on the necessity of god, goddess, gods, goddesses, or a combinati on of the above

[bantam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]

Robert Scott Gassler wrote:

> I too am a Unitarian Universalist, and my answer is that we believe in
> God,
> but we refuse to speculate in detail on what She's like. This
> invariably
> draws an interesting reaction whenever I say it.

Like if She's a sexually reproduced being (else, whence Her sex?), why
don't Mum or Dad get any kudos or divine authority, may we expect the
pitter-patter of little divine feet at some stage, and who would Dad
then be?  God 'explains' the unexplained with the inexplicable, I
reckon, and I wield Occam's razor very much in the Carrol-Coxian manner
on this.  'God' mystifies and misdirects (especially interpellating our
moot afterlife-selves at the expense of our being/agency in the world)
more than is economically efficient.

Cheers,
Rob.