51. 'Teddy' teacher jailed in Sudan

Comment #91887 by room101 on November 29, 2007 at 2:01 pm

I still don't understand why none of the kids knew not to mock their great deity. Didn't they learn that already in their madrassas or wherever the hell they get taught? And shouldn't their parents have instilled this great fear in them by now?

52. Why debate dogma?

Comment #91886 by room101 on November 29, 2007 at 1:59 pm

..what a waste of an enlightenment...

And...

if you want me to believe something, provide evidence or expect mockery and ridicule...

Amen. This is exactly how I feel regarding debating xtian idiots. Less debate, more mockery. I'm loving this guy more and more...

53. This Friday: Debate between Dan Dennett and Dinesh D'Souza

Comment #91828 by room101 on November 29, 2007 at 12:02 pm

From Quine:

Check out Pat Condell's little video on polite debates:

Thanks for the Pat Condell link. I have become a huge fan of his, and this video explains EXACTLY how I feel about debating these xtian idiots.

I get a pang in my stomach every time I hear about Dennett/Dawkins/Harris/Hitchens debating anyone anymore. The fact that we debate at all instead of just plain ridiculing them incessently legitimizes their side - gives them equal time.

I highlight my point from a recent video I saw on youtube, featuring a debate/discussion on a conservative talk show (Fox news) some time ago between Sam Harris and Ralph Reed, the former christian coalition leader and recently implicated in the Jack Abramoff scandal. It was absolutely sickening to see Reed and the host Laura Ingraham (picture Ann Coulter's more conservative sister - ugggh) take it Sam, not letting him get any words in edgewise and simply spewing their lies and dogma - complete with smirks, eyerolls, etc. Made me want to puke.

What upset me the most: The simple fact that placing a video image of Sam next to a video image of some idiot like Reed/Coulter/Ingraham/Hannity etc., not only legitimizes the debate between the two, but allows for both arguments to be presented as though they are EQUAL IN VALUE.

Think about that. Because it's on TV, your basic layperson equates the two personalities side by side on a TV screen as "experts" on the topic at hand. Both sides should be considered, right?

Anyway, I agree wholeheartedly with Pat Condell: Less debate, more mockery.

Peace...

54. Pupil defends teacher in Muhammad teddy furore

Comment #91547 by room101 on November 28, 2007 at 2:27 pm

Also...

It just dawned on me that none of these 7-year old children apparently knew that the Great One should not have his name tossed around and idolatrized as such.

Uhhhh...wouldn't you think these overly pious parents would have taught their kids this by age 7? It appears to me that the parents are suprised by the actions of the British teacher Gibbons - but I'd like to know why their kids weren't as taken aback by all of this, as well. I mean, they should have known, right?

55. Pupil defends teacher in Muhammad teddy furore

Comment #91516 by room101 on November 28, 2007 at 1:31 pm

Thank you, 7-year old sudanese boy, for coming forward and helping to clear this issue up for a bunch of your retarded elders.

Funny how a kid gets it, isn't it? Begs the question: At what point does he 'turn' and start to think the opposite like his idiot parents? Hmmmmm....

56. This Friday: Debate between Dan Dennett and Dinesh D'Souza

Comment #91505 by room101 on November 28, 2007 at 1:18 pm

It will be an easy task for Dan to show what we all know: "God is a manmade invention"

Sounds "easy" enough, doesn't it? But that really never is the case. It's all spin and delivery nowadays. Also, the setting/audience counts, too. Douche-ouza is a skilled orator who can talk about absolutely nothing and make it sound like something. I thought Hitchens would mop the floor with him in their debate - didn't happen. Not only that, he seems to be getting off debating the secular side and then gloating about how well he did on his website.

Let's see how Dr. Dennett does. I like that it's at a real university. Hopefully the audience will be comprised of mostly learned, open-minded individuals who will be able to not only provide Dr. Dennett the respect he deserves but also cut through the BS from that blabbering idiot.

57. Georgia gets rain, but it may not help

Comment #88961 by room101 on November 19, 2007 at 9:21 am

Hold on a second...

This was last Wednesday? That just happended to be the day after I sacrificed one of my kids to the Aztec Rain God, Tlaloc (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tlaloc)

I've been tracking the drought in that region of the country for months, and decided that I'd better do something about it.

So. Hey, Georgia: You're welcome.

58. Judgement Day: Intelligent Design on Trial

Comment #88570 by room101 on November 17, 2007 at 9:36 pm

I echo Goodwithwood's sentiments/warnings. Places like Liberty U. et al, along with a right-leaning Supreme Court could potentially make things difficult for the secular side. The next president could potentially appoint 2 justices. Almost makes me think of voting democrat for that sole reason alone. Don't know how much longer Stevens (and maybe Ginsberg) have.

Regarding the excellent NOVA program: What astounds me the most is that the ID'ers are still making the same arguments they made prior to not only the court decision, but also after all of the refuting evidence that has rebutted their claims. Yet weeks, months, years later - there they are. Doing talk shows, writing books, etc. - still touting that there can be "design inferences" made in nature and then siting the flagellum as their example. Absolutely mind-boggling.

It reminds me, wasn't there a saying: "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over yet expecting different results."

59. Georgia gets rain, but it may not help

Comment #88455 by room101 on November 16, 2007 at 6:28 pm

Huh...well, I'll be darned. Didn't know this prayer s*** worked.

Excuse me for a moment while I pray for a new Porsche...

60. 'Expelled' Movie: The Extended Trailer

Comment #88235 by room101 on November 15, 2007 at 1:41 pm

briancouglanworldcitizen:

Indeed, you are correct. As Pat Condell so eloquently states (paraphrasing):

"If you want us to believe you're a chicken, start showing us some eggs."

61. 'Expelled' Movie: The Extended Trailer

Comment #88229 by room101 on November 15, 2007 at 1:18 pm

First of all, F*** you Ben Stein, you disingenuous prick...

There, I feel better. Sorry, but I think that about captures how I feel regarding idiots like him and the other conservatives spinning this whole thing and making the science community look like a bunch of fascists.

Wow...frightening stuff. Especially after watching the NOVA "Judgment Day" special.

I can't believe these ID "scientists" crying about things like how they've been shunned and ostracized and have not been taken seriously - like a bunch of 8 year-old little girls.

But, hey, maybe Stein is on to something. Forget about facts and evidence. Get a really good PR movement going. Reality, science, and truth are not issues or relevant anymore. It's all about language and spin.

62. Why Science Will Triumph Only When Theory Becomes Law

Comment #88070 by room101 on November 14, 2007 at 1:43 pm

I agree with the majority of the posts...people need to understand that there is a difference in the scientific community as to what 'theory' means.

However, I'm drawn to what the author is saying. Last night I watched the documentary 'judgment day' that chronicled the Dover, PA ID vs Evolution trial in 2004 on NOVA. Hopefully many of you did, as well. Although it was well done, I found some things quite disturbing.

Mainly, the 2 idiots who started the whole mess (Cunningham and Bonsall - as well as others) kept saying throughout the entire documentary that evolution is 'only a theory, so what's wrong with introducing a different theory?' Hell, even counsel for the defense (representing the ID'ers) used this in defense of their case. I've also noticed that the conservative media picked up on this. They say 'scientists have their views, so why can't alternative views be introduced? Why won't the scientific community and the courts allow this? Not allowing differing ideas in the classroom - isn't that fascism???' What nonsense...

And this to me is a disturbing trend. It's almost like science and truth aren't the important issues - it's language and spin that are important.

63. Church row evolves over fossil boy

Comment #86547 by room101 on November 9, 2007 at 2:15 pm

"...but my family most certainly did not descend from the apes"

You're correct, bishop. We didn't. We did share a common ancestor, though, in case you're wondering...

64. Church row evolves over fossil boy

Comment #86545 by room101 on November 9, 2007 at 2:08 pm

"Bits of it are being disproved by scientists every day," he said. "Yet it's being taught in our schools to children - a theory being taught as fact."

When dealing with creationists why does it always seem like we're dealing with children? Do these people read? I don't get it. I hate it when people make grand, sweeping scientific statements, as this idiot bishop does, based solely on his own feelings about the topic.

"Bits of it are being disproved..." by whom? Where? When? How? And why don't you understand the term "theory" as it is used in the scientific realm?

65. Pat Robertson Says Giuliani Presidency Appears in Book of Revelation

Comment #86272 by room101 on November 8, 2007 at 10:16 pm

Un-f****** believable...

Back in May of this year, Giuliani ripped Ron Paul during a republican debate when Paul suggested that US foreign policy may have contributed to our nation being attacked. Rudy G. lambasted him for suggesting that we somehow brought this on ourselves.

Pat Robertson said the following regarding the attacks on 9/11:

"We have insulted God at the highest levels of our government. And, then we say 'why does this happen?' Well, why its happening is that God Almighty is lifting His protection from us"

So, Rudy G. rips Ron Paul for having the sheer gall of "suggesting" that our policies could have something to do with the attacks, but welcomes the endorsement of a televangelist who essentially said that "we had it coming"?

WTF????? Regardless of how Rudy feels about the issue, what a friggin' flip-flopper. He's should lose all credibility...

66. What's Good About Religion?

Comment #82424 by room101 on October 26, 2007 at 10:00 am

...abrahamic triangle of insanity...

I love that line describing the 3 monotheisms.

Also:

...buddhism - a religion with no gods, like a prison with no walls...

I've seen this guy on youtube before. I like his fluid style and delivery.

67. War in Heaven: Hitchens Meets D'Souza on Home Turf

Comment #81023 by room101 on October 23, 2007 at 11:04 pm

"But seriously... we need someone speaking for atheists, who can cut right to the point on these topics - someone who is fast on their feet, concise, and who cuts right into the fallacies that are heavy in the minds of theists that watch these debates with abated breath."

Macros_Man - you took the words right out of the passage I was about to write. I agree completely. But I thought that Hitchens was THE right guy to be fast, on their feet, etc. I disagree with roach in that I think Harris is NOT a very good debater. He is too hesitant and not nearly as fluid as Hitchens. Nonetheless, I'll reserve judgement until I see the debate.

I've noticed from videos, transcripts, etc. that there are basically 3 topics these god freaks keep harping on:

1. Without the bible, there is no morality
2. What about Pol Pot, Stalin, Hitler, etc.
3. There is no evidence of transitional fossils

The rationalist side must absolutely, positively refine their answers to these issues, especially to numbers 1 and 2 (3 is easy, just google it). Especially now that Douche D'souza is "looking forward to debating other atheists."

Good f'kn christ.....

68. The Pentagon Sends Messengers of Apocalypse to Convert Soldiers in Iraq

Comment #64008 by room101 on August 17, 2007 at 9:14 am

We feel the forces of heaven have encouraged us to perform multiple crusades...

Uhhhhh, dumbasses, do you REALLY want to use the word "crusade" when dealing with this particular region of the world?

I might actually welcome an insurgent response in this case...

69. Christians disrupt Hindu Prayer at Senate Invocation

Comment #56082 by room101 on July 13, 2007 at 3:55 pm

I agree with ChrisMcl...I don't understand why the constitutionally-impaired struggle so hard.

What part of "religion is no business of the state" don't you get??!!??

70. Christians disrupt Hindu Prayer at Senate Invocation

Comment #56067 by room101 on July 13, 2007 at 3:12 pm

Yaaaaaaaaawwwwwwwwwn.....booorrrring.

Hindu priest? How lame is that? Come on, US Senate, liven things up a bit. Why not celebrate with something more exciting, like say, inviting an Aztec priest to recreate an offering to their ass-kicking war god, Huitzilopochtli?

You see, the ancient Aztecs used to believe that there was an ongoing battle between day and night, and this god used the sun's rays on a daily basis to defeat the elements of night and darkness.

And he can only be fed by the blood of victims to sustain him throughout his battles. It is said that over 20,000 people were sacrificed at his temple's "grand opening" over a 4-day period, with there heads displayed on racks. The priest could sacrifice a different senator and mount their heads on the wall. That would be cool.

So, I agree with "Flip" that this was indeed an abomination. But we part ways in that you can't just worship 1 god - If we can't rid our government bodies of them then I believe all deities should be represented. Equal time for all myths, I say.

How about some love for Huitzilopochtli?

71. Giuliani To Regent University: 'The Amount Of Influence You Have Is Really, Really Terrific'

Comment #53157 by room101 on June 29, 2007 at 6:06 pm

No way Giuliani gets Pat and his Lemming's support...not god-fearing enough, and married twice (or thrice?)...

I always find it interesting how you can like a guy before or after he delves into politics - but during, forget it. Remember Bob Dole after he lost to Clinton? He did TV comedy appearances, commercials, etc., and was funny. He showed a very likable side (same with Al Gore). Gore seems more human now that he isn't on the inside. But if he were to run and get back in - instant dickhead/suckup/god-fearer.

72. The Benny Hinn Report

Comment #50232 by room101 on June 15, 2007 at 11:35 pm

JamesStephenBrown:

Thank you for your response. And more importantly, thank you for sharing your weekend with Mr. Hinn with us.

Funny, I certainly hope that I did not come accross as angry at you for posting this. Indeed NOT! Hopefully it was taken rhetorically. I get easily frustrated watching scenes like the one you described - and I know I'm preaching to the choir when I vent.

And as easy as it is to get upset at people for not taking responsibility for their actions, I tend to forget the awesome power wielded by cretins like Hinn who offer nothing other than to simply name-drop the almighty.

Perhaps I should heed Phillip1978's sage advice (#16 above):

"..never get tired of these people."

73. The Benny Hinn Report

Comment #50178 by room101 on June 15, 2007 at 2:25 pm

"It's not a lie if you believe it."

-George Costanza (Seinfeld)

74. The Great Mutator

Comment #49870 by room101 on June 14, 2007 at 1:38 am

Love this guy.

How about this: Jerry Coyne - the 5th musketeer.

Anyone??

;o)

75. The Benny Hinn Report

Comment #49866 by room101 on June 14, 2007 at 1:06 am

OK, so I agree with everyone regarding how repulsive this is.

But, come on. Am I the only one getting tired of feeling this way? It almost seems too easy. We witness something like this and instinctively lambast the con men evangelists.

Frankly, I'm getting tired. I'm getting tired of reading about stories like this and then reading all the same posts. I've started to vent my anger away from the Pastor Hinns, Falwells, and Robertsons of the world, and towards all of these idiot lemmings who are so effortlessly fleeced.

Look, an average human should know things by now. I mean, come on. We know smoking is bad for you. But 50 years ago, not so much. There were advertisements showing doctors smoking for Christ's sake. But we know better now, don't we? Anyone who decides today to start smoking is clearly an idiot who ignores all the evidence and does so at their own peril.

Reading stories like this is kind of like watching a horror movie with its inevitable cliched scene where the axe murderer is stalking the screaming hot chick, who always seems to fall down, and runs right into the dark woods, tripping, etc., while the murderer - who appears to be simply taking a casual stroll - somehow always ends up catching up to his victim.

At moments like this I actually find myself rooting against the victim (no matter how hot she is). I find myself yelling at the screen: "Oh, that's good, you stupid bitch, run right into the woods, he won't follow you there. Reaaaally smart."

I guess I feel the same way about Benny's victims. You should know better. We all should. But hey, Benny, if these idiots want to fund your 401k, more power to you, brother.

76. What I Think About Evolution

Comment #46528 by room101 on May 31, 2007 at 2:50 pm

Idiot...this is one of our presidential candidates, mind you...

Anyway, I hope what Jon Stewart said is true (during a segment on "The Daily Show" that featured these 3 nitwits raising their hands when asked who didn't believe in evolution).

"In case you missed it, raising their hands were Sam Brownback, Tom Tancredo, and Mike Huckabee. They will be missed."

77. Lou Dobbs w/ Hitchens on Al Sharpton's Bigoted Remark

Comment #39364 by room101 on May 10, 2007 at 12:21 pm

Interesting...I listened to the Hitchens/Sharpton debate a couple days prior. Hitchens said - as he has been saying - that belief or faith in all Gods is non-sensical. Sharpton called out one faith in particular (Mormonism) as being non-sensical and HE is the one getting lambasted in the press.

Love it...It's just mind-blowing to me that this is what's getting talked about in the mainstream press. All this nonsense about imaginary fairies and goblins...

Idiot 1: "My imaginary friend is more believable than your imaginary friend."

Idiot 2: "Uh-uhhhhhh"

Idiot 1: "Yah-huhhhh"

78. Disney daughter calls Muslim Mickey evil

Comment #39306 by room101 on May 10, 2007 at 9:40 am

Rtambree & Phaderus:

Agreed...I'm waiting for the Bugs Bunny vs Farfur the Hamas mouse debate. I think Bugs has the edge as he is eloquent and isn't easily bullied (ala Hitchens). That mouse, however, scares me a little. Make sure you check his belt for explosives at the door.

79. Christopher Hitchens and Al Sharpton: A Debate God Is Not Great

Comment #38666 by room101 on May 8, 2007 at 10:51 pm

I agree with yeahok on how Sharpton dodged CH's attacks on the bible. Sharpton states on more than one occasion that although CH is attacking God all he (CH) does is attack religion and man's misuse of it, and that CH doesn't prove/disprove God's existence.

If anyone here watched the LA Times panel posted on this site you'll remember a similar exchange between CH and the 2 moderates Kirsch and Karabell. After K&K droned on about how CH was "cherry picking" just the bad bits out of the bible yada, yada, CH asks them both poignantly: "Is the bible the divine word of God or not?" A question neither Kirsch or Karabell answered mind you, but very profound nonetheless. If the answer is yes, then it IS the connection to God that people like Sharpton are inquiring about. If the answer is no, then why are we all wasting our f'king time? If the Bible is no more divine than say, Aesops Fables, then shut the hell up, already. No further questions. I wish CH posed this to Sharpton, but oh well.

All in all, another solid performance by CH.

80. Lou Dobbs Interviews Christopher Hitchens

Comment #37409 by room101 on May 4, 2007 at 12:02 pm

phil:

Lou Dobb's response didn't surprise me at all. He definitely seems to be left of center regarding his views, and a champion for the masses (populist). He has come down hard on many of Bush's politics claiming that they're, among other things, "out of touch with working class Americans".

Christopher Hitchen's book is getting a lot of press and it's good to see. Now, I'd like to see him appear on Fox (against the right wingers) and have a go with O'Reilly, Hannity, et al. I think he would hold up well as he is eloquent and doesn't appear to be easily bullied.

81. Christians and Atheists to Debate Existence of God in First-Ever 'NIGHTLINE FACE OFF'

Comment #37180 by room101 on May 3, 2007 at 3:25 pm

Hold on a second...

This is being held at a CHURCH, with 2 actors/con-men who are deft at art of gab.

Not good.

They are skilled orators. No matter how daft/stupid/delusional you are (as these two have more than demonstrated), if you can articulate well you generally have the edge. Also, throw in emotion - which is all religion is about anyway - and this could be disastrous (read: emotion trumps facts). I'm also concerned about the network and moderator, both of whom will do their very best to make sure each side is treated "fairly" and not have one side beat up the other (which, if done correctly, the rationalists should mop the floor with them. These two idiots should be made to look like the f'kng dolts that they are). Couple all this with a crowd that, no doubt, will be partisan comfort/cameron - did I mention that it is being held in a CHURCH?? And I wouldn't be surprised if they're out at this moment recruiting to stack the crowd in their favor.

I can only hope the rational response squad has members that possess the eloquence and aggressive debating skillset of a Christopher Hitchens. Otherwise, I agree with Spinoza. This setup can only favor these two pious clowns (comfort/cameron).

May Apollo bless the RRS and give them strength and wisdom...

82. Religion & Culture Panel

Comment #36308 by room101 on April 30, 2007 at 10:07 pm

First of all, congratulations to CH for becoming a US citizen on April 13th. Welcome to one of the most religious countries on the planet. We need you here.

I agree with kkant regarding Hitchens's eloquence and superior debating skills, even to the likes of Harris (I agree too that Harris' prose is much better than his debating skills - his writing is much more impatient, scathing and vitriolic than other populare rationalists and I liken his writing to Hitchen's verbal skills). If Harris can master CH's debating skills, that would be an 800 pound gorilla.

Nonetheless, CH clearly ruled this debate. He doesn't let the other moderates 'get away' with anything, which is nice to see. I love it when the others "fence sit" by ranting about how there are "dangerous extremists" in all religions, and how we must come to understand each other (blah, blah). Kirsch sites that "revelation created culture" and is always "progressing and evolving" to which CH replies: "Well, that implicitly proves my point: The less religion, the more civilization. As we improve and progress, we believe less in the absurd bronze age myths of the holy books. We're gradually outgrowing this barbaric impulse."

But by far my favorite moment is when Karabell espouses how we should "allow people to worship as they please...and that how they worship should be of no concern to us", to which CH replies (may not be word for word, but this is one of the best retorts to the moderate position that I've heard and had to share):

"Then they must stop teaching creationism to my children. Why can't they keep their beliefs to themselves? If you thought you had a God that made you and loved you, wouldn't it make you happy? Wouldn't it cheer you up? No! Noooo!

You're totally miserable until you get everyone else to believe it, too. This is why it's sinister. This is why it's always dangerous. If they could manage to contain themselves - but the definition of religion cannot do that. Its beliefs are to arrogant, too total, and too certain. It's the origin of totalitarianism, and it threatens those who don't take its offer with eternal torture for themselves and their children.

This is WICKEDNESS. There's no other word for it."



Amen, my new American brother.

83. Two idiots get a forum

Comment #35781 by room101 on April 28, 2007 at 8:54 pm

Anyone who has seen various fundies posting their "proof" of God's existence and debunking of RD on youtube know what to expect. They all do one thing, and one thing only - they quote scripture. That's it. That's their proof.

These two ass-clowns are no different. Check out their "Way of the Master" series on youtube. Their logic goes (roughly) something like this:

"How can we prove God's existence? Matthew 1:2 tells us that man himself cannot blah blah blah...and Jesus so blessed him and said unto him yada yada yada. So, in conclusion blah blah blah..."

I'm not amused at all with this so-called debate. Idiots or not, these events should be met head on with a full artillery of top thinkers and rationalists. They should be made to look very, very silly. I agree with AgentofEvolution about getting Ken Miller. Do you think he might consider giving up his Saturday for this?