851. Pop Tech Lecture

Comment #36424 by Logicel on May 1, 2007 at 5:02 am

Though I have heard or read Dawkins discussing many of the points made in this vid, his delivery was superb--focused, energetic, and entertaining. I really enjoyed this one.

852. Religion & Culture Panel

Comment #36411 by Logicel on May 1, 2007 at 4:17 am

Kirsh is wedded to the opinion that Religion must still be useful in a positive sense simply because it still is being used in the world. So is female infibulation and genital mutilation, and so is rape.

Moderates, it seems, are more emotionally/mentally invested in religious superstitions than the fundamentalists. Their nauseating and continuing refrain is that religion is familiar, been with us all through our recorded history, how can we possible do without it? I think the moderates are the true religious addicts, and the fundamentalists can learn a thing or two from them. Oops, they already are--belief in belief without evidence is good because, well, it is something us humans have been doing for so long, so it must be good.

853. Religion & Culture Panel

Comment #36410 by Logicel on May 1, 2007 at 4:08 am

Liveliest Crib, spot-on analysis of the obfuscation which Kirsh uses. In essence, Kirsh works very hard to say nothing of clarity and usefulness through his flailing efforts to fancy dress-up his thread-bare doggerel.

854. 'god is not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything' by Christopher Hitchens

Comment #36399 by Logicel on May 1, 2007 at 3:37 am

tomjlawsonwrote: When "Lose Your Fears in 7 Days" hits the bookshelves then we might see a major change, but until then it's just spitting in the rain.
_____

Now that religion is on the table for criticism, I suspect that we will see lots of therapeutic, positive, life-enhancing books directed at replacing often damaging and ineffective religious 'solutions' for psychological and emotional needs.

However, as it has been pointed out in other threads, the potent allure of make-believe used unabashedly by the religites can not be matched. Though that fact needs to be told honestly, it does not necessarily mean such admission will be a deterrent in educating people how to live without make-believe as make-believe falls on its face in terms of using human energy to truly change our reality for the better. Human imagination using the stuff of the real world can fuel wonderful achievements. Who needs some stinking make-believe?

855. Convention ends with Satan and immigrants

Comment #36392 by Logicel on May 1, 2007 at 3:10 am

MIND_REBEL, the Landover Baptist website is a spoof, brilliantly poking fun at fundies.

856. Believe in God Spray

Comment #36387 by Logicel on May 1, 2007 at 3:02 am

21. Comment #36249 by atkinson on April 30, 2007 at 4:08 pm
The new invocation: Let us spray.
________

too funny!

857. Pundit Christopher Hitchens picks a fight in book, 'God is Not Great'

Comment #35842 by Logicel on April 29, 2007 at 3:14 am

Hitchens is, if he will forgive the religious reference, preaching to the choir.
_____

And what a wonderful, intelligent, enthusiastic, GROWING choir it is!

858. Pundit Christopher Hitchens picks a fight in book, 'God is Not Great'

Comment #35839 by Logicel on April 29, 2007 at 3:10 am

petermun wrote, My wife, fully armed with the arguments of Dawkins, Harris, Dennett et al shocked them into silence. They wowed never to return!
________

Way to go, Mrs. 'petermun'!!!

859. Scene Caused by Christian Group at NYC Stage Show

Comment #35834 by Logicel on April 29, 2007 at 3:02 am

Machinus wrote, It was about profanity! The f-word!
________

And the head of the school outing was informed that the language would be 'adult' beforehand, and they still abruptly herded out the students anyway as if the appearance of such words was unexpected. Instead of owning up to their MISTAKE, they compounded their error by disrupting the show and destroying property. Also, I would imagine that they have actually terrified their own by their actions, by imperiously demanding immediate evacuation and labeling the utterance of the 'f' word as a security issue.

That's it, guys, call fire in a crowed theater when there isn't any, and the result will be the next time you do it, you will not be listened to--the opposite of what these Christian chaperons want to encourage.

860. Scene Caused by Christian Group at NYC Stage Show

Comment #35824 by Logicel on April 29, 2007 at 2:06 am

And then I forgive him. He is very quiet--he is obviously shocked. And I tell him, "I want you to remember that a liberal atheist has forgiven you today. I don't want you to ever forget that, as long as you live, do not forget what happened here. I don't have God behind me, but I speak for myself, and I forgive you for myself, and for you. Never forget this."
________

Yet another example of an atheist teaching a Christian how to be "Christian."

861. We aim to misbehave

Comment #35630 by Logicel on April 28, 2007 at 2:49 am

Sam, a very nice and succinct post.

Reading and posting at this site now for close to 6 months has been a very positive experience for me--I have learned much information from an international community and from reading the varied articles posted here resulting in the increase of my confidence and skill in debating and challenging religious superstitions.

Religites who practice the majority religion in their geographical locations are not persecuted as they inanely insist, but instead are coddled and sheltered from opposition to the point that when their beliefs are questioned and challenged vigorously they regard such criticism as being off the deep end, angry, and indicative of an unhealthy mind. They embrace psychological defense mechanisms like second skins.

862. God Is in the Dendrites

Comment #35462 by Logicel on April 27, 2007 at 8:31 am

Persinger was quick to note that Dawkins had scored way below average on a psychological questionnaire measuring temporal lobe sensitivity—hints of a neurobiological correlate for atheism.
_______

SARCASM WARNING:

Why has God done this to Dawkins? Religites claims that God is there if you are only willing to converse with him. Does God love Dawkins less than the people in whom He fitted brains so as to be receptive to His divinity?

863. Bill Maher - APATHEIST

Comment #35381 by Logicel on April 27, 2007 at 3:20 am

Scarborough likes his Christianity well cherry picked. He seems to be fairly moderate and also embraces the compartmentalizing of his irrational faith from his rationality. Since he can cherry pick well and isolate himself from the nutty bits expressed within non-evidential faith-based beliefs, he regards his faith as benign, and does not grasp that encouraging such non-evidential faith is dangerous because many cannot do what he can do.

He is the type of Christian that thinks that the extremist type of Christianity has NOTHING to do with his kind. He cannot see the common denominator which feeds religious extremity--the encouraging of believing in belief because it is touted as being good, not because there is any evidence to such beliefs.

In addition, Scarborough was unable to understand that his doing his good Christian works is because he does want to be saved via Jesus. It is much better to do the good works because you, yourself, want to do them, for the benefits such action begets for yourself and others in the real world.

864. Bill Maher - APATHEIST

Comment #35366 by Logicel on April 27, 2007 at 2:28 am

In general, I personally don't get much out of Bill Mayer though I do think he is a very good political analyst but then again I am politically illiterate so maybe it is politics for dummies that he does.

He is unabashedly a hedonist which I admire.

865. Iran arrests 300 'insufficiently veiled' women

Comment #35362 by Logicel on April 27, 2007 at 2:12 am

There is this great travel TV show here in France, where this guy goes traveling all over the world by himself and his video camera with the goal of sleeping at some stranger's house. The viewer can get a real slice of life that way.

In Kuwait (if I recall correctly), he met a young man in traditional dress at a sports stadium who befriended him and tried to say that his countrymen were friendly despite the fact that they almost physically harmed the French guy for trying to take photos of women from afar.

The French guy and the Arab one met the next day, and the Arab guy very reluctantly consented for the visitor to stay at his home after the French guy again remarked how unfriendly everyone seemed. The Arab guy insisted that his countrymen were traditionally hospitable.

While staying at his newly found friend's home occupied by a big extended family, the Frenchman did not catch a glimpse of a woman. When asked why, the Arab guy said that women and men must be separated TO PREVENT DIVORCE. How about preventing real life from happening, how about that!!!!!!!!!!!!

The young Arab said that many in his country liked certain aspects of Western lifestyle like technology but were against the encroachment on traditional values like friendliness and hospitality. These traditional values are probably more based on the in and out group viewpoint, and not as admirable as this young Arab seems to think.

And the poster that has that fabulous avatar in question is a young Irish woman (I think) whose id here is Luthien.

866. Vote for the Time 100 - Are They Worthy?

Comment #35356 by Logicel on April 27, 2007 at 1:24 am

Bremas, I have been unable to find out when this poll ends. In addition, the polling page has come up blank for hours, preventing me from voting. RDs rating has sometimes made it up to 7 and 8.

867. We aim to misbehave

Comment #35031 by Logicel on April 26, 2007 at 3:35 am

Successful revolutionaries ignore the admonitions about which fork to use for their salad because they care only to grab the steak knife as they launch themselves over the table.
________

Way to go, PZ!

868. Bill O'Remix

Comment #35028 by Logicel on April 26, 2007 at 3:29 am

Fantastic! Not only can big media format how information is disseminated, so can the little guys.

869. Jesus 'Love-Bombs' You

Comment #34902 by Logicel on April 25, 2007 at 2:19 pm

flobear, thanks for that insightful comment. How can humanity encourage both individualism and social cohesion without giving up the one for the other?

870. The God disunion: there is a place for faith in science, insists Winston

Comment #34825 by Logicel on April 25, 2007 at 11:28 am

BillySands wrote, By saying some scientists deal with uncertainty with certainty, he is misrepresenting and damaging the public image of science himself.
______

I agree. Wise of Dawkins to decline comment until he sees the full text of Winston's lecture.

871. Shout your doubt out loud, my fellow unbelievers

Comment #34817 by Logicel on April 25, 2007 at 11:07 am

As mainstream Christian church attendances fall farther still I predict that the Church of England, and finally the Roman Catholics, will be driven to conclude that they cannot even afford to make enemies of homosexuals, unmarried couples and family planners, and start welcoming them in too. I expect they'll call it the "love community". In truth it's the "can't afford to be choosy" community.
______

Hilarious and so insightful.

872. Doctors Opposing Circumcision: An Appeal for Misha

Comment #34459 by Logicel on April 24, 2007 at 6:07 am

John Gleisheker, the attorney at Doctors Against Circumcision through email correspondence has answered my questions and gave court case proof of the authenticity of this case.

I am satisfied this case is authentic and if posters are so inclined to support this case by sending in donations for the costly legal work that has been on-going since January and/or publicize this case on the web, I encourage you do so. Please be aware that this article will receive significant exposure if the digg count can be raised, by clicking on the digg icon just above the comments at this thread. If you do not have a digg account, you can quickly register for one. Digg count is at 12 at this moment. Let's aim for a triple digit count.

873. Atheists split on how to not believe

Comment #34442 by Logicel on April 24, 2007 at 4:58 am

DNAtheist, I think your first post was adequately informative of your opinion; and not only did you clearly state your negative opinion of the author, you gave your reasons. And that is the kind of discussion that can go some place. It does not matter if the opinion is pro or con, but that the reasons for the opinion are given. This approach is just honest communication.

There were no expletives in your post. And thank you for pointing out how weefree framed your honest opinion based on your reasons as less than clear thinking.

874. The Video: Bill O'Reilly Interviews Richard Dawkins

Comment #34440 by Logicel on April 24, 2007 at 4:41 am

v4ri4bl3 wrote: And yes I do agree that life originated from "slime" if you would be so bold. If you disagree, and you are a male, ask your self what it is that you put in a cup at a fertility donation center. Doesn't that look like slime to you? Guess what, under the right conditions and about 9 months time it can create human life. From slime to baby in nine months and you're going to tell me that evolution could not have done something similar in billions of years?

_______

I like it! Hopefully, I will get a chance to use your graphic metaphor in a discussion with a godbotherer.

875. One Hell of a Religious Read

Comment #34423 by Logicel on April 24, 2007 at 2:39 am

Hitchens, who says he was once mistaken for the god "Sai Baba" in Sri Lanka, writes, "If I am hit by a bus on the day this book is published, there will certainly be people who will say it was no accident."
________

Hilarious.

876. Brian Lehrer interviews Richard Dawkins

Comment #34416 by Logicel on April 24, 2007 at 2:20 am

Interesting interview. Though little what is new or not been discussed before was on the table, I take these interviews to be like refresher courses in a topic in which I am very interested.

The show host is a typical NYC inhabitant--plain spoken, direct, and blunt. And of course as a native New Yorker myself, I always get a kick out of the accents and place names like Greenpoint--that densely populated northern tip of the borough of Brooklyn, nestled under what I would imagine is still a fairly smelly Newton creek.

877. 'The Day They Kicked God out of the Schools' & Rebuttal

Comment #34406 by Logicel on April 24, 2007 at 1:42 am

Great post, Tim Marsh.

878. The Video: Bill O'Reilly Interviews Richard Dawkins

Comment #34402 by Logicel on April 24, 2007 at 1:17 am

I also thought that this short interview of Dawkins by O'Reilly was useful in giving credibility to atheism. The sound bites, on which O'Reilly flourishes, not only work to his advantage, but also to the advantage of his guest. The presentation was packaged simply, because O'Reilly is targeting his audience which thrives on easily digested bits of information. Dawkins can be considered a brilliant strategist for accepting to be interviewed in this milieu. Kudos, RD!

879. Atheists split on how to not believe

Comment #34239 by Logicel on April 23, 2007 at 3:33 pm

I counted three posts in the first 33 posts that contained insulting words. I think that is pretty good for a heated topic in an essentially uncensored setup.

However, it would be helpful for all of us in order to learn more about the core arguments if instead of just reaching for a handy expletive, if we all try instead to put into well tempered words our rebuttals which we are making to articles, vids, etc., i.e., the aspect that has triggered our disgust enabling us to fire off expletives. Those expletives are potentially golden nuggets of rationality. Let's constructively channel our anger and disgust in honing our argument without using expletives.

BrianCoughland is an inspiration for me, because several weeks ago he was very able to let the expletives fly, and now he has channeled all that energy creatively and is producing productive, stimulating, and beneficial videos. Let's learn from his example.

880. Pope abolishes limbo

Comment #34040 by Logicel on April 23, 2007 at 5:04 am

How nice, because of devolved quoting from TGD I decided to check the quote out, and after I am finished with this comment, I am going to curl up with not only that wonderfully clear, cogent, and convincing book but also one that is eloquently written and triple my reading pleasure by reading it for the third time.

pp 140, bottom of the page, TGD, RD writes:

One-off events like this might be explained by the anthropic principle, along the following lines. There are billions of planets that have developed life at the level of bacteria, but only a fraction of these life forms ever made it across the gap to something like the eucaryotic cell. And of these, a yet smaller fraction managed to cross the later Rubicon to consciousness. If both of these are one-off events, we are not dealing with a ubiquitous and all-pervading process, as we are with ordinary, run-of-the-mill biological adaptation. The anthropic principle states that, since we are alive, eucaryotic and conscious, our planet has to be one of the intensely rare planets that has bridged all three gaps.

Simple, elegant, and substantial. Wow!

881. Pope abolishes limbo

Comment #34033 by Logicel on April 23, 2007 at 4:49 am

7. Comment #33998 by Enblomst on April 23, 2007 at 2:48 am
I think it was that annoying song by chubby checker that got to him.
_________

Hilarious.

882. Street Evangelist Saves 300 Souls From Enjoying Park

Comment #33999 by Logicel on April 23, 2007 at 2:51 am

Great vid response by Briancoughlandworldcitizen. I worked off my insomnia last night by posting a few comments, about 30 at last count! Such a boring lot of religites, it is not only nice but also intellectually stimulating to be back posting among people who are not afraid to critically think and even criticize each other. Christians have been so coddled from direct and clear criticism that they misunderstand the motivation of the criticism and think it is hate or anger which of course it is not; it is just well thought out criticism.

883. Answers To the Atheists

Comment #33877 by Logicel on April 22, 2007 at 12:08 pm

Shrommer, Thank you for replying to my points and for trying to let go of God and describing how it was. I see it was not anymore a positive experience for you than my trying to pray was!

I am glad for you that your perspective enriches your life, and I hope that you are one of the special ones who can keep on compartmentalizing the supernatural from the natural. In your being able to do that, I am somewhat reassured that you would not pose a threat to humanity by the dangers which are presented in holding non-evidential religious beliefs. If a religious believer has faith and needs not to question it in a critical manner, then that faith can lead to very unethical results.

Your 'reality' is based on your subjective experience and interpretation of writings of others of which there is little evidential proof of their accuracy. This approach of yours is often presented to me as a reasonable, rational one--that your personal beliefs and intimate revelations are nestled within a larger, confirming framework. Sorry, I can't buy that. I don't feel trapped or imprisoned within my humanity, I acknowledge it for what it is. It has limitations and I focus on working within them which gives me a sense of being grounded and fulfilled within reality, within the natural world.

You wrote, I don't see my job as one of creating meaning, but rather one of discovering meaning. If your decisions in your natural life--I need to specify that, separating it from the supernatural one you believe is yet to come--are your own and do not stem from being manipulated by a puppet owner, then you are creating meaning in your life, and we both are not doing that much differently from the other.

I think what is only fair is for you say that since you have perceived that the Holy spirit is living inside of you, you feel that you are really living and certainly living better compared to before when the Holy Spirit was not perceived by you as being within you. There is no evidence that can be presented to establish the existence of a spirit within you. I can accept what you are perceiving, but I cannot agree that it is real or that the Holy Spirit's existence thusly has been proven by your subjective experience.

884. NEXT MONDAY: Bill O'Reilly interviews Richard Dawkins

Comment #33715 by Logicel on April 21, 2007 at 10:37 am

After watching the two vids of O'Reilly interviewing Harris, what I get is that O'Reilly thinks belief in belief is good, and he is unable to entertain that it is encouraging belief without evidence that is so dangerous. Once the non-evidential belief card is on the table, there is no way to say hey, your particular belief sux, but yours is fine. For a belief to have value it must at the very least have evidence to that value.

885. NEXT MONDAY: Bill O'Reilly interviews Richard Dawkins

Comment #33713 by Logicel on April 21, 2007 at 10:21 am

O'Reilly in the above vid labelled, Is Bill O'Reilly a closet atheist? stated that believing something with no evidence is fine because the simple desire to want to believe is good enough reason to, he has no problem with that. The problem that he has is when there is evidence and people deny it; it is those people from which he encourages to run away. An example would be to run away from a holocaust denier.

This stance is very odd. You would think that if he is able to see the dangers of not respecting evidence, that he would not encourage people to believe without evidence, especially something as wonky as the supernatural. O'Reilly presents his rationalizing a desire into acceptable reality as being logical. Very sad.

I want to believe that George Clooney lusts after my body. Do you think I can rationalize that desire into reality?

886. Dinesh D'Souza says I don't exist: an atheist at Virginia Tech

Comment #33702 by Logicel on April 21, 2007 at 7:54 am

phil rimmer wrote, At root, I see religion as a long-term mental health problem. The pushers must be made to feel the responsibilities they may bear for denying millions the best possible mental health.
______

A double prong approach could be doubly effective--the recipients of drugs need also to be reached, in fact, they are the most important part of the solution. If they know how to say no, they will put the drug/religious dealers out of business.

887. Richard Dawkins interviews the Bishop of Oxford

Comment #33694 by Logicel on April 21, 2007 at 6:56 am

fonex_86, It seems that the neutered SpagMon certainly failed to get up on the 'brighty bright' side of the neutered self's bed this glorious spring day--not surprising as the neutered self has confessed to quite an aversion to all things 'brighty bright'. If you are wondering why I am referring to the SpagMon as neutered it is because that is the way the neutered self thusly describes the neutered self in an earlier post on another thread.

To clarify my comment so deliciously mangled by the SpagMon, let me use a food related metaphor, one that fishpeddler would appreciate, the master that he is regarding the use of such metaphors. Imagine someone concocting a meal for me. This chef takes the very best and freshest romaine lettuce, massing it together to make a nice appetizing green bed and surrounds the crispy leaves with the ripest, most succulent, red cherry tomatoes. The chef then decides to dump on top of this inviting culinary preamble, a ton of chicken shit, spicing it up with some bracing paint remover and ending his masterpiece by sprinkling some horse urine for extra punch. This meal would horrify me, not frighten me. I would only become frightened if the chef had the means and power to cram this repast down my reluctant throat.

The unsavory elements in the meal are the bollocks represented by religious supernatural beliefs, and the savory elements--the nourishing, vitamin/mineral rich foods like lettuce and tomatoes--are represented by rationality. The bishop is the chef, and as he has no power or even intent to cram his weird concoction into my brain, I am not frightened by him.

888. Richard Dawkins interviews the Bishop of Oxford

Comment #33669 by Logicel on April 21, 2007 at 2:45 am

AndyD, Some think as you do regarding moderates being an useful bridge, and perhaps you are right as there are no psychological studies that I am aware of that will enable humanists to identify the perfect approach to encourage the embracing of rationality.

As my earlier comment showed, at this stage, I agree with the camp in which Dawkins is one, that moderates shelter the fanatics by not focusing on the danger of holding beliefs that are not based on evidential proof. This bishop has pulled off a balance that I consider to be mostly impossible for most of us. As other posters have asked, why is this bishop so rare? He is rare because to do what he does is that difficult.

889. Dinesh D'Souza says I don't exist: an atheist at Virginia Tech

Comment #33665 by Logicel on April 21, 2007 at 1:53 am

denoir, It is useful to state the obvious, which is that the make believe aspect of religion is the potent punch lacking in the rational, secular, humanist approach. The obvious is not spoken more often, because perhaps we think that challenging aspect will go away if we do not discuss it! Unless humanity makes themselves immortal and indestructible, I can't see any approach that humanists can come up with that will replace comfort derived from make believe.

However, if the need for religion is eliminated more and more over the globe, in terms of erasing poverty and preventable diseases, and the establishment of widespread education, etc., then it will be harder for people to make believe, and thus be able to derive comfort from it. The release of human creativity, purpose, and drive--not to mention money--resulting from such a decoupling has the potential to greatly increase the quality of human lives by focusing on real, sustainable solutions.

The enduring attraction of religious make believe constitutes a vicious circle, and certainly not a virtuous one: humanity, not being able to handle issues like mortality, gives rise to comforting via religious make-believe which in turn gives rise to blocking real solutions, which in turn feeds the need for religious make-believe, etc.

890. Dinesh D'Souza says I don't exist: an atheist at Virginia Tech

Comment #33602 by Logicel on April 20, 2007 at 5:17 pm

Do we know how effective religious comforting truly is? I know several people who lost their faith because of the loss of a child. Apparently religion was unable to comfort them. I think of the odd short story where after many decades of giving roses to his wife--thinking she loved receiving roses--the husband is killed by his wife when he offers unknowingly what would be his last bouquet of roses because the wife got no comfort from this particular display of affection and in reality hated it.

The comfort supposedly provided by religion needs to be submitted to psychological studies. We take it for granted that religion comforts, just because that is commonly believed. Now that religion is being challenged and criticized, perhaps its 'effects' can really be detailed and identified.

891. A debate on people who profess no religion

Comment #33443 by Logicel on April 20, 2007 at 5:48 am

foxfire wrote, Us "average Americans" really do need to get out more and experience the rest of the world. That way, we would be much more likely to not fall victim to our own bullshit.
________

My prayers have been answered (:-)))))! And the world wide web has delivered the means by which they have been answered. There are many excellent audios, videos, and blogs which cover international viewpoints of which are now accessible to Americans. Please bookmark a representative list of links which you can email to your family, acquaintances, and friends as alternatives to Fox and CNN.

892. Richard Dawkins interviews the Bishop of Oxford

Comment #33440 by Logicel on April 20, 2007 at 5:38 am

I have listened to this uncut version several weeks ago, and the bishop does a decent and humanitarian job--especially relating to his emphasis on the importance of palliative care--of discussing issues important to all of us. However, I was chilled to the bone, when patiently and relentlessly pressed by Dawkins, the bishop with great feeling and animation revealed the absolute bollocks of his belief in Jesus and what he views as the beautiful importance and meaning of the birth, death, and resurrection of Jesus.

I still can't shake the feeling of horror, that such intelligence is imprisoned within a superstitious sphere. Unlike others, it made me almost cry from disappointment and dismay, instead of feeling positive about atheists and Christians getting along. I perceive this very religious bishop to be dangerous as he appears so accommodating and thoughtful, which he certainly is in part, but absolute bollocks is lurking under all that good sense.

Perhaps this bishop is fortunate enough to be one of the rare people who can compartmentalize the natural from the supernatural well enough to function with integrity and good sense, but his example does not mean that the majority of people can pull of what he has, and yet his success may encourage others not to remain steadfast in focusing on the dangers of supernatural beliefs based on no evidential proof. This religiously moderate bishop therefore gives false hope to atheists.

893. Dinesh D'Souza says I don't exist: an atheist at Virginia Tech

Comment #33297 by Logicel on April 19, 2007 at 7:54 pm

Very emotive. Contrast this essay brimming over with compassion and intelligence and the wretched article written by D'Sousa. Since D'Sousa has shown a consistent inability to feel shame for his hateful opinions, one almost is compelled to feel it for him.

894. Where Is Atheism When Bad Things Happen?

Comment #33288 by Logicel on April 19, 2007 at 7:43 pm

D'Souza can be depended on to keep on saying egregiously vicious and stupid words, which is great--this latest diatribe of his is causing even Christians to protest! Keep up the good work, D'Souza.

895. Flea Circus!

Comment #33267 by Logicel on April 19, 2007 at 6:59 pm

"But when you do don't be surprised when I reply in kind and please don't run to mummy telling tales about how the nasty theist is upsetting you."
_________

Weefree, Choosing the flag for troll, spam, and offensive is not running to mummy, it is a way for the posters here to contribute in monitoring the site themselves.

896. NEXT MONDAY: Bill O'Reilly interviews Richard Dawkins

Comment #33222 by Logicel on April 19, 2007 at 3:55 pm

Dawkins must know the unsavory reputation of O'Reilly, and he still has decided to be interviewed. Dawkins knows what he is doing and can handle the situation. The Fox audience may not like what Dawkins has to say, but it will be the beginning of getting the atheistic, rational sound bite to those ninnies.

The only bad thing is that I will have to watch O'Reilly in order to see RD.

897. Doctors Opposing Circumcision: An Appeal for Misha

Comment #33041 by Logicel on April 19, 2007 at 3:47 am

Yorker, I love color and via ctrl and u I discovered how to do it too!

898. Christians at Bible publishers have their throats cut

Comment #33037 by Logicel on April 19, 2007 at 3:36 am

Isik, I also support Turkey's entry in the EU. Do you support that?

I agree that religious people do have the right to practice their religion, in private. I respect that right, however, I am sure you would not want me to lie and say that I respect your actual religious beliefs, because I cannot in truth say that. Therefore in not respecting the content of your beliefs, while respecting the right for you to be able to practice your beliefs, I will criticise those beliefs but support your right to practice them.

899. Flea Circus!

Comment #33024 by Logicel on April 19, 2007 at 3:13 am

weefree, in his earlier and frequent id incarnations, has been flagged for being a troll, not for being a theist with whom we disagree. I flagged an atheist as a troll recently because he was clogging up the thread with the repetition of his same points over and over again via hugely long comments charged with great emotion and could not accept that others disagreed with him who gave their reasons for doing so.

Unlike weefree, that poster stopped clogging the thread and did not get demoted to troll status. It is astonishing how weefree cannot grasp this little bit of thread etiquette. At this point, weefree is not showing any sign of trolling, but with his history, he could morph into one.

900. Flea Circus!

Comment #33021 by Logicel on April 19, 2007 at 3:05 am

Russell Blackford, My fave is: The Dawkins Dorkitude and am pleased that you thought up some for "our" side also! Though I certainly hope the atheists don't stoop to the level of the theists.