[Buddha-l] Hindu Fundamentalism

[curt]

Richard P. Hayes wrote:

>Public policy, I think, is better based on what all people can observe
>than on what faith-saturated devotees "observe." And that, I think, was
>exactly the point of those who said that there is no scientific basis to
>the claim of Rama's existence.
>  
>
That is obviously not the point of the statement in question. The point 
was that
science somehow provides evidence for the non-existence of Ram and Krishna.
Otherwise the statement would have to read "There is no evidence for the 
existence
or non-existence of Ram and Krishna". But that's not what was said. It 
is fine for
scientists to admit that they are not able to determine whether or not 
Gods exist -
but it is not fine for school textbooks to teach that science disproves 
the existence
of Gods. And it is even worse for textbooks to use intentionally 
misleading language
so that they can imply that science disproves the existence of Gods 
without actually
coming out an saying it.

- Curt