1. Divided by a common language: Richard Dawkins clarifies his position

Comment #15626 by Anat on January 1, 2007 at 5:15 pm

Galactic Lord Xenu posted: What concerns me is whether faith is "abusive" to children as it is irrational, and teaching children faith-based ideas is no different from having them grow up to believe the world is flat. Is it abuse to teach children in a cult that they must serve their charismatic cult leader or God will kill their family? Is it abusive to let children grow up and be subject only to Scientologist education?
------

There are many forms of childrearing that fail to prepare children for life in the greater society they may find themselves in adulthood. In Israel children of Haredi families hardly receive any education in basic secular areas such as mathematics, geography, science, foreign language, beyond the level of 4th-5th grade. Young adults who want to leave this environment have a huge problem with lack of job skills. OTOH for 2 or 3 generations children raised collectively on Israeli kibbutzim were ill-prepared for more typical family life. How do we balance people's freedom to explore different ways of life with the rights of children not to be forced out of mainstream society?

2. Woman beaten on Jerusalem bus for refusing to move to rear seat

Comment #15333 by Anat on December 30, 2006 at 1:13 pm

Vadjong, fortunately they are waiting for the messiah to come and reinstitute the courts that will have the authority to sentence people to stoning.

3. Woman beaten on Jerusalem bus for refusing to move to rear seat

Comment #15215 by Anat on December 29, 2006 at 3:34 pm

Regarding swimming pools, the proportion of segregated vs co-ed swimming times - that would depend on demand. At the Weizmann Institute of Science, (during the 90s when I was a student there) the pool (privately owned) had segregated hours at the end of the day (21:00 to 22:00, IIRC) and an hour in the mid-morning of weekdays - low traffic times. I suppose places with a higher proportion of religious public have more segregated hours, in more popular times of the week.

4. Woman beaten on Jerusalem bus for refusing to move to rear seat

Comment #15196 by Anat on December 29, 2006 at 12:50 pm

Luthien, your post mistakenly attributes a quote from DavidJMH to myself.

5. Woman beaten on Jerusalem bus for refusing to move to rear seat

Comment #15195 by Anat on December 29, 2006 at 12:49 pm

To Katana (comment #3): Having lived as a secular woman in Israel until the end of 2000, I haven't run into much sex segregation outside of religious institutions. Some schools have sex segregated sports/physical education classes and sex segregated crafts classes. Sport teams and clubs outside schools are usually single sex. On the other hand secular youth movements, including scouting, are co-ed.

There is at least one beach that is sex segregated. It serves both the pious and those interested in single sex skinny dipping.

The story is different for people living in highly religious communities, with segregated education at least at the highschool level, and for some also at the elementary level.

In this story one thing that bothers me is the policy of the Egged bus company, as a service provider with a monopoly in most parts of the country. I wonder if there are non-mehadrin alternatives for people who wish to travel by public transportation in these areas. (At least the city of Haifa and its environs still have Egged buses running on Shabbat.)

6. Woman beaten on Jerusalem bus for refusing to move to rear seat

Comment #15186 by Anat on December 29, 2006 at 11:40 am

On the status of women within Orthodox Judaism: Although sex seggregation may have started as a precaution against menstrual 'uncleanness', it has become part of an ethos of 'tzniut' - modesty. From a young age Orthodox Jews avoid all physical contact between members of opposite sex except immediate relatives and avoid situations of 'seclusion', ie when a man and a woman who are not married to each other or who are not immediate relatives are alone in private.

Women are exempt from many of the positive commandments - from participating in most sacrifices, or their substitute - prayer, wearing phylacteries and a prayer shawl, Torah reading and so forth. If you ask why this is so, a modern explanation would be that women are naturally more spiritual than men and do not need to perform such acts to be close to God and communicate with him, but if you look in older sources, you'll find that the purpose was to avoid conflict between a woman's duty to God and her duties to the men in her life - her father or husband. Since in Judaism one's place in the hierarchy is determined by the number of commandments one is obligated to perform women are lower in status than men, and men thank God daily for not having made them women, while women thank God for having made them 'according to his will'. In modern congregations women are seeking a more active role. This is usually done by having separate services and study sessions for women. This is as opposed to non-Orthodox denominations that are, as a rule, egalitarian and have female rabbis and cantors.

7. Response to Richard Dawkins' Criticisms in The God Delusion

Comment #13275 by Anat on December 16, 2006 at 3:52 pm

Swinburne: "But (1) I am not the same thing as my brain."

And what would be left of 'you' without it?

8. Atheists' bleak alternative

Comment #12791 by Anat on December 13, 2006 at 10:07 pm

Two quotes:

A study in the Journal of Religion and Society claims that belief in God correlates with higher rates of homicide, sexual promiscuity, and other social ills, and that when compared with relatively secular democracies, the churchgoing United States "is almost always the most dysfunctional."

and:

What society loses when it discards Judeo-Christian faith and belief in God is something far more difficult to replace: the value system most likely to promote ethical behavior and sustain a decent society.
-----

I think I need a new irony meter.

9. Richard Dawkins on The Late Late Show with Pat Kenny

Comment #12214 by Anat on December 11, 2006 at 9:36 am

I liked the comments of the few atheists in the audience. In particular the guy that explained how being an atheist helps him not take bad things that happen personally. That he can understand that the fact that something bad happened to him does not mean he deserved it in any way. This is my preferred response to the 'religion is comforting in hard times' claim.

10. God's Inbox

Comment #11835 by Anat on December 7, 2006 at 2:36 pm

And if God forgets to read his inbox, you can also get him by fax:
From http://www.jafi.org.il/education/noar/sites/kotel.htm

quote:
Many different customs are now common practice at the Wall. One such custom is placing small personal notes of request in the cracks between the stones. It is now also possible to send notes to the wall via a fax service given by the Israeli telephone company. Fax: 972-2- 56112222.

Or email your fax to kotel@onemail.bezeq.com according to
THIS PAGE.

There are people whose job is getting your message to him, apparently.

11. The godless guru

Comment #11162 by Anat on December 3, 2006 at 12:31 pm

On the literary value of the Bible - it should be treated the way we treat the works of Homer - read as literature and as a source of insight into (a) past society/ies, not as a guideline for our own.

12. The Big Question: Why are we here?

Comment #10675 by Anat on November 28, 2006 at 9:43 pm

Dawkins makes the argument in the essay 'Darwin Triumphant' in 'A Devil's Chaplain' that if a mutation is small enough in its phenotypic effect it has some 50% chance to be an improvement of sorts. And elsewhere, it has been calculated that very small but consistent selective pressure can cause dramatic changes in phenotype over the course of several tens of thousands of years in a mammal (and much faster in an animal with a shorter generation time, such as an insect) - a geological eyeblink.

13. The end of one law for all?

Comment #10645 by Anat on November 28, 2006 at 5:37 pm

It is one thing for people to seek arbitration by mutual consent for civil matters or even for a community to impose social sanctions on its members and an entirely different one for a community to infringe on protected rights. If a community is going to shun people that do not adhere to its convention - well, you cannot force people to like you, but you can still find yourself some other community to live within. But if such communities start incarcerating people - that would be kidnapping. And other physical punishments would be assault and worse.

14. Religion's Real Child Abuse

Comment #10018 by Anat on November 26, 2006 at 10:21 pm

And what evidence is there that hell is a real place rather than a product of the imaginations of people attempting to control others?

15. The God Experiments

Comment #9917 by Anat on November 26, 2006 at 12:14 pm

I think there are quite a few religious traditions in which religious experiences are thought to be reserved to few well-trained individuals.

16. The God Experiments

Comment #9664 by Anat on November 25, 2006 at 12:51 pm

In an interview with Jonathan Miller, Richard Dawkins described how in his adolescence he used to pray and have visions of angels. I wonder if the adolescent Dawkins would have been more responsive to the 'God helmet'. If so, was the change in responsiveness caused by his change in belief. Can our beliefs change the way our brains operate?

17. Census called into question as new Ipsos MORI poll estimates 17 million Humanist Brits

Comment #9496 by Anat on November 24, 2006 at 11:12 pm

Were the 36% those who chose the Humanist option for all three questions?

18. Journal Clarifies Report on a Stem Cell Finding

Comment #9403 by Anat on November 24, 2006 at 5:16 pm

So now they'll need to produce 8 or 16 or whatever times more embryos in order to get the needed number of stem cells? which means even more frozen embryos sitting in liquid nitrogen until someone gives the OK to toss them down the sink? Ridiculous outcome of religious sensitivities.

But then, at least there is a chance to get work done to demonstrate the power of stem cells in therapy, until the religious establishment will be compelled by popular demand to change its views.

19. The Big Question: Why are we here?

Comment #8979 by Anat on November 23, 2006 at 4:04 am

Richard O'Hagan: "I ask again. How does a gene randomly and by pure chance, no matter how small the mutation, get the link between the host and its surroundings? Please, don't repeat again that it does not mimic the environment, it is a chance mutation. That is my WHOLE problem. How could it ever manage to randomly replicate, in no matter how small a way to allow for graduality, the hosts environment?"

But what was the original mutation? How much protection did it provide? Well, for this you must consider what the insect or whatever looked like, it's new environment as well as the visual capacity of its predator. Even a small change in shading or texture - if it is in the right direction - can provide some protection, especially if the visual acuity of the predator isn't that great. So among the mutant offspring of an animal whose environment had changed or who had moved to a new environment, some would be just a little darker or lighter, or have a texture just a bit reminiscent of the pattern of bark, or leaves or whatever the animal rests upon. And that would be some advantage. But then the vision of the predator becomes better at seeing through the camoflage, so there is additional pressure to improve it, etc. The point is, even if the mutation provides lousy camoflage, under some circumstances it would be better than no camoflage whatsoever. Maybe it only offers protection when the animal is in the shade, or maybe only when the sun is low or on cloudy days. It is still better than nothing, so selection has a chance to work.

20. How Full Is Your Quiver?

Comment #8790 by Anat on November 22, 2006 at 9:37 am

"The real question, as distasteful as it is, is "would you rather it was you and yours or they and theirs?".

What are you asking? Whom I'd rather have go through the sufferings brought about by over-population? As I said, not anyone I care about. Ideally nobody, but if people choose that for themselves, well...

21. The Big Question: Why are we here?

Comment #8786 by Anat on November 22, 2006 at 9:14 am

Part of the problem is ignoring the graduality of the change (on both sides of the arms race). The majority of new mutations are failures and get weeded out, but the rare one that provides even a tiny advantage gets selected, is retained and eventually is likely to take over the population. In most cases of quantitative traits you don't get abrupt improvements in a single generation. The phenotype of the mutants will vary in a distribution around that of the wildtype, and if selective pressure is consistent over generations the average of the distribution gets pushed slowly in one direction. In 'The Ancestor's Tale' Dawkins describes a study by Peter and Rosemary Grant of selective survival of finches on one of the Galapagos islands at a time of severe draught. After the draught the average beak length had increased by 0.5 mm relative to average beak length prior to the drought. This was related to changes in availability of edible seeds as a result of the drought.

22. Beyond belief: In place of God

Comment #8601 by Anat on November 21, 2006 at 8:05 pm

The quotes are real but distorted by lack of context, and by being given a new, counter-factual context (for example by putting together all the pro-religion quotes of different people).

23. How Full Is Your Quiver?

Comment #8417 by Anat on November 21, 2006 at 7:15 am

Colin: "Ok, for those atheists out there who think these families are ridiculous, the meaning of life is life itself. It's to successfully propagate your genes to future generations. Simply, the fundamental meaning of life is to have children. Those of you who don't, are evolutionary dead ends.

Those who worry about restricting breeding because of overpopulation and destroying the environment, well, sorry, you and your genes will be bred out of the population in a generation or so. Those who don't want to bring children into a world of wars and famine, you and your genes will soon be gone as well. Forgotten and never missed."

I think it is you who is missing the point. I am not equal to my genes. Whether my genes stay around or not is none of my business. Since I have a daughter (as well as nieces, nephews and many unrelated children that I happen to care about), I would like her to have as good a planet and as good a society to live in as I can help - for her as a person, not as a collection of genes half of which came from me. If the idea of reproducing without considering environmental impact prevails then the genes carried by the quiverfuls et al will take over much of humanity, just before all of humanity goes extinct or manages to send itself back to the stone age. I wouldn't like to live in such a world nor would I want anyone I care about to live in it.

24. How Full Is Your Quiver?

Comment #8191 by Anat on November 20, 2006 at 3:35 pm

curious: " At what time did the planet become overpopulated? What number would be the correct population?"

Well, way back Arthur C Clarke suggested stopping the expansion of human population by efficient contraception, and then use the same means to bring it down to whatever number we choose. I think he was willing to go down to one million (from memory, can't find the reference) and he quotes Fred Hoyle as promoting one hundred thousand. Thus the planet could return to be a more hospitable place for humans and non-humans alike.

25. Morality

Comment #7234 by Anat on November 17, 2006 at 8:14 pm

I'd say our moral instinct, the 'inner chimp' is tied strongly to our emotions (because that's how it evolved), which gives strong feelings of 'rightness' and 'wrongness', but it is limited in the range of consequences it is capable of modeling. The rational element of our moral thinking is capable of considering consequences remote in time and place,as well as secondary consequences. However it seems this kind of thinking does not have the same level of emotional impact, thus we feel less strongly about it. In any case, we can use reason both to broaden our moral thinking (by considering ultimate rather than immediate consequences) but also to reason away immoral behavior (ie find excuses). Use with caution!

26. The sexiest man living!

Comment #7215 by Anat on November 17, 2006 at 5:42 pm

Any other famous atheists on the list? I think the other 2 musketeers would qualify.

27. My God Problem

Comment #7113 by Anat on November 17, 2006 at 8:07 am

This article demonstrates more than anything Richard Dawkins' thesis about the danger of the undeserved respect for religion in society. You let them get away with virgin birth and you end up dealing with faith-based policies.

28. We Might Be Chosen, But We're Still Going to Hell: Jews and the Christian Right

Comment #6863 by Anat on November 15, 2006 at 10:55 pm

Members of the Israeli right wing accept support from the crackpots because they think the apocalypic prophecies are nonsense anyway, so they don't need to consider them. But they ignore the fact that these are groups opposed to any kind of peace. The mainstream right may want to negotiate one day, and suddenly their benefactors will turn against them.

29. A Dissent: The Case Against Faith

Comment #6167 by Anat on November 13, 2006 at 12:32 am

Joad, what kind of abuse? It can probably be regulated. That is not a justification to prohibit the procedure on principle, just like with organ donations.

30. A Dissent: The Case Against Faith

Comment #6157 by Anat on November 12, 2006 at 11:31 pm

johnc wrote:
"Finally, one is able to mount a quite reputable secular ethical argument against, for instance, the "farming" (ie deliberate production) of human embryos for medical research purposes. Removing the supernatural does not eliminate ethical difficulties."

Could you please explain the rationale behind this potential secular argument against stem cell research? On what basis would that be objectionable?

31. Penn Jillette Interviews Richard Dawkins

Comment #6144 by Anat on November 12, 2006 at 9:09 pm

There are more options than deity, liar or lunatic. For example - the stories got exaggerated until they got written down. Even the true parts in them could have been originally about different people. The most you can say is that someone managed to come up with a collection of teachings, but then, that was a common effort both in the Greco-Roman world and in the Jewish culture of the time.

32. Reading of The God Delusion in Lynchburg, VA

Comment #6071 by Anat on November 12, 2006 at 12:14 pm

Anonymous wrote:
"Poor little Richard played both ends of the table, in that evolution produces mutations which are haphazard and, to use his own words "mindless", and that this mindless or haphazrd process is the unified equation of usefull advantageous results?! Or, let's try your specialty, mindless mutations and haphazardness = intelligent and useful results?"

You are commiting the most common mistake of creationists in that you totally ignore the power of *selective pressure* acting over a long course of time. You do not appreciate the fierceness of competition over resources and the arms race between predators and prey, parasites and hosts that exist in nature and what a strong selective force they exert on a reproducing populations. The genes that provide an edge up in such a competitive environment spread over time in the population because organisms that do not have them do not reproduce as efficiently as those who do.

33. Hatred (of Gays) Unites Jerusalem's Feuding Faiths

Comment #5662 by Anat on November 10, 2006 at 10:38 am

Update: The organisers changed venue to a rally on the Hebrew University campus. The rally was a success, with several thousands atending (estimates vary). The police arrested some 30 gay activists who tried to have a spontaneous parade off-campus. There was also a small counter demonstration of 250 students from religious schools.

See http://haaretz.com/hasen/spages/785989.html