1. Richard Dawkins at the Edinburgh Book Festival

Comment #65902 by geckoman on August 27, 2007 at 9:48 am

Re#23 Flagellant

Great comments. Posters, myself included, are quick to bash the USA on here and it's good to get some balance.

Couldn't agree more with all you say. Freedom of speech and an independent press (such as they are) are absolutely crucial. The fact that the islamists burnt Danish flags while the Danish Government was pointing out that the paper involved neither represented Denmark, nor was under their control, illustrates most islamists' utter inability to grasp these concepts. Don't try to drag us down to your level, I say to them.

2. BBC Trust rejects Opus Dei appeal

Comment #65892 by geckoman on August 27, 2007 at 9:21 am

Creepy organisation.

When I worked in the EU in Brussels it was heavily rumoured that at least one European Commissioner was a member of OD. It was alleged that senior staff in her Directorate were selected on religious grounds. Fortunatlely her Directorate was one where religion could not easily be brought to bear on policy, but as I say creepy nonetheless.

3. Feeding the fear gene

Comment #65458 by geckoman on August 24, 2007 at 9:36 am

oarwhat

I think you could make a case that if any Jehovah's Witnesses come to your door, they come with bad intentions-ie to convert you to their warped and insane worldview.

In that case a few shots in their direction would be entirely justified.

4. Scientists should unite against threat from religion

Comment #65038 by geckoman on August 22, 2007 at 5:21 pm

Bizarro

Waiting til you're married to have sex isn't a good idea.

As is tarditional in Scotland, on my wedding night my wife got so rat arsed she locked me out our hotel room. Accidentally, she claims. I had to get the manager to let me in. Obviously, I could have attempted a quick five knuckle shuffle in the corridor, or indeed the bathroom, when finally I got in, but by then that old romantic feeling had passed.

However, the fact that I had already played 'Captain wobbly hides his helmet' on previous occasions sustained me through this setback. You would have no such consolation; so don't say you haven't been warned.

5. Rational Atheism

Comment #64865 by geckoman on August 22, 2007 at 5:50 am

Re post #24 by Dr Benway:

Been struggling a bit with this myself. In fact, my wife has had a go at me for spending too much time on this site for reasons similar to those you mention.

She says that atheists like me are almost gloating at others' ignorance, patting theselves on the back for being so smart and defining themselves largely only by what they oppose. I have found it hard to refute her claims to be honest. She is not a believer; only she just does not think that atheism v religion is terribly interesting.

It's fine to say that I believe in evidence over dogma, that I appreciate the wonder of the world around me etc, but she still thinks I'm some sort of obsessive smart alec that gets wound up by all things religious but doesn't have much positive to contribute by way of alternative.

Can anyone help me provide a snappy response to this?

6. A Matter of Faith

Comment #64741 by geckoman on August 21, 2007 at 2:56 pm

Religion and much of the media have a fundamentally compromised relationship. The media tends to handle religious matters/debate with kid gloves. Among the reasons for this are the practical: legislation covers what can and cannot be said (in the UK in particular), and the conventional: that religious people and religion are de facto "nice" and interviewers don't want them to be publicly humiliated.

Therefore, I agree with posters who imply that any semi-positive atheistic content in any media outlet is in itself a small victory. I think we need to remember this if at times the coverage seems wishy-washy and guys like Hitchens seem to be holding back.

7. Scarlet Letter Campaign Update: A Victory

Comment #62463 by geckoman on August 9, 2007 at 8:06 pm

The pastor/author's surname is Maker. As in "meet your..." Come on people...

8. Does the Bible have a place in public schools?

Comment #61769 by geckoman on August 6, 2007 at 8:25 pm

Well maybe we're looking, not for the first time, at a difference between the USA and the UK.

Interesting to note what Goldy says about RE teachers confirming his atheism. He is talking about when he was 14 or 15 I imagine. That's also the age at which I decided religion was complete tosh. Like I said, teenagers are pretty discerning about what and whom they believe.

Indoctrination mainly thrives in an environment devoid of counterpoints. As long as kids are exposed to a wider general education, they'll make up their own minds. Let's face it, Bible studies is a dull subject, often taught by uninspiring dullards. As such it is destined to fail to capture the imaginations of most kids. In this sense it plays into the hands of those, like me, that think limited exposure is actually helpful as an antidote.

9. Does the Bible have a place in public schools?

Comment #61764 by geckoman on August 6, 2007 at 7:59 pm

Fear of indoctrination is understandable, but let's not underestimate how smart a lot of kids are. Teenagers in particular can recognise crap when it is thrown at them.

I am reminded of a quote from a prominent atheist to the effect that her mother exposed her and her siblings to the bible at an early age, figuring that like any virus, early exposure to the germs would lead to better resistance later in life.

At my school in Scotland in the 1970's Religious Education was a compulsory one hour per week curriculum subject. But everyone, teacher included, knew it was ridiculous. The teacher just allowed us to piss around as he quietly tried to give the lesson. Clearly he'd drawn the short straw of having to take the class and as long as we didn't go ballistic, he didn't care.

In other words, this might be a development that sounds terribly ominous, but that in most cases, won't have much impact at all.

10. The Out Campaign

Comment #61220 by geckoman on August 4, 2007 at 8:01 am

Okay, now that I'm sober again I can accept that my comment about sycophants was misjudged and provocative. The themes of this thread have indeed ranged far and wide.

For Dr Benway the master baker-these cookies haven't arrived yet. DHL or snail mail?

11. The Out Campaign

Comment #61125 by geckoman on August 3, 2007 at 7:25 pm

How come there are 583 posts on this thread? Just becasuse RD began it and has pitched in once or twice? More or less the same discussion was held under another post and had many times fewer posts.

Those who accuse atheists of worshipping RD and others would derive pleasure from this statistic and from the manner posters are scramblimg to engage the great man in conversation.

I find the whole thing faintly embarrasing and sycophantic to tell the truth.

12. God Answers Prayers Of Paralyzed Little Boy: 'No' Says God

Comment #61123 by geckoman on August 3, 2007 at 7:08 pm

Hey Duff

FYI the Onion is an affiliate of the Economist, not the New York Times. D'uh.

13. God Answers Prayers Of Paralyzed Little Boy: 'No' Says God

Comment #61006 by geckoman on August 3, 2007 at 9:51 am

Come on people, wakey wakey.

The publication from which the article is pulled is a spoof online magazine. I think it is worth stating that categorically for the benefit of some posters above.

In the cases of some posters it seems that 'sense of humour bypass operations' have been a complete success.

14. Come Out!

Comment #59484 by geckoman on July 29, 2007 at 8:14 am

Based on most discussion on here and recent literature, a common trait of atheists (which contrasts us to believers) is that they appear by and large more intelligent than believers.

Normally atheists can be trusted to think carefully about their actions, strategies and the consequences.

This symbol and campaign appear unintelligent for reasons that Bergson and others have listed. Bergson's comment that defining 'sides' or polarising the arguement may push people to religion, seems persuasive. Remember, people fear change. Asking them to chose between 2000 year old religion sanctioned by the establishment and a seemingly new movement based on a few writers and a t-shirt may backfire.

Time will tell, but I fear that some atheists have felt the need to make a statement or do something positive so urgently, that they have not considered all the consequences.

On the positive side, teenagers in particular should like the t-shirt. They may need the security of feeling like they belong, in a manner older atheists don't need. And today's teenagers are after all, tomorrow's atheists.

15. Fewer Muslims 'back suicide bombs'

Comment #58687 by geckoman on July 25, 2007 at 7:19 pm

There is also declining support among Muslims for Osama Bin Laden. In Jordan, just 20% express a lot or some confidence in Bin Laden, down from 56% four years ago.

16. Camp Joins Summer Fun With Teaching Hindu Faith

Comment #58650 by geckoman on July 25, 2007 at 3:40 pm

I'm a Brit visiting Illinois at the moment and must thank you guys for clearing up this summer camp/summer school business, as I was wondering about it.

Every second church (and that's a lot in the midwest, believe me) is currently advertising summer bible school or summer bible camp. The newspapers and free community rags also carry commercials for them.

Poor kids I thought. I recall my own 7 week summer holidays as a kid- weeks of fun uninterrupted by that kind of crap. Imagine being cooped up in a stuffy church and listening to some old geyser droning on about sin and punishment.

I think Corylus is right-in the UK summer camp means cowering under damp canvas, eating undercooked campfire food and possibly getting a well developed girl to flash for you. I imagine, ahem. The religious element only manifests itself in prayers that camp will be cancelled prematurely and you'll be back in front of the tv soon.

17. Red Mosque Fueled Islamic Fire in Young Women

Comment #58440 by geckoman on July 24, 2007 at 8:25 pm

Goldy

Rich arabs and doctors are still susceptible to the last 5 factors I mentioned.

If your point is that even some of the educated and wealthy are attracted by muslim fanatacism, then you are correct. Doesn't lend optimism for a muslim solution to a muslim problem, does it?

18. Red Mosque Fueled Islamic Fire in Young Women

Comment #58428 by geckoman on July 24, 2007 at 7:13 pm

The testimony of Miss Sarfraz is as Philip said desperate and heart breaking.

Its roots: lack of opprtunity, institutionalised sexism, poverty, impressionability, indoctrination, lack of balanced education, msplaced idealism and the predatory nature of vitriolic religious men.

That's a lot of negatives to overcome before it changes. And there is no quick fix. I can only recall an earlier article by a physics lecturer from an Islamabad University. He had the courage to oppose extremism and talk to his students about the dangers of blind submission to islam. People like him are one hope of a muslim solution to muslim problem. But it's a slender hope. The AK 47 wielding imam is for the moment, far mightier than the liberal academic.

19. Must the US president believe in God?

Comment #58157 by geckoman on July 23, 2007 at 6:05 pm

kurtdenke

Swaziland. It's adjacent to South Africa. Take a look at www.times.co.sz/ (the national daily) and check out the amount of religious references in any issue.

There was a recent corruption case in which $8m was squandered and stolen, largely by civil servants. One defendant-an assistant principal secretary in the finance ministry-said that when he'd siphoned funds he had been possessed by demons. Since, he'd seen the light etc. The Commissioners of Enquiry (it was a Commission that was to lead to court) began shouting 'praise the lord' and exonerated the defendant.

There are other examples. It's shit. Imagine what it's like living there as an atheist. I wrote to a national magazine (The Nation) on how religion was affecting the country very neagtively. Without my consent they made a feature of my letter. I was told by those in the know that if anyone at the immigration department saw the letter while my residence permit application was being processed, my application would have been refused. Discrimination on the grounds of religion is one thing; discrimination on the grounds of no religion quite another!

20. Must the US president believe in God?

Comment #58067 by geckoman on July 23, 2007 at 8:27 am

Interesting indeed this oath business and the discussions here.

I suspect that I'd judge my approach on circumstances. There is a critical difference between being the accused or just a witness. Were I a criminal defendant, I'm sure I'd swear on the Bible so not to attract negative attention to myself. I'd be being disingeneous of course, but would justify it to myself if I were innocent as a strategy towards exoneration.

Were I guilty, I'd do the same. Let's face it,if compromising personal moral principles meant I might not go to jail, then out go the principles. I live in a massively Christian country. Defendants often base defences along the lines of "I sinned terribly in committing this crime. Now I have seen the light, become born-again and asked God for forgiveness." They usually throw in a few biblical verses to support their defence. In some cases the accused are actually exonerated based on this. I would have no hesitation in lying through my teeth and adopting the same approach. After all the court is massively religiously biased, so there is no level playing field for a non-believer.

If called as a witness I'm not sure how I'd swear. Much would depend on my status, the leanings of the court and the overall context of the case.

21. Must the US president believe in God?

Comment #57640 by geckoman on July 20, 2007 at 11:51 am

MisterX, you say:

"I am optimistic America will be an absolute secular nation in my lifetime like Sweden or Japan"

Sorry to say, I can only presume you have discovered some secret to longevity and expect to live for 500 years or so.

22. Phony Piety on the Far Right

Comment #57559 by geckoman on July 19, 2007 at 8:32 pm

Steven

Agreed. A recent US best seller by far right nut Anne Coulter was entitled 'Godless'.

In her intro she explains that she thought long and hard before using the title as an adjective to descibe today's liberals.

According to her it's the most damning and terrible insult she was able to think of.

In response I'd say "Er..thanks Anne!"

I read her bio though and got to thinking this is just a complete scam to sell books to the brain-dead. Coulter is well-educated and has held some impressive professional positions. She can't really believe some the deluded bollocks she says she does. But she does know about professioanl writing.

Any writer is involved in a commercial undertaking, RD included. They have to convince an agent and in turn a publisher that their book has a market. There is no way the publishers of her book would have thought - gosh, the liberals will be so offended they'll buy this right wing lunacy in their thousands. Which means the publishers ticked the boxes of anti abortion, anti-intellectualism, christain fundamentalism and thought-great, the far right nutters will lap this up. Coulter gets the cash and becomes a big fish in a medium sized pond. If others think she's a hypocrite, lying twat, what does she care?

23. Why I Believe Anti-Evangelism Is Wrong

Comment #57553 by geckoman on July 19, 2007 at 8:09 pm

AtheistAcolyte

I think you make a very good point in evoking racism as an example to refute the author's claims.

I live adjacent to South Africa. Among some people its racist legacy lives on. If I am conversing with someone who calls an African a derogatory term, I normally point out the rdiculousness of their archaic views (unless they're armed and drunk of course.) I am in effect challenging what they think and, by unsubtle implication, suggesting what they should think.

As my confidence as an atheist grows, I feel increasingly obliged to do the same with anyone talking religious claptrap, if they talk first.

Note though that in general atheists are acting IN RESPONSE to religion. Religion threw the first punch. We have been provoked by stupidity and superstition and the extent to which it has infiltrated our lives. It is not in my nature to go looking for theists to argue with; but I have respect for those atheists that do, as long as they do so with some decorum and reasonableness.

24. Preventing More Lal Masjids

Comment #56914 by geckoman on July 17, 2007 at 8:24 pm

Solarium

1.Technology-you can do more damage with an AK47 and semtex than with a scimitar.

2.Self-perpetuation- when killings begin, notions of heroism, vengeance, martyrdom etc figure.

3. Communication- easier to recruit, plan and execute violence with cell phones, internet. Also easier to get media coverage and impress the gullible.

4. Travel-you can take the fight to the enemy in his land

5. A more easily identifiable enemy- USA, UK armed forces present in Islamic countries.

25. Preventing More Lal Masjids

Comment #56909 by geckoman on July 17, 2007 at 7:53 pm

I sincerely hope that the author is well protected from the extremists he writes about. Based at a University in Islmabad, he must fear for his safety. His courage in writing about this and in raising the issues he mentions with his students is admirable.

26. Kenya: The Death of Religion And Rise of Atheism in the West

Comment #56864 by geckoman on July 17, 2007 at 3:09 pm

GoatBoy

Just looked at the foaties and they are impressive. The venue looks a lot less cheesy than expected. That said, is that real graves in the grounds of the pub? Is there not a problem with folk heefing and pissing on them?

27. Kenya: The Death of Religion And Rise of Atheism in the West

Comment #56786 by geckoman on July 17, 2007 at 8:00 am

GoatBoy

Have these venues all got really imaginative names like "Cloisters", "Confessions", "The Spire" etc?

28. Kenya: The Death of Religion And Rise of Atheism in the West

Comment #56765 by geckoman on July 17, 2007 at 6:39 am

Just for background, allafrica.com, from which the article is pulled, is one of these umbrella websites that collates news items from multiple sources. These especially include African newspapers.

This article was written for the Nation newspaper in Kenya. The standard of journalism and quality of African papers falls far short of what many readers on this forum are used to. The national daily where I live is clearly not even proof-read, so frequent are the basic errors.

Writers like Odoyo are writing for a domestic readership who share his homophobic and unquestioning religious adherence. Concerns like accuracy, provable statements, balanced reporting etc are not major concerns for the editor. Note also Odoyo is probably an MP. In Africa (and I accept I generalise) adherence to hierarchy and status mean that MPS and the like are never criticised for their views.

29. Kenya: The Death of Religion And Rise of Atheism in the West

Comment #56659 by geckoman on July 16, 2007 at 7:58 pm

Having lived in South East Africa for the last five years, I can tell you that Peter Odoyo's article and views are typical. In fact, he would be seen as a softie and liberal in Swaziland where I live.

Africa is probably the last bastion of utterly unquestioning Christian adherence. In Swaziland, the PM, Ministers, indeed everyone cites the Bible as the reference for ...everything. A recently appointed Minister was asked if not having any qualifications or experience bothered him. "No, because the Lord will guide me." A civil servant was accused of embezzling millions. In court he pleaded that he had been possessed by the devil but had since seen the light. 'Praise the Lord' sang the judges and exonerated him. The King tells subjects that the country's number one enemy is...demons (not HIV, corruption etc) and that every Swazi needs to pray harder. We even had full page newspaper ads about the second coming which was expected in May. I am not making this up; I wish I was.

Religion is a massive impediment to African development as well as a tool for the elites to hold onto power. It is unquestioningly accepted and Odoyo is almost certainly genuine in his indignation (and ignorance).

We should all be worried, because while atheism gains some ground in the developed world, religion is becoming more entrenched elsewhere.

30. LA Church 'agrees abuse pay deal'

Comment #56542 by geckoman on July 16, 2007 at 8:15 am

Can you imagine the outrage, furore, calls for punishment etc were another organisation responsible? The church and its adherents would be at the vanguard in such a scenario.

In addition, the Cardinal pledged that the abuse 'would not happen again'. Really? What steps are being taken to ensure that? Are all the criminal priests still alive being placed on a sex offenders' Register? Are all future priests being screened in some way?

On the figures-while there may be a few opportunistic claims-normally the shame, stigma and horror of such abuse stops many victims coming forward; so the figures are likely far higher than reported. Was this your experience with the CPS, Corylus?

31. Hitler Was an Atheist Who Killed Millions in the Name of Atheism, Secularism?

Comment #56534 by geckoman on July 16, 2007 at 7:19 am

german-atheist

You say "neither the german people nor any nazi organisation whorshipped any non-christian god"

One could make a strong case that the German people and the nazis actually worshipped Hitler in a god-like manner. Hitler and the nazis were quick to seize on the potential of worship, obedience and blind faith, and to skew it in their favour. Look at the crowd scenes during nazism, the iconography and the faith that Hitler was the saviour of Germany and you can see how much they borrowed from religion.

For many, Hitler was approximate to a living God. Although the nazis stopped short of expressly representing him as a living God, implicitly they succeeded in achieving an impression of this stature through projecting his personal infallibility, great wisdom, pure motivations and in turn demanding utter obedience and faith in his actions.

32. Hitler Was an Atheist Who Killed Millions in the Name of Atheism, Secularism?

Comment #56445 by geckoman on July 15, 2007 at 8:07 pm

NJS

You are correct.

Hitler was above all a political expedient, light years ahead of his time. He made pacts with enemies, only to break them when it suited. In his era, this was not the done thing; politicians were gentlemen of honour. When he did do it, his opponents were invariably caught out. This largely explains his military succeses early in the war, until people finally cottoned on.

It is therefore entirely consistent that he said to the Christians what he presumed they would want to hear. As long as it suited his purposes he said anything to anyone. And he needed the Chritain majority onside.

Hitler was clearly not a practising Christian, though he came from a Christian background. But crucially I think, this does not make him an atheist. More accurately he was a power hungry, pragmatic, ultra nationalist sociopath for whom the existence of Gods or not were of little importance measured against his dreams of world domination and a Thousand Year Reich.

33. The fundamentalist delusion

Comment #56295 by geckoman on July 14, 2007 at 7:50 pm

OhioAtheist

It would have been God's will to make your lengthy post disappear because you were speaking ill of Him.

Sad to reflect that while I joke, many people would believe this.

34. The fundamentalist delusion

Comment #56290 by geckoman on July 14, 2007 at 7:22 pm

Tend to agree with the thrust of Stryker's comments on this one.

Religion is a mechanism that helps to perpetuate tribalism. Tribalism is now, I imagine, able to be categorised as an instinctive evolutionary hang over from long ago. It may have served a useful purpose once. Now it doesn't, but because of religion and other factors we have not been able to cast it off.

The Celtic Rangers nonsense is an example where religion is used to draw the tribal battle-lines between the residents of the same city. Most of them aren't really religious, but religion is a convenient dividing line.

Were religion removed from the equation in such an example, would the tribalism cease? Probably not. It is so deeply entrenched that another factor would fill its place. Tribalism creates identity and after all it's easier to hate than to channel energy positively. I agree that there are psychological reasons for this; many of the religiously tribalistic have what I belive are called authoritarian personalities, and are easily attracted by divisive and simplistic arguments.

Time will tell if RD and others, by arguing against religion, are only serving to draw new battle lines. It is not I think the case, as Stryker says, that RD will never convert a true beliver with his arguments; a glance at the converts section on this website belies that. Also, RD and others are at the very least raising awareness of the religioulsy motivated horrors carried out by our Governments and policy makers. The separation of religion and state can be protected without converting anyone.

35. Bush, the ethicist-in-chief

Comment #56118 by geckoman on July 13, 2007 at 9:04 pm

Nice article but...taking the piss out of GWB is like shooting fish in a barrel.

I have made a resolution, starting now, to stop doing it. Unless of course it's especially hilarious like some of his 'dreams take wings' comments. But finding contradictions, lies and hypocracies in his pronouncements is so easy it is depressing. The man will go down in history as the least able President of the USA ever, as a complete laughing stock and a dangerous nutter. Is there any point therefore on dwelling on him any further?

36. The Republican War on Science Rages On

Comment #55913 by geckoman on July 12, 2007 at 8:25 pm

Thanks for that Fouad.

You succeeded in saying in five words what took me two hundred!

37. The Republican War on Science Rages On

Comment #55910 by geckoman on July 12, 2007 at 8:22 pm

Watched this story on another news channel and thought it pretty interesting.

I understood that the last three Surgeons General all said that they were unable to properly do their jobs due to political interference. One said that he was ordered to mention Bush's name 3 times on any page of a speech or published document.

What is interesting is that people associated with the Bush administration who have been biting their lips for years are finally raising their heads above the parapet and beginning to lay bare the abuses committed in the administration's name. Hardly shocking news to anyone with an IQ above 80, but a start at least and a suggestion that GWB is largely a lame duck President.

Not, of course, that this will influence Bush and his immediate disciples anyway, but perhaps the House will increasingly vote against proposals that include the religiously inspired madness that has characterised many policies to date.

That said, hard facts, truth, evidence and rationality don't figure too much in American politics, so I won't be holding my breath.

38. Police plea on genital mutilation

Comment #55465 by geckoman on July 11, 2007 at 7:39 am

This talk of the 'political left' strikes me as inaccurate terminology.

Roughly speaking, on the political spectrum Marxist Leninism is the extreme left and conservative ultra nationalism the extreme right.

Today's 'political left' are largely capitalists, often monetarists and social conservatives. They are only called the left because on some issues they take a different view from the extreme right. But to call liberal Democrats in the USA, or liberal members of the British Labour Party 'left' is stretching things to say the least.

It is nonetheless gratifying that the UK Government has seen fit to set pc notions aside and banned circumcision. Coming on the heels of Rushdie's knighthood I wonder if we are seeing a policy shift in the UK of -'ok, we have been real touchy feely with domestic Islam but homegrown extremists are still bombing us, so let's start toughening up when appropriate '. I hope so.

39. Don't Mince Words: The London Car-Bomb Plot Was Designed to Kill Women

Comment #54968 by geckoman on July 9, 2007 at 1:51 pm

Wow!

Fanusi and Xeno,I know it's none of my business really but you guys are getting a little bit carried away here. At first your discussions were highly interesting. What happened?

You guys should maybe take a step back and listen to yourselves. Xeno-it is a bit creepy to go searching and lifting quotes from other threads and Fanusi-by actually defending the 'charges' laid, you have joined in the creepiness.

Sure passionate beliefs and discussions are great, but when they cross into cyber stalking and mud slinging it's time to have a time out I reckon. So do please have a virtual beer on me and come back refreshed and reasonable.

40. Pakistan Mosque Leader Vows a Fight to the Death

Comment #54904 by geckoman on July 9, 2007 at 9:27 am

The part of me brought up in an environment with a liberal (and christian)ethical code, considers any mass loss of life a tragedy. Particulalry when those involved are victims of indoctrination, poorly educated and easiliy led. And especially if children are involved.

Yet I am not afraid to admit that part of me also thinks that if you allow yourself to follow a religion and its leaders so unquestioningly and so vigorously, and this is where it leads, then too bad. Your demise might at least be a lesson to others, though just as likely you will be seen as a martyr and inspiration for other gullibles.

I cannot also help sensing that the Pakistani crack-down is heavily influenced by pressure and inducements from other countries..

41. Won't anyone stand up for God?

Comment #54740 by geckoman on July 8, 2007 at 7:59 pm

I should have added that, to answer the aricle's question, here in the USA recent books have been published that 'stick up for God'.

"Godless" by Anne Coulter is probably the best seller. She's the one that defied her co-religionists to deny laughing at the thought of RD burning in hell, or words to that effect.

I browsed her book for a laugh of my own the other day. It appears not to be a defence of God as much as an attack on what she calls liberals. Her idea of a liberal is of course anyone one degree to her left, or a Democrat. The over-riding irony of her book is that while she thinks it's the ultimate insult to call a liberal 'godless', many who claim to be liberal would take that as a compliment.

Otherwise her book is written entirely for the closed-minded uber right in the USA that would never even open a page of TGD or its like. This and the poverty of her arguments does suggest that while Dawkins, Hitchens, Harris et al have written because they have something to say and because they hope to convert the odd religioso along the way, she and her ilk are preaching entirely to the converted and are motivated primarily by money.

42. Won't anyone stand up for God?

Comment #54734 by geckoman on July 8, 2007 at 7:26 pm

SRWB

I think you make a very well observed point. Language is indeed revealing: in this particular case it is appears to be revealing of the author's prejudiced perception of atheists.

By phrasing the article in this way the author is attempting to evoke the idea that atheists are potentially physically threatening. If the militaristic language ties in with Iraq, terrorism and so on, all the better as far as the author is concerned.

We should remember however that the article did appear in a (not very good) newspaper. Articles of this type are written to grab attention and ultimately to sell newspapers. The writer is probably a lot smarter than he/she sounds, but may well have written in with a clear idea of her (not too smart) readership.

Basically, I would imagine that most posters on here are smarter than many of the the Daily Mail readership.

43. Emory Brain Imaging Studies Reveal Biological Basis For Human Cooperation

Comment #54457 by geckoman on July 7, 2007 at 8:34 am

Henri, you say:


Geckoman:
You commit the all-too-common and illogical 'Reductio ad Hitlerum' which should be banished from any argument today. It's childish.

It is not childish to mention nazi ideology in a political science context because, unlike much of the abstract philosophising above, nazism existed in reality, was well documented, recent and the consequential acts of that ideology are more or less 'provable'. It may be 'tiresome' (and wrong)to say that Hitler and Stalin were atheists and they killed millions of people...but that was not my point. My point was that the nazis are a pertinent example of a movement that attempted to banish compassion for the weak, but that in fact it did not get them very far.

If you are looking for an example of childishness in a debate, you could look to the phrase "I cannot respond to every single point you all mentioned, except to say that my views are undoubtedly correct." and comapre it to the type of banter prominent in any primary school playground!

44. Emory Brain Imaging Studies Reveal Biological Basis For Human Cooperation

Comment #54363 by geckoman on July 6, 2007 at 2:18 pm

Henri Bergson says:

"Contrary to the common argument that compassion has helped mankind develop, it could be argued that it has hindered the evolution of mankind by proliferating the weak."

I would observe that yes, you can make that arguement. I would further observe that the Nazis incorporated something akin to it into their ideology. Their 'iron will of nature' philosophisng was similar and was a basis for killing the infirm, insane etc in order not to pollute the gene pool. Soldiers were ordered to show no compassion to untermensch-racially inferior Slavs and so on.

The Nazis came from a Western Christian moral background interestingly and were of course defeated.

Showing compassion to the weak is, I would think, instinctive. Babies are after all weak.

Either way, basing a political ideology and military philosophy on lack of compassion doesn't seem to work.

45. For Muslim Extremists, Religion Matters

Comment #54343 by geckoman on July 6, 2007 at 12:56 pm

On the positive side, it is goood to read a female from a muslim background writing in these terms.

But I tend to agree with the others - re-interpreting is unworkable.

Besides, as long as anyone choses to live their lives by what is written in one book, there's likely to be trouble. Re-interpreting that book contextually will not change the fact that basing important decisions, judgements and acts on its( fanciful and unproven) contents is at best worryingly odd, at worst a sign of a severe personality disorder and a harbinger of alarm bells.

Another simple point to make is that 're-interpreting' a written work implies that it contains enough of positive value to make the exercise worthwhile. Or to put it simply: you can't polish a turd.

46. Unorthodox Atheist

Comment #54073 by geckoman on July 5, 2007 at 7:39 am

I'd have thought that rather than wasting time trying to decide whether to discipline you or not, the principal's time might be better spent adressing more pressing issues- such as the standard and quality of education and whether students are bringing guns to school.

47. Floods are judgment on society, say bishops

Comment #53997 by geckoman on July 4, 2007 at 8:11 pm

If the bishop's theory is correct drought in Africa could be eradicated by holding gay pride marches, or homosexual mongolian cluster fucks for that matter in the most arid zones. A lot cheaper than complex irrigation systems. He should write to DFID at once.

48. When is a bishop like a suicide bomber?

Comment #53996 by geckoman on July 4, 2007 at 7:42 pm

Sorry for starting to hog this thread, I tend to hate posters behaving like me but...I was just thinking about the Paradise promise in future islamic terrorist training camps.

Instructor-"So lads, if you get it right like the 9/11 guys, the 72 virgins are guaranteed, I swear. Now go out there and give it 110%"

Suicide bomber-"Thanks boss. Sounds magic. Cannae wait."

Instructor- "But...if you end up setting fire to the motor and running around an airport car park yelping like a wee lassie, nae virgins when you die."

Student-"M'on tae fuck boss, that's a bit severe."

Instructor-"Cannae let the good reputation of suicide bombers down son."

Student- "So what's the deal in Paradise, later likesay?"

Instructor- "Yer own dug. Nice looking mind. A virgin tae."

Student bomber-"Awright boss, sounds magic..."

49. When is a bishop like a suicide bomber?

Comment #53969 by geckoman on July 4, 2007 at 1:42 pm

Corylus

Thanks for this, that Mark Day is pretty funny. I admit I am, ahem, Scottish too.

I also admit that descending into laddish humour on a website which is subtitled "a clear-thinking oasis" does seem a bit naughty. So, I fully intend to keep it up.

50. Don't Mince Words: The London Car-Bomb Plot Was Designed to Kill Women

Comment #53966 by geckoman on July 4, 2007 at 1:25 pm

Xenocratic

Impressed by your post number 47. The USA does indeed have much to be ashamed about and one might well argue that their assumption of the moral high ground is an affront.

I don't know what 'lynchpin of the west' means either, but I do think the USA, having assumed the role of the world's policeman, has discovered this can be a lucrative position to hold, so they won't let go easily. Probably one reason they dislike the UN so much.

I would add that up to the end of WW2 the USA could justifiably claim to have intervened in overseas conflicts for acceptable reasons. And that it was that USA to which people looked for help and which they respected. It seems a long time ago now.

Keep the thoughtful posts coming.