Love isn't real

Imagine an article that tells you that "love isn't real". Suddenly you are faced with the very real fact that the smile you get when you see your kids playing in the yard or the butterflies you feel seeing that first love are merely a chemical reaction brought about by a particular stimuli. That same article explains how love is a result of evolution and that it may have helped our ancestors create tighter bonds in order to preserve the species through hard times like drought, famine, and flood.

Now substitute God for love. God is simply a chemical reaction deep inside the brain that every human feels in order to help them cope with something outside of their control (drought, famine, and flood.) Really? Could it be that simple?

The issue though is this. The people writing these types of articles, the naysayers, and the "rational right" (versus the "moral majority") are showing their own form of bigotry. While they can use the scientific method to postulate that love, or god, or alien abduction, or out of body experiences are simply brain chemistry run amok, they cannot use that process to prove the non-existence of a thing.

In fact by identifying and quantifying the process under which love occurs they are in fact proving love exists. Whether love is a chemical process or not does not matter, we know that it exists. Whether god or belief in the spiritual is a chemical process or some entity external to ourselves is irrelevant. Science can prove why we have these feelings and therefor the feelings are real, serve a purpose, and thus should be embraced.

If everyone can feel those feelings then those feelings shape our reality. It's a circular kind of argument. If the feelings about god are quantifiable and explainable then god also must be quantifiable and explainable. If love is measurable then thus it must be real.

There are two sides to this type of argument. You have a set of people who state: "We're all just hairless apes, but we've moved beyond the need for [your_hated_feeling_here]." You have a second set of people who state: "We're all just sinners, but through God's grace we can remove [your_hated_feeling_here]."

There may or may not exist a third side of the argument. These people state: "I will encourage the positive behaviors of my biology and discourage those that are counter to being."

For example, if love is biology I say that it is positive and does not run counter to being. Likewise I can see no reason why believing in god or the flying spaghetti monster is counter to being. It would be poor reasoning to say that by doing away with either of those beliefs at some point in history that the world would have been a better place today. That is unknowable.

All I'm really trying to say here is that you should just be. Don't try to dissect every thought and every bodily process to prove your worth as either a person of faith or a person of reason. Be a person of both faith and reason. Just Be!