SHANE QUINN,
Sir, - I don't think that science and religion are at loggerheads. I believe in God and I also find myself believing most of the major pronouncements coming from the world of physics or the other disciplines. I think science explains how certain things came to happen, but I have never heard a convincing argument from an atheist as to why we exist.
Michael McGuire's argument (June 18th) is supposed to be based on science, yet it appears to me to be based on some anti-religious bias. I don't know what was irrational about God sending his only son to this world; it appears to me to have worked handsomely.
Mr McGuire states: "The fact that we cannot disprove the existence of God proves nothing". I'm not sure if Mr McGuire thinks he's pulling the rug from underneath believers with this statement. I can't imagine he has caught many people out.
We then come to the issue of domestic cats reporting back to the planet Zog. I'm not aware if anybody thinks this; if it's supposed to equate to believing in God I'm afraid it doesn't. I have many reasons to believe in God, not many to believe that we are being observed from the planet Zog.
People who believe in God have many reasons for doing so. I am tired of the scorn I am treated with by people such as Mr McGuire in the name of science, constantly suggesting that I am deluded.
They should realise that many of us abandoned the good ship materialism a long time ago because we found answers that we considered more reasonable elsewhere.
I think it much more likely that Jesus Christ holds the answers than Nietzsche or Dawkins. I'm amazed how objectionable some people find this. - Yours, etc.,
SHANE QUINN, Newlands Manor Green, Green Isle, Dublin 22.