1. URGENT APPEAL: Please Help Protect Ayaan Hirsi Ali

Comment #88971 by dthuleen on November 19, 2007 at 10:15 am

It's entirely probable that Aayan makes more money than me. Sam Harris, Christopher Hitchens and Richard Dawkins certainly make fa-a-ar more money than me.

And they almost certainly make more than I do. But for all I know, they are giving her more than I am, as well. And if they are not, that is their failure, not an excuse for me to do nothing. So the comment above is irrelevant.

"But she MIGHT be killed!!"
Yes, and in the meantime, 20.000 other people will DEFINITELY die today. Because they don't have food, water, shelter, medicine and are mutilated, murdered or die of diseases that we in the west cure with a few pills and a good night's sleep.

It seems to me that the comment misses the point. This effort to protect her is not merely an attempt to save her life; as a person, she is no more deserving of help than millions of others, and few here would be likely to donate to a fund for her medical treatment if she were ill. No, the protection is for the freedom of people to speak openly without having their safety threatened. She happens to be the prominent example of that freedom.

2. URGENT APPEAL: Please Help Protect Ayaan Hirsi Ali

Comment #88748 by dthuleen on November 18, 2007 at 10:02 pm

Big T,

Wikipedia claims a population of about 17 million, so the cost per Dutch citizen goes up to about $0.30 per year. But your point is essentially valid even so.

If your figure of 4 million dollars a year is correct, we can see why the profits from her book don't go very far toward paying for security. Even a bestseller like The End of Faith, for example, has only sold in the low hundreds of thousands of copies. These authors are not becoming multimillionaires, at least not on the basis of their book sales alone.

3. URGENT APPEAL: Please Help Protect Ayaan Hirsi Ali

Comment #88667 by dthuleen on November 18, 2007 at 12:48 pm

Certainty is hard to come by, so no, we are not.

But if she doesn't, I'm only $10 a month poorer. I'll take that chance.

4. New Rules: A Religious Test

Comment #73034 by dthuleen on September 23, 2007 at 10:15 pm

In reply to comment #73032 by rar

Atheists aren't elected because they're generally unlikable. It's merely a correlation. An atheist could hold any position they want, but I haven't found one, atheists cannot agree on one, and there has not been a good candidate mentioned on this entire forum.

I worked last year on a local school board campaign. We called thousands of voters in the month prior to the election and sought to convince them to vote for the candidates we supported. It was not unusual to find that we had nearly convinced a voter to vote our way, were about to say goodbye, and then the voter asked what religion the candidates were. It was quite clear from the question that is was a make-or-break issue. As it happens, all three of the candidates were members of local Christian churches, and this fact would then seal the deal. If we had said any one them were non-believers, it is clear we would have lost those votes.

Being unlikeable had nothing to do with it.

5. Reading of The God Delusion in Menlo Park, CA

Comment #50378 by dthuleen on June 17, 2007 at 12:52 pm

Anyone else bothered by the fact that there's a chunk missing between part 1 and part 2? Part 1 ends abruptly in the middle of a discussion of the Old Testament, and part 2 starts in the middle of a Q+A session.

Anyone have the missing part, in either video or audio form?

6. Der Digitale Planet (lecture)

Comment #40224 by dthuleen on May 13, 2007 at 11:08 pm

I'll second japrichard's plea for help. Is the link outdated?

7. Coming out as atheist: Noel Gallagher & Gabriel Byrne

Comment #31916 by dthuleen on April 15, 2007 at 12:17 am

Bonzai,

Do you find it equally silly when a Muslim finds the courage to admit his or her apostasy publicly? If not, if you find yourself feeling admiration for someone like Ayaan Hirsi Ali, perhaps you can understand why some of us in the United States (certain parts, especially) cheer silently every time we see someone reject religion here. Not so much because we can count another one on our side, but because we recognize the bravery it often takes to go public.

I don't know where you are from; I can appreciate that my reaction could be completely bewildering elsewhere.

8. Nisbet and Mooney in the WaPo: snake oil for the snake oil salesmen

Comment #31902 by dthuleen on April 14, 2007 at 10:52 pm

PZ, that was marvelous.

The American Spectator, a magazine I do not often like to read, has advice for conservatives in this article:

http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=10976

I suggest that the kind of logic the article applies to Lincoln applies to atheists as well: move the center.

9. Coming out as atheist: Noel Gallagher & Gabriel Byrne

Comment #31846 by dthuleen on April 14, 2007 at 3:45 pm

"What are two people doing married that can't even communicate?"

If they started their relationship with an understanding that belief is sacred, then they dare not voice skepticism later, even to each other. That is the problem with treating anything as sacred: it prevents people who agree with each other from even finding out that they agree.

What if 99% of the Muslim world is really non-believing, but the penalty for apostasy keeps anyone from admitting it? How tragic and riciulous that would be! I'm not making that claim, but if it were true, how would we know? And how do we know it isn't?

This kind of situation is why it is important that atheists publicly out themselves, even if their atheism is for silly reasons. The publicity, and the realization that it's OK to go public, saves others from having to lie.

10. Coming out as atheist: Noel Gallagher & Gabriel Byrne

Comment #31835 by dthuleen on April 14, 2007 at 2:31 pm

Spinoza asks: "Why the hell do people want "publicity" for atheism?"

Well, sufficient puclicity might eliminate the irrational prejudice against atheists (not just against atheism, the idea, but against atheists, the people) that exists for those of us who live in the United States. Currently there are many bright, capable, and energetic atheists who could run for elective office and would probably do a fine job, but who are automatically excluded from major office if they refuse to make a public show of support for religion (church attendance, prayer breakfasts, voting to endorse religious institutions, dropping "God" into speeches, and so forth). The exclusion is not by legislation, but by social preference, which is why we need to change the culture, not just the laws. Like it or not, public figures help to change the culture.

Just as much of the Muslim world hinders its own development by excluding half of its population (women) from decision-making positions, we exclude something like 10% of ours (atheists). This exclusion of talent hurts all of us, believers incuded.


By the way, the 10% number is speculative, and necessarily so. Ever since I put an atheism bumper sticker on my car, I've been amazed how many freinds and co-workers have come to privately and said, in effect, "I wish I could proclaim publicly that I don't believe in God either, but my wife/husband wouldn't stand for it if they found out I no longer believed."

What's chilling to think about is the possibilty that both husband and wife might feel that way, but that each is afraid to tell the other.

Given that kind of hesitance to admit it, the precentage of self-proclaimed atheists may be far lower than those who are atheists in the privacy of their thoughts.

11. Pope says science too narrow to explain creation

Comment #31268 by dthuleen on April 11, 2007 at 8:00 pm

How is what he really said any more persuasive than this?

"Both popular and scientific texts often say that 'gravity' or 'weather' has done this or that," Benedict said. "Just who is this 'gravity' or 'weather' as (an active) subject? It doesn't exist at all!"

12. The Human Body as an Evolutionary Patchwork

Comment #31267 by dthuleen on April 11, 2007 at 7:54 pm

Thanks so much for this link. There are a great number of fascinating lectures on the Princeton site; I'm thrilled to know about it!

13. Religion useless to Dawkins

Comment #29420 by dthuleen on April 2, 2007 at 10:15 pm

Fishpeddler, you are my hero of the day, for both of your wickedly funny and on-target comments!