1. Gay Marriage Outlawed in California

Comment #281834 by wouldbesakota on November 10, 2008 at 11:49 pm

California is a blue state. And supposedly a liberal one. My friends saw signs that are "Yes on 8" right next to the polls, which is a violation of the laws. And also, she and her younger sister were on a street full of "yes on 8" with "no on 8" signs are were called queers and faggots. Someone even threw something at her younger sister.

And it's supposedly the same racial minorities (Blacks/Hispanics) who got Obama elected, that passed 8. Many people I know have been disappointed at Obama's lack of opposition to 8.

OPEN, the gay-straight alliance at my school even started a protest at lunch, chanting "Equal Rights for Equal Love" and "No on 8- Stop the hate!". About a hundred kids joined in. This was prompted by a "Yes on 8" table out in the Lunch Court. All their flyers said religous bullshit, and "save the children from the horrors of homosexuality". Of course, the weirdest thing is that no one can vote in high school (except the overaged ones) ;-P. I was the one who tipped off the club about the "Yes on 8" table.

We were supposedly told that we could have a "no on 8" table, but no one said anything. I think the Student Activities Director is biased. Most likely for religous reasons.

Things are looking a bit bad from here in California.... I guess the only states left free are Connecticut and Massachusetts.

edit: "Marriage" should just mean a public declaration of love between two people. So call straight marriages Civil Unions too, or at least the legal rights entailed from marriage should be from civil unions. Call the religous bit "Marriage".

2. Islamic radicals make mockery of hate laws

Comment #281516 by wouldbesakota on November 10, 2008 at 2:03 pm

I actually feel sorry for these people. And even more sorry for any that they might just blow up.

It's quite sad how they delude themselves into violence, and it's entirely justified by religion, removing the fear of punishment and faced with eternal reward that accompanies martyrdom. It's just like RD said in TGD.

But more than the pity, I actually feel scared when there are nutcases like this allowed to just run free because of religous freedom.

3. 'Child-witches' of Nigeria seek refuge

Comment #281508 by wouldbesakota on November 10, 2008 at 1:43 pm

That's one of the most horrible things I have ever seen. This reeks of the corruption, sadism, and sickness that permeates religion.

Although, they only mention the Foxcroft, who feels he is doing this out of his Christian duty. But that wouldn't be necessary if the religion didn't exist in the first place.

In the documentary, the charity worker visits one of the pastors, a man who calls himself "the Bishop" and who claims to be able to drive evil spirits out of "possessed" children. At his church in Ibaka, the Bishop pours a homemade substance called African mercury, a potion of pure alcohol and his own blood, into the eyes of a young boy lying on a table. "I want this poison destroyer to destroy the witch right now, in Jesus' name," he says.

The priest charges £170 - in a country where millions of people are forced to live on less than £1 a day - for "treating" a child every night for two weeks, and holds them captive until the bill is paid.

He has recently refined his techniques for dealing with child witches. "I killed up to 110 people who were identified as being a witch,"

4. Islamic radicals make mockery of hate laws

Comment #281502 by wouldbesakota on November 10, 2008 at 1:30 pm

This is where religious tolerance can lead. And it is a very frightful place indeed.

How are they oppressed? That's just a bad excuse to force Islam on the rest of the world.

5. Dr Adam Rutherford criticises teachers' views on creationism

Comment #281429 by wouldbesakota on November 10, 2008 at 10:11 am

Gah.

I feel so damn lucky to be living in California. No creationism allowed. Period. They teach evolution in biology, and even in 6th grade when you study ancient civilizations.

6. Anti-religion agenda among social media users

Comment #280834 by wouldbesakota on November 8, 2008 at 1:33 pm

Someone in my history class says that atheism is a religion because zero is a number.

sigh.....

7. Bad Faith Awards 2008: Vote now

Comment #280829 by wouldbesakota on November 8, 2008 at 1:21 pm

AUGH. Toughie. Went for Oktar in the end because hes trying to poison young minds with a product paid for by illegal funds.

Coulter's a clear bitch, but she likes contreversy, and Palin's out of the ring so far, though potentially dangerous.

The St. Monica Governors came close, but their victims are a rather limited number.

Damn... no all of the above choice. Oktar it is!

8. Stoning victim 'begged for mercy'

Comment #280825 by wouldbesakota on November 8, 2008 at 12:56 pm

Why aren't people outraged? Why aren't we doing something?

9. Fred Phelps's son is an atheist: Running from hell

Comment #277471 by wouldbesakota on November 3, 2008 at 9:58 pm

His father should be in prison. That's just sick.

I admire nate's courage in leaving the church, it takes enourmous strength of charecter to do that.

Teaching christianity is so unpleasant because of Hell.My parents aren't religious but I remember bawling my eyes out when my father told me bluntly the criteria for going to hell. Being eight I didn't really understand how illogical that concept was- worse, my father didn't tell me that it wasn't real, since my parents said I could have a religion if I wanted to, because that was my right as a human being- but I remember being really scared because I wasn't baptized- and worse that one of friends was an active participant in such a religion. The memory is fuzzy, but I remember being terrified.

Thanks to kiwi for posting the documentary- I've never seen it before.

10. Beware - creationism's march will go on

Comment #276935 by wouldbesakota on November 2, 2008 at 7:38 pm

To freedom of speech, great, sure. Just as long as anybody who reads whatever crap is allowed to be published KNOWS it's crap.

The ability to recognize whatever is published for its level of truth surely lies in education. People who know nothing of teaching, and know nothing of whatever subject, literature, history, math, and Science, most particularly should not be qualifed to be in any position of teaching or affecting education.

A board that monopolizes curriculum should actually be representative of that subject. For example, if you have a board for science education, none of them should be creationists. Very few reputable scientists are actually creationists.

The whole war on evolution by creationists and IDeologists seems very depressing. These creationists shouldn't even have anything to say, as it's intellectually embarrassing to subscribe to such a thing. Often, these people don't have degrees in biology or whatever scientific discipline, yet are on such boards.

I'm at loss for what to do. As a high school student in California, I feel lucky that my state doesn't teach creationism due to a seperation of church and state.

11. Prepare for an ugly battle in Texas

Comment #276921 by wouldbesakota on November 2, 2008 at 7:12 pm

This is just plain scary. My state, California may be 47th in education, but we're blue enough to teach evolution with no mention whatsoever about creationism. Nonethelesss I just checked my bio text book and found that there's only half a unit specifically on evolution.

Ah, well...

But I do find it frightening that a great deal of textbooks are published by this state.

12. Interview with Richard Dawkins on fairy tales and retirement

Comment #276416 by wouldbesakota on November 1, 2008 at 7:42 pm

If I ever have kids, I won't be reading them stuff like princesses and frogs. Those are usually sexist anyway, with preconcieved notions about beauty. I'll read them fantasy and science fiction, but tell them that it's just stories, but it's fun to know and that literature is wonderful. Just like how younger children can watch TV shows about fighting monsters meant for young teens may not understand it comletely, they can still be very interested in it. My parents read children's literature to me, but not fairy tales. My mother disapproves of the apparent sexism. I also have qualms with disney for making most girls of my generation believe they were princessess when they were young.

13. Turek vs. Hitchens Debate: Does God Exist?

Comment #276258 by wouldbesakota on November 1, 2008 at 4:11 pm

I've only been watching about fourteen minutes of this and Turek makes me want to deck him. Cosmological arguements blah, blah, blah- shout louder so they believe me. Of course the universe is "tuned" to existence! If it wasn't, it wouldn't be in existence for us to know this!

Gee, look at that, if a things weren't this way, they wouldn't be. Well, I'll be damned, what? They are?- look, god did it!

It's painful watching this guy. Religion is the obvious enemy of clear thinking and rationality. Most of his arguements were non-sequitors, not to mention misquoating non-theists.


edit: 22:34- objective moral laws?! I dunno, something to do with human rights, unaleinable rights. "No moral standard", who says human opinions aren't worth it? Some people actually put thought into their opinions. And a standard? Oh, I don't know. How about suffering? Pain? aren't those relevant at all to right and wrong, rather than pleasing some creator- whose only reason to please is because he'll crush you like a bug. No suffering considered!

23:14- "spaceless, timeless, and immaterial", if you're those, you don't exist, ergo....

24:13- chemical reactions? These chemical reactions are complex, more beautiful than this guy probably appreciates. Just because they're chemical reactions doesn't mean you can't discern truth from them.

25:54- no freedom if you're a moelcule in motion?! You have a freedom of concious decision-making because you exist as a physical thing. It doesn't matter if all we are is physical because as physical, complex things, we can discern morals and ideas as products of these physical brains, because there is no other way to exist, except in a poetic sense of being remembered. Although these ideas have no "true" physical form, but can be applied to physical things, or are conclusions we get based from examining the natural world, and are therefore natural processes relized bby physical brains.

14. The Retirement of Richard Dawkins: Reflections on a Stewardship

Comment #265513 by wouldbesakota on October 17, 2008 at 12:20 am

I was not raised religous but turned out to be a theist for about most of my elementary school career until fifth grade, whereupon, I seriously contemplated the afterlife and came, slowly, to the conclusion that if hell exists, this is a very bleak universe indeed.

I first heard about Richard via Douglas Adams, who my parents are incredibly fond of. I started off reading Hitchhikers books in seventh grade- six years after his death. After appreciating his work, the prior knowledge of his death burned in my mind, painful to the touch. After reading the points posed in Adams' Is there an Artificial God? debate, I realized I had a great deal to think about.

I have never been fond of religion since fifth grade, and until then had considered myself not a christian, but certainly a believer. After mulling over Adams'debate, I realized how silly it is, that we never critisize religion, and it's positively weird! And was an atheist based on the point that besides religion's sheer irrationality, it also worshipped a being that was clearly evil. Excellently summed up in George Carlin's quote used in the TGD as a start to one of Richard's chapters.

My history teacher in seventh grade even let me do a presentation against the evils of religion. Ironically (sort of), the assignment was to pick a position on an issue and argue about it with at least 10 points, based off of Martin Luther's 95 theses.

To my chagrin, I tried reading The selfish Gene in seventh grade, but only managed about half of it. I had purchased the 30th anniversary edition, which has incredibly small print closely packed together, making it a difficult read-but also the vocabulary was above me, and flipping open the dictionary every few minutes was getting aggravating. But what I have read completely easy to understand, clear, concise, and poignant.

I have read the God Delusion, The Blind Watchmaker, and A Devil's Chaplain, in the past few months. I'm currently going through Unweaving the Rainbow. I'm extremely fascinated by the chapter dealing with Fraunhofer lines. I think that's incredibly cool- to be able to tell what stars are made of via "barcodes in the stars".

I even shared the paragraph were Richard imagined a conference of learned bat-like creatures discussing light and humans, with my biology teacher, who laughed and asked me if I was on the creationist side of the contreversy. I told her in no uncertain terms that ID is one of the most pathetic arguements I have ever heard. A huge grin split her face. Unfortunately, I've been told off by my English teacher to pay attention in class rather than read Richard's Unweaving the Rainbow, which was infinitely more interesting, especially when I was bored out of my mind in that class to begin with.

Ever since reading Richard's books, it's as if the world got brighter and more detailed and incredibly more wonderous and beautiful. Like puting on new perscription lenses, only after being treated for near-blindness. And just like how someone described Douglas' work as something you just itch to share with another person, I want to tell practically anybody about the immense age of the Earth, Fraunhofer lines, and echolocation. I want to brandish Richard's books in front of them and say, "Look! This is amazing- isn't that an incredible piece of information?"

But I am not nearly as eloquent as Richard, and have so far had several debates with about five different people in my classes. They are fundementalist Christians, one of which even said loudly that he thought "gay marrige is stupid". About everyone in the class (most of them liberal christains) turned, looked at him, and shouted, "What the HELL is wrong with you?!"

For this sort of response, I am thankful to be living in a blue state that doesn't teach Creationism (not that it places much value on evolution either).

So far, I've convinced no one to convert, and have been afraid of alienating close friends, who are religious moderates, supporting women's choice, and gay rights. (my best friend since 3rd grade is Catholic- a victim of indoctrination)I would like to show her how great evolution is-how much more beautiful the world is by leading the examined life- and how rationality could end much human suffering.

Thank you, so very, very much, Richard! Know that you have a high school "missionary", here in California on your side. The universe is incredibly beautiful, and to be the only one here in my life who sees this- well, that's just not tolerable. Happy retirement, sir. I hope with all my heart that you continue to popularize science and advocate atheism publically.

15. What does atheism say about the purpose (or the meaning) of life?

Comment #250981 by wouldbesakota on September 21, 2008 at 12:57 am

Life just happened. The universe just happened- but it's an incredibly beautiful thing, made of mostly empty space. I agree that on the cosmic scale of things, yes, we DO NOT MATTER, so all that is left is our scale, our own little planet orbitting quite an ordinary yellow sun.

Life has no original purpose, and I think that as a species we should learn this. So vain and arrogant are we, to suppose that it has a purpose, that we are special. I think everyone on this site understands how religion is simply a side effect, or a surviving idea that hasn't been killed off yet by our own cultural selection.

But didn't Richard mention in TGD that love and compassion and all those emotions that were a possible side-effect of evolution, a "wonderful, precious mistake?

I think that's a really important point. It IS a wonderful mistake. We care for our injuried, have programs for the mentally retarded, and all sorts of things, out of compassion and human sympathy.

Becuase there is no eternity, then doesn't that make what we do here even more precious? Life is sweet becuase it is brief and precious.

16. Back from the grave

Comment #250964 by wouldbesakota on September 20, 2008 at 11:33 pm

Hmm...

But without a physical body, wouldn't the small range of light in which we see be wrenched open into a wider scale? I mean, if they have no eyes, then a conciousness that can sense things about a body with sensory organs seems rather suspicious.

And that's all on the suppoition that conciousness is seperated from the brain (which I do not believe it is) and actually "floats" away in a physical world that appears just the way we see it. The way we percieve the world, the way we see and hear are all limited by our physical sensory organs, so wouldn't the experience of the ficticious, hypothetical, out-of-body conciousness be extraordinarily bizarre from our mundane, human point of view?

Then again, the people that are described in this artical claim to have seen other worlds. But so what? When I dream, I see other worlds, most likely synthesized images from what I have already seen, images my brain has archived away and ready to thumb through when I'm asleep, so I don't think it proves anything.

It seems like a bit of wasted money since the answer seems obvious, it's what we see when the brain is heavly stressed. Period. And after you've had these brushes with death, you should LEARN what it is- the brain shutting down. But more importantly, I think people most importantly take away the knowledge that Life IS precious and wonderful, and very brief. And clicheic as it sounds, I really do think that's true.

17. It's Time for Science and Reason

Comment #250592 by wouldbesakota on September 20, 2008 at 1:05 am

It did seem quite scripted but it was generally well done. It WAS the dream team of rational thinkers. I liked how the intro talked about how people did strange things in ancient times(not that they've stopped mind you), but I think it would have sounded a little better if they had stuck to the same format as eachother until someone came in to explain how we sort of just go "Meh...they didn't know any better".

Someone tell Richard about those postcards! That's awful. It could have read something like "These two girls are being taught about secular humanism and what it can do to change the world" or something.

It seems very depressing to realize that the world's rational thinkers are so distrusted by common religious people and ignored by the government, seeing as how these people of rational thought tend to be scientists whose areas of expertise have solutions for problems.

However sad it seems though, I feel a little better when I little bit of that poetic awe for the universe and how complicated living things are. People take being alive for granted. And just as that's double sided, the fact that we are the species that's been here the shortest amount of time, we've seriously managed to fuck things up. But I think of course, we're the only species in a position to fix any of this too.

Once we start thinking rationally and recognizing greater goods. I'm going to e-mail this to people I know.

18. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #250545 by wouldbesakota on September 19, 2008 at 10:08 pm

PSYCHO-CHRISTIAN O_o'

I am shocked! "GOD's WILL"????? She's crazy.

To bring up Richard's point of conciousness-raising, she was indoctrinated as a child, and indoctrinates her kids. How awful.

But awful doesn't cover it! What a blight on history if the first female president (I hope to... well... no body in particular- but I really, really, really hope she doesn't become prez) is this...this... religous-nutcase, girl-next-door, child-indoctrinator.... IDIOT, becomes vice president!

I can hardly be proud to call myself an American anymore. I admire the ideals that my country was founded upon, but the Republican party has twisted into something evil and repulsive- a party that loves guns, and God, and rich people, with anti-women's rights, anti-gay marrige, religous zealots!

Ooooh, it just makes me so angry! It is a disgrace when the country that is supposed to have a government free of religion has a governemnt filled with elected officials who CAN'T get into office without mentioning God in every speech!

This is so disgusting!

The United States is one of the most influencial countries in the world- and our politics are ruled by religion. And the greater good of the environment and quickly diminishing supplies of oil should be more important than our right to have Macho-gasguzzlers, and Subburban Armored Land Vehicles. There are so many issues that the US is adding to, rather than helping. What a beacon and example for democracy and freedom everywhere.

*sighs and shakes head* Perhaps Bush's invasion of Iraq "at God's will" will prove to be the downfall of us all.

19. Eoin Colfer to write sixth Hitchhiker's Guide book

Comment #250481 by wouldbesakota on September 19, 2008 at 6:43 pm

Admittedly, Colfer's a great writer, I adore his kids' books... but....it does seem really WEIRD to have him writing HHGG. I wonder why Douglas's wife would have chosen Colfer for such an honor.

Besides- do we really need to have another one? A release as what he might have intended for the next book would be nice...but it just seems really surreal to ask Eoin Colfer to do it.

Seems very mismatched.... I'm worried.

20. Look Who's Irrational Now

Comment #250479 by wouldbesakota on September 19, 2008 at 6:34 pm

The definition of an atheist is someone who does NOT believe in God- obviously, some people are not going by this. Jeez, the ignorant masses- makes me cringe to be American sometimes. Interestingly, California, a blue state, is like 47th in education, but at least we DONT teach creationism because of the supposed seperation between church and state.

Although, creationism should be taught in the sense that students should know what is and what is says but not be told "this is true", but when presented with the facts, evolution just blows it out of the water.

But just because religion SEEMS to have a lower number of believers in the psychic, "supernatural", clairvoyance etc, but doesn't religion count among among supernatural beliefs to begin with? It just so happens, that most people (the religious) do not believe in other supernatural explanations due to loyalty to their own irrational belief- so of course, several non-religous will seek OTHER irrational beliefs.

And anyway- why is religion suddenly a better supernatural, irrational, riduculous belief than the psychic etc. ?

21. Richard Dawkins on Talkback Radio

Comment #236557 by wouldbesakota on August 24, 2008 at 7:30 pm

I'm glad he puts up with these airings. It not only gives a chance to shoot down some creationists, but also demonstrates the virtue of patience of the professor. Yays for Richard!

People keep calling up to put forth the same creationist arguments over and over- it's really quite pathetic, because they don't actually research the arguments that clearly shoot down their ridiculous fronts. They just repeat each other and regurgitate creationist pamphlets.

22. Q&A with Richard Dawkins after lecture at UC Berkeley

Comment #235255 by wouldbesakota on August 22, 2008 at 3:52 pm

The world isn't really subjective-
we each have personal tastes which are ingrained in personality, but the tectonic plates, and scientific fact are not subjective- they are objective truthes.

23. No credit for creationism

Comment #234544 by wouldbesakota on August 21, 2008 at 2:32 pm

Religion has no real place in education. People should be taught critical thinking above all else, but because of Bush's no child left behind bullshit, all i get is tests and more tests. It's ridiculous here in the states because really- every state and district tests'(the important ones)point is to get a better score than the previous test!

infinite regression- but it CAN'T go on forever- that just doesn't make sense. all the teachers are sick and tired of it. Education in the states is just plain terrible.

24. Richard Dawkins slaps creationists into the primordial soup

Comment #234512 by wouldbesakota on August 21, 2008 at 1:24 pm

it's a good picture of him. You know- a lot of the articles from women (who like/agree with him), always describe him as physically attractive (not that he isn't, of course! I think he looks just fine), but it seems kind of an odd trend.

He's right- the use of literature, and pushing metaphores will greatly help public understanding of sciences.

25. US school district sued over homophobic 'witch hunt'

Comment #234497 by wouldbesakota on August 21, 2008 at 12:52 pm

Lifting a girl's shirt just to make sure she didn't write it on her body? Who's 'perverted' now?

what an ass.

26. Review interview: Richard Dawkins

Comment #234010 by wouldbesakota on August 20, 2008 at 6:08 pm

Just as a point of note- Richard is in the lead of that poll, at 22%, while bill nighy is closest at 15%.

27. Beware the Believers

Comment #234005 by wouldbesakota on August 20, 2008 at 5:47 pm

hmm. Some one who made this seems to be mocking both sides but knowledgable about the whole issue.

Funny- but incomprehensible.

28. Forget not to smite

Comment #233829 by wouldbesakota on August 20, 2008 at 12:51 pm

Figures they'd give it a shot. I doubt "God" gives a crap. 'tis funny though

29. Bill Good Interviews Richard Dawkins

Comment #233825 by wouldbesakota on August 20, 2008 at 12:44 pm

All the wack jobs who ask him ridiculous questions on the various radioshows don't actually read his work, and ask questions he actually answered!

but occasionally, he does get support from the public (those that call).

Isn't it actually kind of weird a concept to get famous people on shows to answer questions from a particularly uninformed public? But in this particular interview, it was good for the president of the canadian humanist association to call.

30. Conversation between Richard Dawkins and John Lennox

Comment #233803 by wouldbesakota on August 20, 2008 at 12:23 pm

Lennox just didn't shut up. And all that "evidence" for christianity, can easily be a hoax, and the empty tomb and all that. Ever heard of grave robbers?

dawkins shouldn't have to be subjected to idiots. But then again, a point could be made that we should crush their arguements publically- but that's pretty hard to do when they don't even argue logically or fairly.