matters which contradict their religion have explicitly ended with unquestioning belief statements. It's in the bible, which is the word of God, therefore it's true. You have to have faith, and believe, and the spirit will tell you it's true.

Again, your sample set of "religious folks" are all part of the same very narrow slice of the Protestant Christian spectrum. They are hardly representative of Christians at large, much less the global "religious community".

Never in my discussions with any true believer have I ever heard the words (apart from for-the-sake-of-argument disclaimers), "I could be wrong."

Then you need to go read up on Mother Theresa's doubts towards the end of her life. She is fast-tracked to sainthood, and wasn't even sure she believed in God by the end of it all. Or I could have you go talk to my aunt who is a Catholic nun and could tell you a thing or two about what goes on in the minds of people in religious orders.

Your exposure to religious people seems limited to a very vocal community that is known for not being particularly thoughtful or analytical (a quality which they seem to embrace, in fact). How you can then extrapolate that *all* religious communities are equally uncritical is beyond me.

Generally "nuns, monks, priests, etc" are the footsoldiers of religious oppression, demanding conformity with shameless scare-mongering, ostracisation, carrying out indoctrination rituals, etc. Just look at all the arrogant imams in the Canadian Press trying to spin Aqsa Parvez's murder as a matter of culture or worse trying to tacitly make it her fault.

How many Catholic nuns do you know? Or Buddhist nuns, for that matter?

And by the way, the word is "ostracism". You're starting to sound like Alan Sokol. I think it was your use of the word "hegemony"; it gave me flashbacks to my college days and the worst excesses of PoMo academic unspeak. If you're going to be pretentious, at least learn how to spell the words properly.

D. Nuns have helped indoctrinate/brainwash generations of children through their role in Catholic education. They harm women by accepting a subordinate status in patriarchal faiths often so virulently sexist they refer to god as a male entity (if god exists assigning gender is meaningless and indeed blasphemous). Moreover their virginity is usually a sign of their faith's negative attitude towards sexuality, i.e. the most devout women are the womens that never play with the boys.

I ask you again, do you actually know any Nuns (Catholic or Buddhist, or any other religion that has such a thing?)

Your comment re their subordination is a little wide of the mark. The reality is, nuns have far greater latitude to engage in rebellions both small and large, and do so every day. They are a tremendous force for social justice, more so than priests whose role is to act as the mouthpiece of the Church. The whole 'women should become priests' battle is a double-edged sword: once those same radical (such as they are) women are ordained as Catholic priests, they *must* adhere to Church protocols, and lose the freedom of independence that they had as nuns.

As for your comment in the post title calling me a "scullery maid", well I'll let that stand on its own. You hardly have a leg to stand on, calling me pedantic, when you are resorting to ad hominems as if they were valid arguments. I do belong in the kitchen though, you got that one right. I'm a pretty fucking awesome cook.

And you sounded even more like Alan Sokol in your last post than in all the others combined. Is this a put-on?

Why be Catholic if you don't agree with Church protocols? There are countless other avenues to enacting social justice which do not involve alliegence to a patriarchal, homophobic and exclusivist doctrine, which by your own admission the nuns may not believe in.

I don't know. I'm atheist myself, so I don't really get the appeal. What I *have* heard is that it is the community and the contemplative lifestyle that is so valuable. These qualities don't often manifest outside of religious communities, so people take them where they find them, and put up with the inconvenience of actually being a nun because the net gain is greater than the annoyances of dealing with, say, Cardinal Egan.

Buddhist nuns are another story altogether, but I've only known one in my life and her not very well at all, so where her head is at I couldn't begin to guess. I would assume she has sought out the same communality that Catholic nuns have, but her community is far less structured and ritualistic.

Her male companion was also raped. What ever happened to him?

I believe that Jesus walked the earth and was a compassionate and charismatic leader but not the son of god nor born of a virgin who also had to be born from a virgin (why is your religion, most religions, so afraid of sex?).

Anne was not a virgin. Mary was conceived "the regular way" but without the stain of Original Sin on her soul. Jesus was the only person conceived of a virgin.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immaculate_conception

Sorry that's just a real pet peeve of mine (and I'm atheist!)