1. President Obama: Bad News For the New Atheists and Other Fundamentalists

Comment #280037 by ColdFusionLazarus on November 6, 2008 at 6:39 pm

Good luck with the birth. Vote wisely.

2. President Obama: Bad News For the New Atheists and Other Fundamentalists

Comment #280032 by ColdFusionLazarus on November 6, 2008 at 6:28 pm

I fear that McDonalds statement may be a swipe. I prefer a Royal with cheese, but I couldn't possibly advocate the metric system. Beer sounds good though.

That is a cheeky grin! Where are your hands'

3. President Obama: Bad News For the New Atheists and Other Fundamentalists

Comment #280021 by ColdFusionLazarus on November 6, 2008 at 6:16 pm

I was going to move to Sweden, or some place like that, but those bastards speak foreign.

Goodnight and thankyou.

4. President Obama: Bad News For the New Atheists and Other Fundamentalists

Comment #279977 by ColdFusionLazarus on November 6, 2008 at 5:43 pm

Bravo indeed!

5. President Obama: Bad News For the New Atheists and Other Fundamentalists

Comment #279967 by ColdFusionLazarus on November 6, 2008 at 5:30 pm

Enlightenme,

I want to do better than this, but the reality is that people believe in nonsense and people who believe in nonsense can get elected. I can't think of anything better than democracy at the moment, so I'm thankful that a person that "quietly" believes in god, fairies, unicorns is leading the nation, rather than one that wants to shove their unicorn in my face. I don't want a leader that wants to tell me that their unicorn is very cross about my perverse requirement to rub my eye.

I can't help what has happened. Borak was indeed elected and he was better than the other option, considering my atheism.

6. President Obama: Bad News For the New Atheists and Other Fundamentalists

Comment #279781 by ColdFusionLazarus on November 6, 2008 at 12:02 pm

I want to state that I thought Laurie was perfectly in his right to express his opinion. I wasn't criticising at all. I'm too lazy to learn all the ins and outs of what socialism would mean for society. Laurie's thought it through (well he's thought it through a lot better than I have). I just enjoyed reading what he said. "Good on-yer," I say. I look forward to more passionate responses from him.

As for whether Obama believes in God. Well, he just might. But it looks more like deism than theism. His "faith" doesn't involve waiting for miracles and it doesn't involve predicting the end-times are near. If he wants to practice his faith in his church and in private, then I can just about tolerate that. Everything else I see looks like humanism.

7. President Obama: Bad News For the New Atheists and Other Fundamentalists

Comment #279401 by ColdFusionLazarus on November 6, 2008 at 2:48 am

Awww Shucks! Looks like we missed a trick. It would have been better for us all if the McCain-Palin ticket had won.

By the way, I think Laurie disagrees with quantum_flux! I personally don't feel any strong conviction that any idealogical socialism works, but I'm hopeful that some thoughtful, pragmatic interventionist policies from Obama might bring benefits. Bush and other politicians across the world failed to do anything that could have stopped the present economic catastrophe. They failed.

8. ELECTION DAY IN THE USA. GO VOTE.

Comment #278657 by ColdFusionLazarus on November 5, 2008 at 1:14 am

DamnDirtyApe,
Cracking Pixies quote.

Gotta go to work now :-(

9. ELECTION DAY IN THE USA. GO VOTE.

Comment #278655 by ColdFusionLazarus on November 5, 2008 at 1:12 am

Peace,
Blair was a Tory-wannabe. He made the decision that they couldn't get elected unless they appealed directly to the Tory-voter. He may have been right. But I've seen nothing from Barack that shows that he's a Republican-wannabe. He's a Democrat. He's a smart guy and he's not an Evangelical God-Bod!

10. ELECTION DAY IN THE USA. GO VOTE.

Comment #278648 by ColdFusionLazarus on November 5, 2008 at 12:55 am

Brilliant news to wake up to. All seems very simple, straightforeward and pleasant. But I don't know how I would have coped with finding the Republicans had won. Phew!

11. ELECTION DAY IN THE USA. GO VOTE.

Comment #278367 by ColdFusionLazarus on November 4, 2008 at 5:16 pm

"Dole" lost. Fuck you bitch!

12. ELECTION DAY IN THE USA. GO VOTE.

Comment #278361 by ColdFusionLazarus on November 4, 2008 at 5:09 pm

201. Comment #278349 by Mark Jones on November 4, 2008 at 4:44 pm
I'm watching the Hitch on the BBC and he's not pissed

13. ELECTION DAY IN THE USA. GO VOTE.

Comment #278333 by ColdFusionLazarus on November 4, 2008 at 4:21 pm

Hitchens is speaking on BBC TV

14. Paddy Power offers odds of 4-1 that God exists

Comment #278199 by ColdFusionLazarus on November 4, 2008 at 12:59 pm

Duff. Now I understand. It's all just been an extended game of hide-and-seek. Those gods are so much fun.

15. Paddy Power offers odds of 4-1 that God exists

Comment #278193 by ColdFusionLazarus on November 4, 2008 at 12:56 pm

But you've only got to read your bibles for proof that god exists. I'm off to the bookies to pick up my winnings. I'm sure they'll pay up when they see the evidence

16. Stoning victim 'begged for mercy'

Comment #278170 by ColdFusionLazarus on November 4, 2008 at 12:38 pm

Oh yes, "Sharia Law". Isn't that the thing we should give some credibility to by allowing some judgements to be allowed in Britain, based upon it [quest-mark]

[Edit - I see even Prof. Richard Dawkins can get his question marks to work, but not me!]

17. For many evangelicals, it will be the end of the world if Obama wins

Comment #278138 by ColdFusionLazarus on November 4, 2008 at 12:25 pm

Bloody hell, Tez. I had to google "the lower 48". I'm British don't you know!

The only thing I know about Alaska is that "it's so cold in Alaska", and Palin runs the place!

Without crossing my fingers, I don't know how to cope with the waiting and hoping for a good result in the election.

18. For many evangelicals, it will be the end of the world if Obama wins

Comment #278088 by ColdFusionLazarus on November 4, 2008 at 11:58 am

I'm not sure that vanquishing the right is possible or desirable. Personally I'm left-leaning. I'm pretty sure I'll vote labour next time, but couldn't actually stomach Blair; actually voted Tory a couple of times.

I'd hate to see Obama do "a Blair". He doesn't appear to be doing that. So, after watching this election unfold ... I'd choose Obama. He does appear inclusive. He talks like a pragmatist that wants to involve people. I was actually impressed when he spoke about his christianity. If you have to have someone with some form of faith, then Obama's quiet, intelligent form seemed acceptable. He clearly wouldn't force his politics to match his faith. He said he wanted his decisions to be based on reason. His decisions have to be argued so that they are acceptable to people, not just trying fit decisions to one set of beliefs.

If McCain does somehow win, then Palin's church will be crowing about how it was god's will. If Obama wins, as I hope, then they will be complaining about how USA is infested by evil people going against the will of god. It's amazing how the religious viewpoint can be correct whatever the outcome!

19. Barack Obama Exposes The Bible

Comment #275632 by ColdFusionLazarus on October 31, 2008 at 10:35 am

104. Comment #275401 by Ian Bamlett on October 31, 2008 at 6:33 am
I keep one of those free Gideon bibles in the bathroom.
You know, incase I ever run out of Korans

20. Why We Believe

Comment #274778 by ColdFusionLazarus on October 30, 2008 at 11:17 am

The point of the article seems to be that we are all susceptible and that we should almost be surprised that any of us are skeptics or atheists. Perfectly normal, clever people see a connection and believe in alien abduction or miraculous help from god. It's not sufficient for me to feel superior and say, "Shit! What a bunch of thickoes" I suppose it would be better to say, "There but fot the grace of no-god go I"

The other thing is that these people don't accept a plausible scientific explanation. I sometimes wonder about this. Scientists and people asserting scientific explanations can come across as Authority Figures. There's almost something healthy in rebelling against this and seeking your own explanation or accepting the advice of the guy at the bar. Go Sarah Palin!

21. Why Children Like to Share

Comment #273616 by ColdFusionLazarus on October 29, 2008 at 1:52 am

Inequality averse[questmark]

That's God's programming isn't it[questmark]

I'll get me coat, and read the article properly later.

22. Interview with Richard Dawkins on fairy tales and retirement

Comment #272586 by ColdFusionLazarus on October 27, 2008 at 3:58 pm

Steve13
That may well weaken the pernicious prospect, but if the evidence suggests that young children do struggle to differentiate fact from fiction (as I suspect there will be some such evidence, especially when an adult-authority-figure is involved in telling the tale) then that doesn't really tell us that the tales are harmful.

I can convince my kids that untruths are true. I can even sometimes get my wife to believe some of the garbage I come out with. But usually it's a game, and I let them know when I've won the battle and fooled them. I once convinced them that "European Years" were shorter than "British Years". They are now a little more suspicious about accepting what I say, and they've "had" me a few times now.

There I go with my anecdotes and what I "think".

23. Premier debates with Dawkins

Comment #272570 by ColdFusionLazarus on October 27, 2008 at 3:41 pm

If the start of this universe is called Zrak, then I'm happy to accept that there might be a Zrak (some event). But those christians are indeed so confident and don't even listen to their own book of Job asking, where were you when the universe was started[questmark] We all accept that none of us were there, but rather than having doubt the christians are absolutely sure that their god created it!

24. Interview with Richard Dawkins on fairy tales and retirement

Comment #272553 by ColdFusionLazarus on October 27, 2008 at 3:09 pm

Steve13
It's good that you are indicating real research, and not just how you feel, but what does that tell us about the value of make-believe and fairy tales[questmark] Even when children shockingly believe that there really is a dog in a box, even though they've been told it's make-believe, doesn't invalidate how useful play is and how beneficial fairy tales can be during childhood.

25. Interview with Richard Dawkins on fairy tales and retirement

Comment #272530 by ColdFusionLazarus on October 27, 2008 at 2:32 pm

"You missed the part where Richard said he was agnostic on the subject'"

This makes it sound like Richard is completely neutral. He's not. He likes some things and isn't so keen to suggest that there should be much further research on the benefits of teaching history in secondary school. He's content for everyone to be taught history (remember Ford questioned how valuable the subject was)

But Richard is keener to propose that research be carried out on positive-negative aspects of fairy tales.

He's not being neutral. He feels there's a possible problem with stories with magic. If Richard has a viewpoint then it seems fair that everyone else should give an opinion.

26. Interview with Richard Dawkins on fairy tales and retirement

Comment #272504 by ColdFusionLazarus on October 27, 2008 at 2:00 pm

I'm getting more confused the more I read. This thread, and the other one I read, does seem to hint at certain value judgements from Richard. Above it's made clear that he loves science fiction (a thumbs up from Richard). Then Richard wonders whether fairy tales are as benign as some might think (for me this indicates a thumbs down).

Sure, what I think doesn't matter. It's evidence that matters. A personal story or some other anecdote is going to have no merit. "Show me the evidence".

Well, I've been waiting for the evidence, but I've not seen it yet. Nor have I found any from my own research. Indeed, on the other thread good arguments were put as to how difficult it would be to set up the experiment (a group of kids with no fairy tales in their lives) and I'm not sure how you'd measure the benefits or problems produced throughout someone's life. But, yes, fair enough, some evidence may yet be found.

Whilst I wait, I'll listen to how people feel, including Richard's value judgements. Let the gossip continue, just as on many of the other threads.

27. Children need to be sprinkled with fairy dust

Comment #272229 by ColdFusionLazarus on October 27, 2008 at 6:22 am

"Football, football, football ... a load of men kicking a bit of leather around a field"

It amazes me how readily religious people are willing to demonize us in this way when we don't accept their myths:
http://bishopalan.blogspot.com/2007_08_01_archive.html
Which paints a picture of Dawkins banning Birthday 3-wishes, and sucking the fun out of everything.

How can they not see how stupid this is. I don't mind the tooth fairy for children under ten. And I don't mind the fun of Birthdays and pretending that wishes might come true (I don't really believe they come true). But how stupid do you have to be to equate your religion with believing in 3 wishes and fairies.

That's what we like to say to ridicule religion. Sheesh!

28. All aboard the atheist bus campaign

Comment #268279 by ColdFusionLazarus on October 21, 2008 at 4:12 pm

Oh, oh. Got it. How about, "Shove god up yer F-in arse!"

29. All aboard the atheist bus campaign

Comment #268267 by ColdFusionLazarus on October 21, 2008 at 3:54 pm

Best I can think of is, "Actually, you are wonderful. You don't need a god to tell you that. Think about it"

Retches into nearby bucket and awaits flack.

Personally wouldn't mind seeing a bit of Blake's poetry. Perhaps a line or 2 from The Garden of Love ... "binding with briars my joys and desires"

30. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #267827 by ColdFusionLazarus on October 21, 2008 at 6:09 am

hungarian,

That's how I read it too. All the miners I knew at the time (in the Midlands) were working at really efficient, modern, profitable pits. Not one of them are miners now. They should all have received a huge Thanks and an even bigger public apology for getting it so wrong.

31. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #267819 by ColdFusionLazarus on October 21, 2008 at 5:56 am

"Spruik" is the same as "spiel" (I went to dictionary.com also)

The only big strike I really remember was the miner's strike in Britain in 1984. My Dad had been a miner and my brother was a miner at the time. Ian MacGregor had been brought in to close pits. I still agree with what Scargill was trying to achieve, I just don't agree with how he didn't achieve it. By losing in such a spectacular and painful way - I blame Scargill for the state of mining and the retreat in union membership almost as much as Thatcher.

I still think the "Comic Strip Presents - The Strike" is the best way to remember it:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BuxAqGmLS0k

32. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #267806 by ColdFusionLazarus on October 21, 2008 at 5:29 am

I see the younger groups in the USA are not generally union members. I guess it's up to the older guys to show them the way. Although popular media had led me to believe that the unions in America were run by the mafia!

Glad you had a good party. I always measure how well a party has gone by how much unspecific guilt I have the next day. Any "faux pas" that you can actually remember from the day?

33. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #267794 by ColdFusionLazarus on October 21, 2008 at 5:03 am

Titania

Happy Birthday for a couple of weeks ago (surely a lady should never reveal her age?)

I remember strikes. Used to see a few of them in the eighties. I have to say that even then the teachers in Britain were pretty wimpish about taking industrial action.

34. Bill Heine interviews Richard Dawkins

Comment #267779 by ColdFusionLazarus on October 21, 2008 at 4:33 am

isthatclear,

CaptainMandate is being rather blunt, but he is so correct in what he says. Even if I believed in your god, I'd have to ask myself if I was really doing the best I could in this world. I reckon I should work a little harder on saving the planet and making life better for myself and those around me. I should work harder on increasing my knowledge and understanding. I'm equally sure you are not working to the best of your potential. Rather than spending your time badly disproving evolution, why not go to your next door neighbour and see if they need some help with the gardening.

35. Bill Heine interviews Richard Dawkins

Comment #267744 by ColdFusionLazarus on October 21, 2008 at 3:34 am

isthatclear

Your mission appears to be to ridicule the idea that many species "Evolved".

You'd like me to come to my senses and see that Evolution is a lie, created by evil scientists to take mankind away from God.

Let's imagine that you have put forward a very good case. Let's imagine that I now doubt that this process of evolution could describe how all the species came to be on this planet. Now what?

What else do you want to tell me now that I accept that evolution is a lie?

36. The soul? It may all be in your mind

Comment #267726 by ColdFusionLazarus on October 21, 2008 at 2:53 am

I'm betting Kraes85 WAS smart, but he lost me!

All I keep thinking is that removing the concept of soul is a real kick in the teeth for Abrahamic faith. I don't think many of those believers would be willing to accept there is no soul. Nothing after. No heaven. No promised land for all the good guys.

The other thing I keep thinking is, "That's not my Buddhism". Who knows what that guy really thought so long ago. Who knows whether Steve's interpretations Buddhism are what was intended. I think Judaism, Christianity, and even Islam could be useful in your life, but only if you remove God from it and so only half-believe it. A bit of cherry picking for the cultural-christian never did any harm (did it?)

37. Death for apostasy?

Comment #266600 by ColdFusionLazarus on October 19, 2008 at 11:57 am

Agreed, it's not Steve's fault Fanusi isn't here. I think Steve's comments have been very good on these issues. And importantly, Steve has shown he will change his mind on something when a convincing argument is put to him

38. Death for apostasy?

Comment #266589 by ColdFusionLazarus on October 19, 2008 at 11:40 am

I've asked Fanusi to post. I think he'd have something interesting to say on this Islamic apostasy issue too. However, he refuses to do so.

It's his choice. If he doesn't post though, I'm sure others will be able to make similar points and arguments that he would make.

Come on zoltix, you don't neccessarily need Fanusi to say the things you want to say.

39. Convert or we will kill you, Hindu lynch mobs tell fleeing Christians

Comment #266584 by ColdFusionLazarus on October 19, 2008 at 11:19 am

Of course, "That's not my Hinduism"

Everyone knows real people of faith would not do such things. So this fighting and killing has nothing to do with religion at all ... er ... is it?

40. Death for apostasy?

Comment #266565 by ColdFusionLazarus on October 19, 2008 at 10:12 am

I guess the question I should ask Nesrine is, would it be appauling if I issued a death threat against her for the views she publishes? Would she think that a terrible thing? Would that be sexist, racist, islamophobic of me, or just downright wrong!

I mean, it's unlikely my death threat would actually be carried out, but I'm sure she'd be deeply offended and would want the police to investigate what kind of person I am. She may rightly want some protection from the police, just in case.

By the way, I do "not" want her killed - not at all. I dislike what she says, but I prefer that she have a full, long and happy life. Hey, she might even come to her senses one day. Unfortunately, Islam does not make the same clear denial that I do!

41. Death for apostasy?

Comment #266523 by ColdFusionLazarus on October 19, 2008 at 7:54 am

Oh, ok, at least only one or 2 are being killed occasionally.

Of course, there is always the possibility that violent individuals will take matters into their own hands, as in the case of the Nobel prize-winning writer, Naguib Mahfouz, but these are a minority found in all religions

42. Richard Dawkins at Conservative Party Conference 2008

Comment #264350 by ColdFusionLazarus on October 14, 2008 at 8:48 am

Hungarian,

I'm sure that you are correct - you should not make sweeping changes to a generally working system. There's a reason why we use Money, Banks and have a "Stock Market". These things have been around for a long time. However, the sweeping changes have already been made. The banks are now largely owned by the government. Whether you like the term "Capitalism", or prefer "Free Market Economy" or "Laissez-Faire Politics", governments now own and control (reluctantly) the mechanism for the movement of money. For that reason alone, capitalism as it should be, is no longer working.

We have no idea where this will bottom-out, but most people want to see some form of free-market capitalism restored. We certainly need the confidence in money, and its transfer, restored. What I actually hope, at the end of all this, is that some amount of confidence in public ownership is restored, such as obvious monopolies that serve the public, like public transport and Utilities.

43. Richard Dawkins at Conservative Party Conference 2008

Comment #264343 by ColdFusionLazarus on October 14, 2008 at 7:52 am

Hungarian,

And as any businessman will tell you, it's cash, not profits or underlying value, which is the lifeblood of a business

44. Richard Dawkins at Conservative Party Conference 2008

Comment #264326 by ColdFusionLazarus on October 14, 2008 at 6:30 am

Fair cop, Hungarian, I can't answer that one. I'd just go along with my basic understanding that the restrictions on Banks and stock-market traders have not been good enough. Loosening those restrictions have given the British economy the freedom to do as it likes, and it's been able to give Britain some advantages, but financial de-regulation definitely didn't help when you consider where we are now. Tighter controls could have slowed the economy and given us problems over the 80s / 90s / 00s, but our financial institutions may have looked a lot sounder at this point.

You can tell I'm not an economist, can't you!

45. Richard Dawkins at Conservative Party Conference 2008

Comment #264324 by ColdFusionLazarus on October 14, 2008 at 6:24 am

Bigot! Ha ha!

46. Richard Dawkins at Conservative Party Conference 2008

Comment #264318 by ColdFusionLazarus on October 14, 2008 at 6:21 am

Did I mention that Thatcher is the only reason I'd really like to believe in something like hell?
Die, bitch! Die!

47. Richard Dawkins at Conservative Party Conference 2008

Comment #264315 by ColdFusionLazarus on October 14, 2008 at 6:17 am

Hungarian,

I would say part of the answer lies in the fact that she was the first person to really embrace Capitalism-proper. Truly proud of all the greed-is-good stuff. Deregulation and "choice" were her mantra. It made Britain look quite distinct compared to other European countries that seemed a little more interested in policies to help society. I particularly think that Britain is lacking a decent public transport system, something this country really needs now, and I put the blame firmly at her door.

48. Richard Dawkins at Conservative Party Conference 2008

Comment #264314 by ColdFusionLazarus on October 14, 2008 at 6:11 am

ukvillafan,
that sounds like a fair summary to me.

I would have imagined myself saying, like Richard, that I would never have voted Tory, but as the Blair years approached I found myself putting an X in the only box that could have stopped Tony destroying everything I thought Labour were about. I've voted Tory several times now. Even I find it hard to believe I did it.

BTW - is that "By far the greatest football team the world has ever seen" that you support?

49. Richard Dawkins at Conservative Party Conference 2008

Comment #264300 by ColdFusionLazarus on October 14, 2008 at 5:27 am

Steve

Yep, I know about all that Supremacist website stuff. I didn't like it, and I thought the fact he'd been there undermined what Fanusi had to say. But Styrer is saying that Fanusi can no longer post here, and I'm trying to work out why that is. As I said at the time, any posts he makes are going to be badly received because of what we know about that site, what was posted, and the lack of a response from Fanusi that truly explained why he was there and why he tolerated the despicable writings of others, with no comment of his own on that site to clarify that he distanced himself from such ideas. But, after all this, he still isn't banned from this site.

Anyway, I've PMed him.

50. Richard Dawkins at Conservative Party Conference 2008

Comment #264291 by ColdFusionLazarus on October 14, 2008 at 4:40 am

Styrer
Ok, in for a penny, in for a pound. I'll PM him.