OnlineBookClub.org

I'm curious as to what other readers thought of the juxtaposition of human rights and Chatton's religious beliefs against the pain acclimation sessions and the use of the cattle prods. How could Chatton spout scripture and then look the other way on a daily basis? He wouldn't tolerate profanity, but the use of physical pain was okay?

I think like so many people, he compartmentalizes his beliefs and does not let them affect his day to day decisions. Also, of course, he does not see the projects as human. Still, even animals deserve better treatment than the projects get. He may even justify it as a type of military-style training. Still, it is sad that his beliefs did not inspire him to stand up for justice.

I had some of these same thoughts. Early in the story, Chatton seemed to be just another one-dimensional stereotype of a religious hypocrite. At least he redeemed himself somewhat by helping Kata, and maybe we can assume that his eyes were opened to the moral consequences of his behavior.

I think this type of dichotomy is so prevalent, maybe not on this scale, but I could be wrong. I've personally known people who will spout scripture and yet turn and do the exact opposite of what scripture says. I've known people who use scripture to justify their evil actions, twisting the words to fit their own agenda. However, I think @teacherjh is right in that he probably compartmentalizes things. His day-to-day actions are kept separate, not at all subject to the scrutiny of his belief system. I'm sure I'm guilty of it too. I may believe what scripture says but I am far from getting it right all the time, no matter what my intentions are.

I see him as being hypocritical with his religious belief. Despite his military experience, he should have still been human in dealing with living things, even animals. Though he justified himself by helping Kata

I think he compartmentalized a lot of the time, but he did step out of the room so that Tau could give Kata some of his food when he was being starved by Dennison.

I laughed aloud when Chatton started swearing like a sailor when he thought he was going to be killed. I didn’t know he had it in him.

Bothofus07 wrote: ↑22 May 2020, 13:03 I had some of these same thoughts. Early in the story, Chatton seemed to be just another one-dimensional stereotype of a religious hypocrite. At least he redeemed himself somewhat by helping Kata, and maybe we can assume that his eyes were opened to the moral consequences of his behavior.

I agree completely with you that he was just a one-dimensional stereotype.

I like to think that Chatton represents those who say they are religious and preach love for all but turn a blind eye to all the bad that is happening in the real world, or worse, have a hand in it. It is frustrating to see Chatton (with all of his love and religion) be abusive to these projects, which is the point. I think the author wanted readers to see that people who are religious have to ability to ignore all that they believe and be bad in the world, or worse, use that religion to justify what they are doing.

In the science aspect, this book is amazing among its genre! But considering it in the spiritual sphere (Theological) it is unacceptable.

Believers only believe that God is the Almighty Creator. So the idea of Human cloning is way out of line for Religious cultures.

When looking at the novel with a religious perspective, it is difficult to decipher whether this novel is acceptable or not. In Christianity, the Lord has the power to create life. By giving this power to humans, it is against Christianity in a way. The main character didn't let his religious background affect his every decision.

Chatton eptomizes the real world where people use their religious views subjectively to suit their circumstances. And of course action speaks louder than words.

I think chatton was a hypocritical in his actions and tried to make amends by aiding the escape of kata

I believe that Chatton was very hypocritical with his actions. He picked and sorted through which of his beliefs he would "follow". This very much resembles people today. Those who pick and choose which beliefs to hold hear, and which ones to ignore. It is most likely a statement on humanity/ society.

I feel that Chatton represents those who say they are religious and preach love for all but turn a blind eye to all the bad that is happening in the real world, or worse, have a hand in it. I think the author wanted readers to see that people who are religious have to ability to ignore all that they believe and be bad in the world, or worse, use that religion to justify the evil they do.

That's to show you the hypocrisy of humans. They're okay with a type of 'sin' and not okay with the other. Hypocrisy at its peak.