1. Do you have to read up on leprechology before disbelieving in them?

Comment #76268 by Robert on October 5, 2007 at 9:35 am

Bad attitude to leprechauns - the wee fellas are out there boyo.

2. Importing a slave class

Comment #44792 by Robert on May 25, 2007 at 9:43 am

What she fails to mention is that the Republicans were originally the party of the left and the Democrats the party of the right. Conservatives who support wage slavery today by opposing unions and welfare are the descendents of those who defended chattel slavery a hundred and fifty years back. Then as now vulnerable Americans are seen as either white trash or lazy blacks.

After LBJ's party renounced racism and passed the Civil Rights Act the race bigots saw the light and became good Republicans.

3. Let us pray for the soul of Richard Dawkins

Comment #40325 by Robert on May 14, 2007 at 6:10 am

Assuming Dawkins actually did raise this thought experiment about the baby and the elephant and is not being misquoted I have to say it's a no brainer. I'd shoot the elephant immediately. There wouldn't be any reasonable alternative. I'd feel very bad about it afterwards, I admit, but no normal person could do anything else.

There's no point in treating a practical problem as a theoretical problem. If anyone was actually in that situation human instinct would take over.

4. The meaning of freedom

Comment #40115 by Robert on May 13, 2007 at 7:13 am

There's a case for dress codes at school and in the workplace. But I don't see why women shouldn't be allowed to waar modest headscarves if they want to. Turkey is wrong on this one - as is France. Imposing a dress code that forbides any kind of religious clothing at all is almost as authoritarian as dictating that women should cover themseleves up.

If a Muslim woman feels that pressures on women to wear sexy clothing are more oppresive than traditional dress she may have a point. The question is whether it is her choice rather than one imposed by the mullahs.

5. A Bunch of Monkeys

Comment #38408 by Robert on May 8, 2007 at 3:17 am

I don't know how many times I've had to make this point - we are not monkeys. We share a common ancestor with monkeys, as do the other apes

6. Why the Gods Are Not Winning

Comment #36476 by Robert on May 1, 2007 at 9:36 am

In George Orwell's Animal Farm religion is represented by the raven Moses, who preaches a fairytale heaven called Sugarcandy Mountain. After the animals start a revolution and drive out the farmer he disappears, but later when the pigs reestablish a tyranny even worse than the old human dictatorship Moses the raven returns and is granted a whiskey ration by the chief pig, Napoleon. Religion has always been very useful in diverting the slaves and pesuading them to put up with injustice. It's no coincidence that most American Christianity is utterly reactionary and Republican preaching private charity from the rich rather than a welfare state.

7. Here Comes the Fourth Musketeer.

Comment #33735 by Robert on April 21, 2007 at 12:30 pm

Hitchens is yet another former lefty who's flipped over and joined the right. Many of the neocons were Trots in a former life. Still he's capable of some superb polemics against the sky fairy so we shouldn't complain.

8. Postmodernism Disrobed

Comment #29272 by Robert on April 2, 2007 at 12:01 pm

One clear sign that postmodernism is BS is its hostility to science. PM asserts that science wrongly claims to describe the physical world that surrounds us. In this it echoes the basic tenet of relativists that all points of view are equally valid. Scientific truth, it is asserted, is only one of many truths, or rather just 'one story among many' The American philosopher Richard Rorty, a leading exponent of the view that there is no truth, but only truths, ridicules those who seek the truth as 'lovably old fashioned prigs' He maintains, with a refreshing directness unusual among postmodernists (who rarely make simple and direct statements) that truth is what your contemporaries allow you to get away with. According to postmodernists, scientists have not discovered laws of nature, but constructed them.

As Dawkins points out this twenty four carat bullshit does not stop the postmodernists travelling to international conferences by aeroplanes, whose safety, one would have thought, might be regarded as highly uncertain if the laws of aerodynamics were mere social constructs.

9. Can Jews and Evangelicals Get Along?

Comment #18493 by Robert on January 21, 2007 at 8:28 am

There's no question that in the abstract many Islamic extremists would be happy to see the state of Israel disappear but that doesn't mean that they would support genocide in practice. To launch a nuclear weapon at Israel would be nothing short of psychotic. Even if Ahmendinajad were insane enough to do it neither his own people nor the Iranian military would allow him to push the button since it would risk the destruction of Iran.

Personally I don't see how we can deny the bomb to Iran having allowed Israel and Pakistan to acquire it. Double standards don't work.

As for the Holocaust conference it was a big mistake politically. Leading Palestinians have condemned it as disastrous for their cause and there are signs that Iran's supreme leader is beginning to regard this dingbat president as a liability.

10. Can Jews and Evangelicals Get Along?

Comment #18135 by Robert on January 18, 2007 at 2:10 pm

A depressing example of how many people are prepared to collaborate with fundamentalist wingnuts because they believe it is in Israel's interest.

The idea that Iran would consider a nuclear first strke on Israel is absurd. The effect would be to slaughter as many Palestinians as Israelis and Tehran would face a devastating response. Iran wants the bomb to deter an American attack - nuclear weapons are essentially defensive.

11. Readers Write: Atheist Sam Harris on Torture and Faith

Comment #17265 by Robert on January 12, 2007 at 12:44 pm

You cannot legally sanction torture; it's too dangerous. It wouldn't just be the ticking bomb scenario, the state would end up using it as a manner of routine provided the victims were accused of crimes that had no public sympathy.

In the early Seventies the British tortured IRA suspects with the result that thousands more Irishmen joined the IRA. Guantanamo Bay and rendition have done massive damage to the image of the US even among its allies, never mind the hundreds of thousands of Muslims who sympathise with Al Qaida's cause.

It is not possible to defeat terrorism by descending to the terrorists' level. When the terrorists have as much support from their community as Al Qaida clearly does then the only way to get rid of them is to arrive at a political solution which means addressing the legitimate grievances of Muslims.

12. Ancient religion may face extinction

Comment #16741 by Robert on January 8, 2007 at 11:52 am

I'm not a specialist but one good general source is John Julius Norwich's History of Byzantium Vol 1 which describes the Persian wars in some detail. Persia had just experienced a series of shattering defeats inflicted by the Byzantine Emperor Heraclius so it was particularly vulnerable when the Muslims emerged. Ironically over the course of Byzantine history Persia had tended to get the best of it besieging Byzantium on several occasions.

13. Ancient religion may face extinction

Comment #16629 by Robert on January 7, 2007 at 4:58 pm

It's a great shame that the Muslims conquered the noble Persian Empire and destroyed Zoroastrianism which seems rather a fine religion, as religions go. One of the reasons they succeeded was because Persia and Byzantium had already devastated each other with a sucession of wars so they were both a pushover when Muhammad's fanatics burst out of Arabia. Otherwise the Muslims might have been contained in a remote desert country and remained totally marginal in world affairs. What a deprivation for the rest of us that would have been...

14. If they preach the cause of the poor, they're my people

Comment #15896 by Robert on January 3, 2007 at 2:56 pm

What was Israel supposed to do? Stop stealing Arab land, bulldozing people's homes to make way for foreign settlers, firing missiles into civilian areas and calling the murders collateral damage, flying aircraft over Gaza at night causing sonic booms that make it impossible for the Palestinians to sleep properly, imposing sanctions on what's left of Palestine because its people voted for the wrong party...

There is no civil marriage in Israel because its based on a toxic mixture of religious racism. It has no more right to continue in its present form that did apartheid South Africa.

15. If they preach the cause of the poor, they're my people

Comment #15840 by Robert on January 3, 2007 at 9:48 am

The left right divide has nothing to do with religion. There are many socialist Christians and plenty of right wing atheists but so what?

Religion is reactionary for three reasons - it encourages blind faith rather than reason, since Darwin it is extremely difficult to reconcile with a scientific view of the world (not impossible; theologians can do it but only by interpreting their holy books allegorically on an ad hoc basis) and it also divides people into opposite tribes. I read an article a few days ago about a Hindu who lost the love of his life because her Muslim family insisted on an arranged marriage with another Muslim in Pakistan which eventually lead to her suicide. Totally pointless cruelty.

Whether or not you believe in God says nothing about your politics or worth as a human being. But it does mean you're committed to a redundant philosophy that has become more harmful than otherwise.

16. The Blasphemy Challenge

Comment #14395 by Robert on December 22, 2006 at 9:08 am

The antidote to Islamic fundamentalism is to address the legitimate grievances of Muslims, starting with an end to American support for the apartheid state of Israel. This cannot happen while millions of Protestant fundamentalists in the US believe that the Israeli conquest of Palestine is not only sanctioned by God but a necessary prelude to the Rapture.

A settlement to the Northern Ireland war only came about after the Irish Republic ceased to be a Catholic fundamentalist state. God needs to be driven out of America as he has been for the most part in Ireland.

17. The problem with secularism

Comment #14392 by Robert on December 22, 2006 at 8:58 am

18. The problem with secularism

Comment #14390 by Robert on December 22, 2006 at 8:57 am

Jesus wept

19. The Race Goes On!... (extinction of the Baiji Dolphin)

Comment #13109 by Robert on December 15, 2006 at 1:42 pm

Wonderful. Yet another species we've destroyed for no reason. I'm only glad Douglas isn't around to see it.

20. When Atheists Have Their Say (5 Letters)

Comment #11834 by Robert on December 7, 2006 at 2:27 pm

I agree but it's a harsh message for the sick lonely and bereaved who derive comfort from religion. I'm not sure it's good idea to destroy a fool's paradise unless he's harming others.

On the subject of trolls:

http://members.aol.com/intwg/trolls.htm

DM will inevitably be back, possibly under another handle. We should all just ignore him - flaming simply means he's having an effect.

21. The God of the Bible is No Delusion!

Comment #11787 by Robert on December 7, 2006 at 11:07 am

You would have thought that Darwinism would have dealt a death blow to religion by now but sophisticated theologians dodge the bullet by acknowledging physical evolution but insisting on a spiritual dimension beyond the physical. In other words dualism in the Descartian sense. They also sometimes fall back on Berkeley's idealist philosophy. This is an intellectually coherent position that cannot be disproved until we have a purely physical explanation of consciousness including qualia. We're not there yet.

In the meantime could we stop calling all the religious people intellectual retards? Some of them may be but not all. There is a difference between liberal theologians and American fundamentlists and by refusing to acknowledge or show any respect for moderates Dawkins does himself no favours.

22. When Atheists Have Their Say (5 Letters)

Comment #11574 by Robert on December 5, 2006 at 3:22 pm

It's hardly fair to demonise Islam because of Al Qaeda's suicide bombers. There are over a billion Muslims out there and most of them would regard the murder of civlians as a crime.

Also the West has killed vastly more innocent people than Bin Laden not because we are more depraved but because 'we' - the US Britain and Israel - have better technology. Al Qaeda uses suicide bombers, we fire rockets from a distance and call the results collateral damage. To say there is no moral equivalence is eyewash - the amount of 'collateral damage' we're causing is not an accident but reckless murder.

Another embarassment is that the US trained and financed Bin Laden and his maniacs in a terrorist war against the Soviets in Afghanistan as part of the jihad against Communism known as the Cold War. On 9/11 we were savaged by our own attack dog.

The atrocities in the War on Terror, so called, have nothing to do with whether God exists. Suicide bombing is fuelled by hate, despair and humiliation. It won't be an atheist campaign that gets rid of Al Qaeda but an end to Western policies that are seen as acts of wanton aggression against Muslims.

23. Creation vs. Darwin takes Muslim twist in Turkey

Comment #10521 by Robert on November 28, 2006 at 9:56 am

Turkey is one of the most advanced Muslim countries because the founder of modern Turkey, Kemal Ataturk, was a secularist who regarded religion as a curse holding his people back. All Turkish patriots should regard these fundamentalist pillocks as a liability to the nation.

24. Why Are Atheists So Angry? A Debate with Dennis Prager

Comment #10042 by Robert on November 27, 2006 at 12:30 am

What is the answer to Davids question about the inevitable human extinction?

Well, i am sure any open minded person can look at the problem and say with some conviction that yes, we will go extinct. Its a matter of time, not a matter of gods. All it takes is one large rock from outer space, or even our own political stupidity to make sure that humanity does not live as long as the dinosaurs did.

What does it do to my non-religious beliefs? nothing. I accept that humanity is a blip in the history of our planet. We are tiny, tiny little things in a universe so massive that we cannot properly perceive just how big it is. People tend to use faith to hide from this problem, making them feel bigger then they really are.

If we are talking about the 100,000 people who died in Hiroshima and the vile heartless scientists who invented the atom bomb, why don't we talk about the church during the crusades?

They sent just as many (if not more) people to die in a far off land to 'reclaim the holy land.' Which is another way of saying "go grab that city and bring back lots of loot for us to spend".

Perhaps the childrens crusade? when thousands of children were marched off to war? Most of them were sold into slavery, or died on the way.

Do not be so quick to accuse scientists of being evil. While Jesus turned water into wine, and fed his people with bread and fish scientists developed hot running water, plumbing, cooked food, water flourinisation, medicine, pasteurization and antibiotics.

Without scientists, we would not have 6.8 billion people on this planet.

Another question interested me, which was why atheists keep on arguing about this issue and why wouldn't they just leave us alone?

Well the answer is simple i suppose.
Why do you constantly rush at us and try and 'save' us?

More specifically, we are being preyed upon constantly. did you know that in 30 states of the union, an atheist cannot run for public office?

People may form rallies and mobs when a white cop shoots a black child, or when a comic strip depicts a religious figure in a satirical way.
When people beat up an atheist, or force him to learn religions he does not want anything to do with, do you see them massing and demanding revenge? Do you see atheists marching upon city halls demanding the right of office?

No.

There are several reasons for this.

Reason number 1. Atheists are scared. yes, thats right. i won't deny it. I would rather have a rabid weasel shoved into my pants then to deal with an armed religious Zionist. If atheists gather in one place, it means that a lot of people know where they are, and possibly who they are. this can effect their lives, and makes them a very large target. We know what religious insanity can do to those who think differently, we don't want it happening to us.

2. No one in power will take us seriously. It has already been stated that people would not vote for a man or woman who is atheist even if he is the best suited for the job. this means people will vote for a chimpanzee instead of an atheist.

3. We desperately hope that people will wise up. This is one of the reasons why we argue it so much. We hope that if we give them enough reasons, we will give them what they need to 'open their eyes' so to speak.

4. Many of the most outspoken atheists are young, inexperienced, or in positions that are not taken seriously. There are people who are very outspoken and in positions to make quite a difference. But lets face it, people don't want to believe upstart youngsters



On to the next subject.

Why are people so wound up about the beginning of time and the universe anyway? does it really matter that much? sure scientists want to know, but does the average person really need to know? will it put food on the table? will it pay taxes?

What makes knowing what will happen after your die so damned important? your not dead now, i say don't worry about it. That does not mean you should not be a moral person, but it doesn't mean you should be worrying what will happen after death. You should be more concerned with raising your kids, or making the world a better place for everyone, not just yourself and a select few people. Scientists do this every day


Does it matter what happened in the beginning? the beginning was X amount of years ago. THIS is not the beginning, and as far as i can tell, its not the end. The point is, we are here. this planet is here, this huge universe is here.

If any of you want to know what i believe in, what i REALLY believe in, i will tell you.

I believe in myself. I believe i have the power to do anything i want to do. I believe that i hold just as much power as the president of the united states, or the poorest beggar on the street. I feel i can mold the world with my hands, and i do so every time i run my hand through the sand on a beach.

I believed that i could change myself without the help of others, and i did. I believed that i could succeed in life doing the things that i enjoy, and i am. I believe that peoples opinions of me and what i do should always be taken with a grain of salt, and i do. And finally, i believe that everything, yes, everything should be observed from the perspective of skepticism. Religion, science, everything. I feel skepticism was the greatest gift my father gave me, and i will pass it on to my children when I have them.

This is Robert, logging off

25. Why Are Atheists So Angry? A Debate with Dennis Prager

Comment #9931 by Robert on November 26, 2006 at 1:27 pm

On the subject of Israel a debate on Zionist crimes against the Palestinians is one for another thread. I will simply point out that Prager's knee jerk support for Israel is hardly evidence of morality.

What's more if Israel is more advanced than its Arab neighbours that is because it is largely secular and Orthodox Judaism is less virulant in Israel than fundamentalist Islam is in the Arab countries.

The reason for this is not hard to seek - Israel was founded by Jewish refugees from Europe who were dominated by liberals and socialists committed to Enlightenment values. In so far as Israel is superior to the Muslim fundamentalists that is because it is further from God.

26. Why Are Atheists So Angry? A Debate with Dennis Prager

Comment #9926 by Robert on November 26, 2006 at 1:14 pm

This is a controversial statement but I regard the nuclear bomb as a good thing. Take Hiroshima. The alternative would have either been a land invasion of Japan in which tens of thousands of Americans and hundreds of thousands of Japanese would have been killed or else a blockade of Japan in which the Japanese people would have been starved out. Also the Japanese armies in China would have fought to a finish. Hiroshima was a blessing to the Japanese as well as their victims.

Without the bomb I am convinced that there would have been a Third World War with Russia. As it was the jihad against Communism was conducted by proxy in the Third World because those states weren't in a position to threaten Washington or Moscow.

It is warfare itself that is hideous not WMD. The Rwandan genocide was carried out with machetes. The worst genocide in history was possibly Genghis Khan's rampage across Eurasia and his armies simply consisted of mounted archers.

WMD puts politicians in the firing line. When they themselves fear for their personal safety they may be less willing to send young men to die in foreign countries while ensuring that their own sons are safe in the National Guard.

Iraq's tragedy is that Saddam was only pretending to have WMD.

27. Public school teacher tells class: 'You belong in hell'

Comment #9033 by Robert on November 23, 2006 at 9:25 am

The whole concept of eternal damnation is monstrous. Even Adolf himself doesn't deserve to be burned for eternity. It seems to me that those who propagate such psychological terrorism, especially on children, are prime candidates to be suspended on Satan's toasting fork

28. Reading of The God Delusion in Lynchburg, VA

Comment #7451 by Robert on November 18, 2006 at 2:53 pm

@Gary 114

Dawkins does not advocate violence. You are taking his point and extrapolating it far too far. He believes religion is wrong. Yes, perhaps it is natural to question and which is why we formed beliefs for these hard questions and why religion came about. However, these 'groups and beliefs' that we have formed are now outdated. Their questions are not only unsatisfying but outright untrue. That I think is a good reason for not welcoming religion. It no longer fits in with the world we live in now and it is a very destruction force in ones life.

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

Comment #6481 by Robert on November 14, 2006 at 1:27 pm

'Cultural sensitivities' so called are an issue that needs confronting, not least because so many liberals have been seduced by such arguments into indulging the forces of darkness. For example it's one reason why we have faith schools in the UK.

I say nuts to British Muslima of Pakistani origin who want to imprison their sons and daughters in segregated schools so they can be brainwashed inot believing a load of homophobic and misogynist nonsene on the authority of a Bronze Age pixie in the sky.

I also find the sight of women in veils disturbing but if women voluntarily choose to wear it that's their choice. I'm not sure that its always a free choice - then again it's true that our over sexualised beauty culture is also oppressive to women and some may feel they get more respect in the street when wearing religious dress.

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

Comment #6437 by Robert on November 14, 2006 at 8:42 am

I agree with Mary that there is an issue about good manners and appropriate behaviour in public. I must confess that even as a straight man I don't particularly appreciate blokes snogging their girlfriends in public. It's egotistical if nothing else.

Having said that there is an exception to the general ruel. When opressed people decide to assert themselves instead of remaining invisible they often behave in ways that are deeply offensive to many. The Freedom Riders were showing total contempt for Southern culture as well as actually breaking the law. I don't think any of us would symapthise with the Dixies. I would be deeply dubious about claims for respect. Often it has nothing to do with manners but is an authoritarian demand that is about controlling territory.

As for Jenna's point about the Romans of course Titus' actions were excessive but the fact remains that acknowledging the divinty of the Emperor was a political rather than religious act. I doubt whether many educated Romans ever believed that he was literally divine but that he had the mandate of heaven in that fate and the gods permitted Rome to rule. Most subject peoples in the Empire managed to combine political loyalty with worshipping their ancestral Gods so the ancient Hebrews must have been exceptionally provocative. The only other religious groups I can think of who were suppressed were the early Christians and the Druids. The latter went in for human sacrifices and persisted in inciting the British to rebel. As for the Christians there's a wonderful scene in Bernard Shaw's Androcles and the Lion where a Roman captain states that any Christian facing the lions is there because they freely chose to commit suicide. Point being they did have a choice.

Put it this way if the Jews were entitled to give the Emperor's statue the finger I don't see why gays shouldn't parade in Jerusalem

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

Comment #6260 by Robert on November 13, 2006 at 12:25 pm

Cheers John, hard to argue with any of that. I didin't know about the Egyptians although it would make sense. There was probably a vague sense very early on that the lesset gods ware manifestations of a deeper reality. That's certainly always been the case in Hindu India which was also relatively tolerant until Islam invaded.

Apparently there's fierce debate among Israeli archeologists between those who are trying to find evidence that fits the Bible and those who say there is no evidence that David and Solomon's empire ever existed. The earliest Bible figure whose existence is corroborated by non Biblical sources is King Omri (father of Jezebel's Ahab, who defeated the Assyrians at the battle of Qarqar)

It would not be beyond the realm of the possible if the achievements of David and Solomon were actually carried out by Ahab but David was given credit for them by later scribes becaust Ahab did that which was evil in the eyes of the Lord - he was tolerant of other gods in his dominions besides Yahwah.

Recent finds of clay figures inscribed to 'Yahweh and his Asherah' suggest that the Israelite god originally had a female consort which would fit in with the Sky Father and Earth Mother model of the surrounding fertility cults. It was after the exile in Babylon that the religion was purged of any female element.

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

Comment #6217 by Robert on November 13, 2006 at 8:12 am

I agree that the phrase 'good in photography' is insensitive but when I said 'Indeed' I was endorsing the principle that the privileging of any one group of victims of the Nazi horror is wrong. The Holocaust is not the property of either the Jews or the Germans; its lessons are universal.

It also has to be set alongside Stalin's Gulag, Mao's famine and Pol Pot's genocide in Cambodia. Utopian fundamentalist ideologies, whether based on race, religion or class can lead to any abomination since the individual becomes nothing.

The British and European attitude to subject peoples was based on Christianity as much as racism and the idea that the heathen were inferior was inherited from the Old Testament.

In the ancient world most of the empires were tolerant of other religions. A priest of Osiris and a priest of Baal would have recognised each other as worshippers of legitimate gods. Belief in divine rulers did not lead to divine racism; all peoples of Assyria or Egypt or China were equal subjects of the God Emperor. Ditto pagan Rome. There was an abundance of horrors in the ancient world but the idea of an exclusive God was a mischievous invention of the Israelites. The Romans did not persecute the Jews because they persisted in worshipping their ancestral God but because they were blaspheming everyone else's rituals in what was a cosmopolitan empire as well as wantonly insulting the Emperor in a way that was an affront to authority.

Although the personality of Jesus in the Gospels is attractive I believe the Abrahmaic monotheistic traditon was a step backward. It led to homophobia but also to misogyny with Eve being blamed for the Fall. When Rome became Christian the emperor Justinian closed down the Academy in Athens because it taught people to reason for themselves and quesiton faith. Europe didn't start to recover until the seventeenth century and the Entlightenment.

As it happens I'm not gay but a straight Gentile which means I can be objective. I probably have both Irish and Welsh blood in my veins if you go back far enough but I don't feel the need to identify with Owen Glendower. Identifying with your race, whether Black, White or Jewish is a primitive instinct which we should grow out of. The beauty of Darwinism is it makes all this nonsense redundant since both the Nazis and their victims were descended from the same monkeys in Africa.

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

Comment #6046 by Robert on November 12, 2006 at 10:13 am

Indeed.

Western civlisation is founded upon three cities. Rome (imperialism and materialism) Athens (rationality and democracy) and Jerusalem (religious fundamentalism) I used to think that the future of mankind depended upon us becoming more Greek and less Roman but since 9/11 it is clear that the legacy of Jerusalem is the one we most need to repudiate.

sing if you're glad to be gay...

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

Comment #6008 by Robert on November 12, 2006 at 7:22 am

In percentage terms more Gypsies were murdered than Jews and they could no more choose not to be a Gypsy than the Jews could deny their Jewishness since in both cases the Nazis selected their victims on the basis of race not behaviour.

It's not true to say the Jewish tragedy was unique or even that the Holocaust was the worst horror in history. Genghiz Khan's rampage across Eurasia was possibly the ultimate in genocide. The reason we are so shocked by the Holocaust is that it was a throwback to the Dark Ages. But such abominations were routine if you go far back enough in human history.

The activities of the Israelites in the Book of Joshua probably helped inspire Adolf and his monsters - who all claimed to believe in God. It's a disturbing fact that the concept of a Chosen People, a master race and Lebensraum derives from the Old Testament - in other words from orthodox Judaism.

35. Dawkins Delusion (3rd article, Same Stupid Title)

Comment #5989 by Robert on November 12, 2006 at 5:26 am

I agree the ad hominem attacks should cease. Resorting to personal insults is usually the sign of someone who's losing an argument because the facts and logic are against them. Either that or it's just bullying.

36. Beliefwatch: The Atheist

Comment #3364 by Robert on October 27, 2006 at 8:24 pm

Are people really so clueless about atheists they find it surprising we can be friendly and have manners? Do they expect us to go around scowling and hissing? I don't get it. But I don't think she meant to be condescending. I'm really looking forward to Sam's "proper work of neuroscience."

37. A God State of Affairs

Comment #2752 by robert on October 23, 2006 at 8:57 am

the comments about critical thinking are probably true, but we,(americans) were not so stupid as to elect bush either in 2000 or 2004.
both elections were stolen with massive voter fraud.
this is both encouraging, we really arent that dumb, and discouraging, they will try to do it again and may succeed.
robert

38. Lunging, Flailing, Mispunching

Comment #2360 by Robert on October 20, 2006 at 9:17 pm

The book is called The God Delusion, not The Inane Theology Delusion. Although, now that I think about it, that sounds like it would be a real howler. And where are these large numbers of people who accept the theological outlook this guy is jabbering on about? I know a lot of Christians, and I'm sure most of them would find this review just as incoherent as I do. "He is, rather, the condition of possibility of any entity whatsoever, including ourselves." Is that supposed to be some kind of joke. Have I been punked? Dawkins paints a very ugly picture of religion, but he has nothing on this guy.

39. Alan Colmes Interviews Richard Dawkins

Comment #2199 by Robert on October 19, 2006 at 3:22 pm

The caller's point about there being no reason not to rape and kill people without a belief in god comes up a lot. Am I being paranoid, or does this terrify everyone else as well? Even the most sincere true beleivers must have doubts at times. Are they really teetering so close to the edge of madness?

Robert

40. Ryan Tubridy interviews Richard Dawkins

Comment #1166 by Robert on October 10, 2006 at 9:16 am

It's almost impossible to have a reasonable debate, or debate at all, with someone who thinks that merely increasing the their volume and trampling over the spoken words of their opponents constitutes "winning" the debate. Unfortunately, this approach prevented Richard from being able to be as effective as he usually is. The moderator is at least as much at fault as Quinn. Someone like him cannot be convinced, one can only offer counter arguments, if you get a chance to state them.

41. Collateral Damage: Part 2

Comment #680 by Robert on October 6, 2006 at 3:55 am

To RnBran

The Lebanon war started when Hizbollah launched a raid over the border and captured Israeli soldiers. Soldiers, not civilians. That may have been an act of aggression but it was a legitimate military operation. Israel by contrast targeted the entire Lebanese population with the result that they now nearly all support HIzbollah as the defenders of their country. So quite apart from the morality Israel's actions were a mistake.

The use of disproportionate force is as much a moral issue as who started it. But Israel can be condemned on both counts because any objective look at the Middle East conflict will find that the Arab Israeli wars can all be traced to the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians by the Zionist invaders in 1948. There will be no security for Israelis until compensation is paid for the crimes committed against the Palestinian people and the theft of their land.

If the Israelis and Palestinians abandoned Judaism and Islam and became atheists the tribal divisions would be vastly easier to overcome.

42. Surviving 'Jesus Camp'

Comment #587 by Robert on October 4, 2006 at 11:25 am

Cheer up. These dingbats are not going to wreck the scientific and technological base of the United States. They are only powerful in some of the red states and even there they won't necessarily dominate forever. Kansas has begun to return to sanity recently by voting the fundamentalists off the school boards. Governor Schwarzenegger of California is taking global warming seriously despite the deniers in the Republican party. My guess is that America will follow California rather than Texas. It always has in the past

43. The real reasons to hate the Pope

Comment #353 by Robert on September 26, 2006 at 3:33 pm

One can hate an idea without hating those who believe in it. If believers then do hateful things in the name of their ideas then it may be reasonable to reject them as human beings.

The Catholic Church's oppositon to birth control makes no sense. If you regard the human 'soul' as beginning at the point of conception then abortion is murder. But the best way of reducing abortions is to prevent unwanted pregnancies by making birth control available.

To be fair to the Catholics they teach that only God gets to kill people and therefore they oppose the death penalty as well as abortion. Protestant fundamentalists like Bush gleefully execute people while showing unctuous concern for embryos.

The Catholic church doesn't go in for taking the Bible literally either - historically it was dead against translating the Bible out of Latin since it felt the book could be dangerous if read without proper understanding. The last pope also acknowledged evolution. It's the Protestant evangelicals and their Muslim brethren who are the main forces of darkness.

44. Reason lost

Comment #352 by Robert on September 26, 2006 at 3:10 pm

If extra terrestial life ever did contact us chances are it would be so far advanced compared with us that it would regard religion as an infantile delusion and feel it had a duty to help us grow out of it.

45. The New Naysayers

Comment #350 by Robert on September 26, 2006 at 2:43 pm

Briar

That's true but all biology is ultimately dependent on physics. The photosynthesis of plants and therefore the foundation of all life depends on consuming energy from the Sun which is finite. All the stars are finite and the consensus is that the universe will continue expanding indefinitely into an dark vacuum.

Assuming the Universe is a closed system it will move to a state of ever greater disorder. There's no getting around the Second Law of Thermodynamics and the Heat Death of the Universe. If you can let me know of any scientific theory that offers a way out I'd be delighted to hear it.

46. The New Naysayers

Comment #345 by Robert on September 26, 2006 at 12:54 pm

Yes I've recently read Kurzweil's 'Singularity Is Near'. His timescale is not credible but it is conceivable that science and technology might be able to cure the disease called ageing eventually. If that day ever comes I reckon the religious urge will fade rapidly. Technology might also succeed in vastly reducing crime and therefore the fear of immorality much sooner.

Immortality raises the problem of where we're going to find room for the younger generation of course. We've enough of a housing problem as it is. Presumably we will have to conquer space.

The one thing science can't promise us is a solution to the ultimate enemy - entropy. Still we have millions of years before we need deal with that.

47. The Theology of the Tsunami

Comment #343 by Robert on September 26, 2006 at 12:35 pm

You don't need to look at natural disasters to realise that an all powerful God is unlikely to be benign. Look at the horrors going on in the animal kingdom. Insect parasites are the most disturbing example but as Dawkins says in River out of Eden at any one time millions of sentient creatures are dying slowly from agonising diseases or malnutrition or gangrenous wounds.

In Byron's 'Cain' the question of why the animals suffer is asked by Cain and his supernatural companion replies that it is all Man's fault - if we hadn't eaten the apple the animals would be happy in Eden. I'm not surprised that Cain was driven to murder.