ron2
Posted : 7/4/2009 9:03:15 AM
I don't belong to any particular church or faith. I was baptised a mormon, my mother was a born-again christian, my grandmother and step-grandfather are now catholic. I am a scientific person, preferring math, science, and logic. That being said, I know there is an afterlife from personal experience. And that includes pets. To me, the existence of a soul or clot of electrical cohesion in the brain is just as much a product of evolution as is the opposable thumb or dew claws. It is bound to happen when a being or organism reaches a certain level of complexity.
I could be wrong but it is harmless to feel that pets continue to the Bridge and it makes our lives better knowing that they are there. But, as I have often said, atheists are in for the biggest surprise of all. By atheists, I don't mean people who doubt the existance or divinity of a God entity, I mean those who think our awareness ends when our body does. I have no proof I can give in a laboratory but my belief harms no one and it inspires me to do good things, when I can.
Others have faiths that stretch out too far for me. For example, believing politicians can help. Ba-doomp, tsh! Thank you very much.
One-liners aside, I think those who say that all existence ends with the last heartbeat are just as clueless as how they might think of us. And, for some reason, they are more comfortable thinking that there is an end to all of this. For they have no proof that physical death is the end. All they have is the abscence of proof to the counter. That is, without proof of an afterlife, they assume there is none, which is not what the true skeptical analysis should bring. The true analysis would be "undecided" or "not enough info."
So, I will continue to be provincial in my own way. There is an afterlife and there is certainly a Rainbow Bridge. Anyone who tells there is not probably has less of a clue than I do and that should boggle the mind.