1. Losing Our Spines to Save Our Necks

Comment #175391 by MarcCountry on May 5, 2008 at 10:37 am

"All of their talk about... how the problem of fundamentalism exists in all religions, only obfuscates what may be the most pressing issue of our time..."

Of course, just because it MAY obfuscate this issue, doesn't mean it isn't true.

While I agree entirely with the point and spirit of Sam's article, it is nonetheless true that the problem of fundamentalism exists in all religions.

Islam certainly leads the way, though. Last year, I had artworks censored by the Mayor of my city because they allegedly "offended the religious sensibilities" of some local Hindus. I was sad to hear the Hindus jealously suggest that I wouldn't "do this to Muslims." It was clear that they envied the power that Muslims have to cow the world into silence and acquiescence.

(incidentally, there was nothing actually offensive about my works: the objections were spun out of whole cloth... but, the Hindus got their way, and a very clear message was sent: religion is off-limits to artists in Edmonton, unless you get a clerical O.K first.)

2. Richard Dawkins and Lawrence Krauss

Comment #162700 by MarcCountry on April 17, 2008 at 9:42 am

Somewhat interesting, but, unfortunately, I was ultimately overwhelmed by my irritation with the meandering, parenthetical, logorrhoea of Dr. Krauss, which barely left a pause in which Dr. Dawkins could speak.

Suffice to say, I was not 'seduced'.

3. Richard Dawkins on five of his favorite books

Comment #135669 by MarcCountry on February 29, 2008 at 7:37 am

"Self-appointed biological guru"? And here I was, thinking that Oxford University did the "appointing"... silly me.

4. CBC News: Sunday - Richard Dawkins

Comment #101964 by MarcCountry on December 21, 2007 at 9:35 am

If anyone wans to try to make the case that this inerviewer didn't come across as a childish prat, good luck... it's all been caught on tape.

The interviewer was clearly quite personally agitated by Dawkins, not surprising given his theo(il)logical background.

The reason some of us, especially the Canadians here, are disgusted by this performance, is because it is so different from what you would expect from the same interviewer when discussing a different subject. As our national broadcaster, we Canucks have some reason to see the CBC as representative of our people, so when we see such miserable failure, we make note of it.

So, let's leave the talk of "Atheist Fundies" aside, lest y'all get nominated for next year's Bad Faith award...

5. CBC News: Sunday - Richard Dawkins

Comment #100118 by MarcCountry on December 18, 2007 at 9:03 am

The childish interviewer made an ass of himself. I too am embarrassed by him, as a Canuck.

Just because the Christians don't want to claim Hitler as one of their own, I don't see why we should have to take him in...

6. Bad Faith Awards: Vote for the winner now

Comment #94667 by MarcCountry on December 6, 2007 at 8:01 am

The idea, that so many here have pointed to, that D'Souza would take something like a "Bad Faith" award as a badge of honour is PROOF that he is the most deserving of a bad faith award. His bad faith is irreducible.

But the real reason I picked him is my suspicion that he KNOWS in his own heart that his filibuster bluster just does not pass muster. His method of debate, in every debate I've seen, devolves into fearful babble, where he just yammers down the clock on his time, saying nothing at all ten different ways, not to convince, but to confuse, so one (he hopes) forgets the question he's avoiding in the first place. The worst is when he habitually steals successful lines from his opponents, and just parrots them back, as if they invariably apply equally well in reverse, which, inevitably, they do not.

7. Bad Faith Awards: Vote for the winner now

Comment #94506 by MarcCountry on December 5, 2007 at 8:54 pm

I'm not surprised to see Dinesh D'Souza out in a comfortable lead... he got my vote.

8. Daniel Dennett Debates Dinesh D'Souza

Comment #92757 by MarcCountry on December 1, 2007 at 12:03 pm

Does Dinesh actually think browbeating an intelligent audience is going to sway them to his (ridiculous) position? He is risible...

9. I didn't know the FLEA CIRCUS was back in town!

Comment #84941 by MarcCountry on November 4, 2007 at 10:05 am

Yeah, take THAT, Reason... And now, back to our regularly scheduled blind aherence to nonsense, ignorance, and dishonesty....

10. Debate between Christopher Hitchens and Edd Doerr

Comment #59212 by MarcCountry on July 28, 2007 at 10:04 am

Hitchens is right, as usual. The argument IS over, and we HAVE won.

With globalism, 'real' religion is pushed to the fringes, while succeeding generations identify less and less with the myths of their ancestors. This snowball will keep rolling, and either religion dies out, or the fringe wins, and civilization does...

11. Christopher Hitchens Is a Treasure

Comment #43527 by MarcCountry on May 21, 2007 at 10:59 pm

"But suppose God is not like the Hitchens model. Suppose that God is not a Rationalist, a Logician, a straight-line Geometer-of-the-skies. Suppose that the Creator God deliberately made a world of probabilities and failures, of waste and profusion, of suffering and hardships and frustrations...."

Ooh! Ooh! I've got one: Suppose God is actually a pair of Siamese Twins! You must admit, it's just as plausible as the rest of it, after all. Then 'They' would be, like, TWICE as powerful!

"If there were no Annunciation of the angel to Mary of Nazareth, if there were no birth of the Son of God in a decrepit stable, if there were no passion, death, and resurrection — or even if all memory and record of such events had been erased — would the world have lost anything of permanent human value?"

Well, since none of those events (except the death, I suppose) ever happened, we can confidently answer that all world has of permanent value is ours depsite the fact that there is NO GOD!

WE DID IT!

Really, this writer needs to develop a little respect for his own species, already!

12. Beyond Belief 2006 Videos

Comment #42605 by MarcCountry on May 18, 2007 at 3:17 pm

I keep coming back for more...

About the comment here: "Konner gave a couple of examples of peer reviewed work that showed religiosity was heritable and that it gave some protection against mental illness."

Am I the only one who sees a problem with religion as a "cure" for mental illness? More like "euphemism". You haven't removed a delusion: you've simply replaced it! I'm reminded of the old saying, however it goes, about a sane man in an insane world is considered crazy by th majority. A person who would be recognized as cuckoo becuase he talks to lamp-posts is considered sane, because he talks to angels?
Yikes!

13. Christopher Hitchens to God: Drop Dead

Comment #41893 by MarcCountry on May 17, 2007 at 9:21 am

"...I would roll my eyes, perhaps doze off, maybe even walk out. This is what believers in houses of worship do when confronted with overblown, out-of-touch, and insulting words from the pulpit."

Uh, no. That's what UN-believers do. Obviously, 'Believers' BELIEVE those words, just as the speaker (another believer) does. How this is not obvious to ANYONE, even a religious pawn like Tanenbaum, is incredible. Converstaion with people like this is ,unfortunately, a non-starter, when common sense can so readily be tossed out the window before we even begin...

14. Hitchens' flat world

Comment #41746 by MarcCountry on May 16, 2007 at 8:02 pm

"...the ultimate questions of life and death that religion grapples with can be set aside by watching the sunset."

Unintentionally, well put. By George, I think he's got it!

15. Beyond Belief 2006 Videos

Comment #39357 by MarcCountry on May 10, 2007 at 12:05 pm

Re: Science v. Religion

Weinberg: "It's a moral choice."

Brilliant!

16. World's most prominent atheist takes on the Biblical God (and other topics)

Comment #39339 by MarcCountry on May 10, 2007 at 11:00 am

As an aside, I'd like to see a list of the world's most prominent _______.
(fill in the blank with atheist, jew, muslim, christian, homosexual, etc...)

I'm not sure how we're specifically supposed to define "prominent", though.

17. Anderson Cooper interviews Christopher Hitchens

Comment #39334 by MarcCountry on May 10, 2007 at 10:45 am

I'm an artist, and let me tell you, we'll all do just fine without irrational belief. There are lots of subjects for art... but nevermind that, 'cuz subjects don't matter, anyway... it is always quality that matters. Van der Weyden's crucifixion isn't great because it depicts Jesus (there are far more depictions of that that aren't great for that to be the reason), it's great because of the inate and trained skills of the human artist.

No faith required... just taste.

18. World's most prominent atheist takes on the Biblical God (and other topics)

Comment #39331 by MarcCountry on May 10, 2007 at 10:24 am

Ah, JVI! There's one reason why I miss watching TV... Those two are fantastic.

19. Free Speech

Comment #39055 by MarcCountry on May 9, 2007 at 9:48 pm

It's great to hear him speak on atheism, and the horror of religion, but he's just so painfully superficial in his singling out Islam as qualitatively different from the other religions, based on middle-eastern conflict. If we all woke up tomorrow and, instead of "Xians" v. "Muslims" the teams were "Catholics" v. "Protestants", for example, the real story would still be one of rich v. poor, educated v. ignorant, opressed and oppressor. Hitchens says, between the angry arab ranting about cartoons, and his free-speaking-self, it is HE that is in danger, HE who needs protection... c'mon, Chris, you're an Oxford educated man with every advantage; your lifestyle is an unimaginable fantasy compared to the life angry arab has known.

20. Interview with Richard Dawkins

Comment #38561 by MarcCountry on May 8, 2007 at 3:53 pm

The interviewer could have passed on one of his lines of coke before the show, but otherwise, it ended well.

But, about atheists not having lobby groups... what about the ACLU? They're a Humanist-founded organization, aren't they?

21. Panel discussion on atheism where no atheists are included

Comment #21562 by MarcCountry on February 10, 2007 at 12:03 am

Amazing.

I just realized that, because of the earth-shaking event of the death of Anna Nicole Smith (whose pictures I fully intend to continue masturbating to, because, heck, she would have wanted it that way), Dawkins' CNN appearance has been bumped to Darwin's birthday.

The lord truly does work in mysterious ways... Praise Jebus.

22. Panel discussion on atheism where no atheists are included

Comment #21560 by MarcCountry on February 9, 2007 at 11:51 pm

I too wrote a letter of complaint to the show (and almost used up all the negative adjectives in my vocabulary), telling them I would never watch their program or network again (I didn't mention that I never did in the first place, nor do I own a television, bu, oh well).
They kindly replied, thanking me for sending my heartfelt message concerning the recent death of Steve Irwin.
Now I'm really worried. I think the Mooninites have taken over CNN... Somebody call Boston PD!

23. Interview with Alister McGrath, author of 'The Dawkins Delusion?'

Comment #21559 by MarcCountry on February 9, 2007 at 11:47 pm

I was thinking about publishing a book, called "The McGrath Delusion", but then I remembered, nobody knows who the hell McGrath is. Too bad it will likely stay that way. Alas, my poor manuscript.

24. The Current: Part 3: The Religious Right

Comment #21557 by MarcCountry on February 9, 2007 at 11:43 pm

Well, there you go... The CBC, as compared to CNN.

YAY, CANADA!!!