Navigating Beliefs and Science: A Modern Perspective on Adoption
Written on
Chapter 1: The Classroom Incident
As we sat in the classroom, our gazes were fixed on the small television hanging from the ceiling. The social studies teacher had turned on a special program discussing gay adoption. On-screen, two men shared their emotional journey as they prepared to welcome two sons into their lives.
My friend Amber, visibly disturbed, exclaimed, “Those kids are going to grow up messed up!”
I turned to her, ready to respond, but she interrupted, asserting, “I’m entitled to my opinion!”
Feeling defeated, I sank back into my chair. While Amber and I typically engaged in friendly debates, today she was unwilling to entertain a discussion about her views. I couldn't counter her stance.
Fast forward several years, and with gay adoption and marriage now widely accepted, Amber’s perspective feels like a remnant of an outdated belief system. Meanwhile, science continues to provide clear insights into the outcomes for children raised by same-sex couples. Unfortunately, bigotry remains prevalent, as does the insistence that personal beliefs shape reality.
Many individuals are eager to present their opinions as facts, even going so far as to create altered versions of films and TV shows that align with their views. Others express mistrust towards scientific evidence, claiming to conduct their own research, often influenced by the discredited claims of figures like Andrew Wakefield. The most troubling aspect is that politicians from both sides are making decisions based on personal beliefs rather than verifiable data or public consensus.
Whether discussing climate change, economic policies, or unfounded conspiracy theories, the conversation often centers around subjective beliefs rather than objective truths. Beliefs are frequently positioned in opposition to scientific understanding — and for good reason, as they often conflict. Science relies on systematic investigation, whereas beliefs often stem from emotional responses. Regrettably, there's a growing trend of anti-intellectualism in the U.S., leading to skepticism towards scientific findings across the political spectrum. This denial of established facts serves to validate personal beliefs. Some even equate scientific principles with religious or moral doctrines. Yet, as illustrated by my school friend, strong personal beliefs about issues like homosexuality do not dictate reality. Despite Amber’s conviction, it’s likely the boys raised by that gay couple grew up well-adjusted.
Chapter 2: The Question of Morality
My partner, an atheist, often faces the question, “If you don’t believe in anything, how do you refrain from committing murder?” As a pagan, I receive similar judgment. This inquiry is disconcerting, suggesting that the asker would resort to violence without the influence of a higher power. Perhaps my scientific mindset makes me less vulnerable to the sway of belief. My intrinsic aversion to harming others suffices for moral guidance.
Questions like these highlight the perceived moral authority attributed to belief systems, which they argue is absent in scientific reasoning. Scientific “beliefs” don’t dictate morality; rather, they exist in an amoral space, unconnected to ethical considerations. This notion unsettles those seeking external validation for their beliefs.
My departure from the Christian church stemmed from a sense of artificial morality imposed by a list of rules grounded in fear of punishment rather than a genuine desire to be virtuous. When individuals like Amber express disdain for homosexuality, they often invoke the concept of hell, or they might say, “hate the sin, love the sinner,” attempting to reconcile their beliefs while still condemning others. Such positions are hardly more compassionate.
Atheism isn't merely a lack of belief; it’s the conviction that no supernatural authority dictates our moral compass. Essentially, it posits that the absence of an external moral force doesn't absolve individuals from acting with kindness and reason.
There’s a correlation between the high number of atheists in scientific fields and the reliance on logical reasoning and empirical evidence. Theists frequently challenge atheists for their perceived lack of imagination, ridiculing them for their inability to believe in the unseen. However, atheists remain largely indifferent to such critiques, as these points are irrelevant to their discourse.
Moreover, blind belief without thoughtful consideration can lead to misguided convictions. Amber’s distress upon viewing that video stemmed from her faith, which taught her that homosexuality was wrong, causing her to worry about the well-being of the adopted children. Had she been open to scientific exploration, she would have understood there was no reason for concern.
Rachel Wayne is a writer and artist based in Orlando, FL. She holds a master’s degree in visual anthropology from the University of Florida and operates the production company DreamQuilt. An enthusiastic aerial dancer and performance artist, Rachel also engages in mixed-media projects. She writes nonfiction narratives about herself and inspiring individuals, alongside essays covering topics such as feminism, societal violence, mental health, politics, and cultural phenomena.