51. 'Gospel of wealth' facing scrutiny

Comment #104099 by LeeLeeOne on December 27, 2007 at 10:06 pm

Pity the ignorant and the gullible, for they can be fleeced for every ounce of their self-worth.

Should this not be added to the 23rd psalm?

52. Functional Neuroimaging of Belief, Disbelief, and Uncertainty

Comment #97877 by LeeLeeOne on December 12, 2007 at 6:48 pm

Is this the first of Sam H's publications towards his doctorate? is this a first taste of his doctorate thesis? if not, does Sam H have a publication date, list of scholarly inquisitors, and argument date for his thesis presentation?

53. Keith Olbermann talks about the Romney 'Religion' Speech

Comment #97039 by LeeLeeOne on December 11, 2007 at 10:18 am

I made a comment on the romney website under "contact", with my real name and real address and real E-mail address.

How many of you, meaning legally voting US Citizens, have done the same?

Romney sucks, yes. But if you scream loudly in a lead-lined box, no one will hear you!

If you are to scream, scream loudly in no BOX! Scream loudly to the masses who will "hear" you!

54. Bah, Hanukkah

Comment #94070 by LeeLeeOne on December 4, 2007 at 5:22 pm

What I have found, through much of history, is that the human memory is clay - it is short, it is finite, it is pliable, and it is more often than not but a mere image of what we imagine, not reality. I have never been one to trump-up (i.e. participate in) traditions and Hitchens' observations of "traditions" reinforces my personal convictions. These very convictions I was able to demonstrate (not force, not threaten, not demand) to my progeny. I am fortunate to live in these enlightening times. Thank you Mr. Hitchens, and Dr. Dawkins for this site! For added insight, perhaps more readers should listen to the Thomas Jefferson Hour on NPR.

55. Stem cell breakthrough

Comment #90587 by LeeLeeOne on November 25, 2007 at 4:52 pm

Stem cell research has been fraught with controversy. But time is endless for all of us. Eventually we ALL are affected with clinically deduced or scientifically proven genetic afflictions. Sociologic, environmental, or hereditary constructs of any affliction; be it cystic fibrosis, alzheimer's dementia, polycystic ovarian disease, schizophrenia, TB, scleroderma, synesthesia, familial colon polyps, acne rosacea, bipolar disorder, diabetes, cancer, depression, addiction, etc., this list is seemingly endless.

Stem cell research must be congratulated and encouraged.

Has anyone noticed that it seems the persons who are "knee-jerk" reactors/detractors, not only to stem cell research, but to any type of change, are those who seem either to be the least educated or, "education" aside, are those who are the least self-secure, self-reliant, and self-assured?

56. Eddie Tabash at AAI 07

Comment #84165 by LeeLeeOne on November 1, 2007 at 10:50 am

While I may mostly agree with the general intent of this video, the language used to describe certain entities I find purposefully inflammatory and thus not needed. All persons struggling to get their "ideas/ideals" across should have learned by now that inflammatory labeling may not be effective. It may virtually turns the listener(s) brains to an "off-mode."

Lawyers, psychologists, historians, etc., surely understand that LANGUAGE may be the effective key to communication.

There are situations which do require "generalized labels." However, when attempting to reach a wide audience, generalizations, albeit explained or defended, descriptive labeling, i.e., the term liberally used - right wing, may reflexively cloud the subject matter, thus rendering the conversation useless.

(additional i.e., It could perhaps push a listening audience "beyond" their listening capability.)

Once again, while I understand and appreciate the subject matter discussed, is there a way to discuss such matter without labels so as not to inflame or demonize the substance of such subject matter?

57. Internet used to target extremism

Comment #83923 by LeeLeeOne on October 31, 2007 at 4:50 pm

Helping ANY one in the name of another, i.e., AHA giving funds in their name for the AFL-CIO, NPR supporters giving funds to NPR which in their name may fund indirectly BCC, or the AA giving funds to the NCFP, etc.; this is why we have ELECTED boards of directors!

When, as individuals, give ANY funds to any group that we as individuals choose to belong to, we automatically assume the elected or appointed board of that entity will follow our intent.

Be responsible PEOPLE! Do your research! If you don't like the agenda the board supports, speak up and/or don't support.

On the other hand, if you do appreciate what the board does for the purpose(s) you give your money to, LET THEM KNOW!

58. Sam Harris at AAI 07

Comment #83831 by LeeLeeOne on October 31, 2007 at 12:31 pm

While we (meaning those of same thought) would love the idea of living life without a "label", this is not reality. Every event has a label - it is rare that it becomes a norm in society so as not to need a label. We are not a fortunate group, meaning we - as nonbelievers, humanists, atheists, anti-theists, whatever!, do not live in a day where no label of our stance is preconceived nor understood without explanation. We do not have this luxury.

Ergo, anti-theist, atheist, humanist, any label we must endure for the next generation or (unfortunately) the next beyond....

59. Shalom Auslander, Voicing a Comic 'Lament'

Comment #79273 by LeeLeeOne on October 16, 2007 at 4:35 pm

For those persons wishing to find absolution in their personal decision to make a decision for their newborn or infant males - ultimately there is no "absolution."

All of us make a choice - to do or not to do, and based on religion - there may have been a reason for circumcision in pre-enlightenment times - because a few of the "elders" may have found urination or ejaculation difficult, nearly impossible, actually impossible, or even painful - thus they incorporated circumcision into their religious doctrine.

This choice is based on ignorance of humans at this level of understanding of anatomy, physiology, and prevention.

As a modern-day parent, we may or may not choose to have this procedure done regarding our newborn sons, also out of ignorance, which includes any religious basis.

But should modern-day mutilation practices be based upon ancient text, rites, rituals?

I think not.

This interview does not condone the practice of male circumcision, it merely demonstrates the vulnerability of parents who have a critically ill child - their previous education or indoctrination weighing heavily on their minds as they make a permanent decision, perhaps to give their child the edge to live if they follow what they've been brainwashed with, that this procedure will ensure their son's place, if not in life, but at least in death.

Is there any parent on this planet who, when reaching that horrific line - death - would not choose to do something, even if it is insane - to save the life or the "soul" of their child, out of desperation? How many of us can relate to the death/near death of a child?

I have no use for genital mutilation - I find the practice cruel and inhumane. But education is the key to stopping this horrific practice, and this means education of the MEDICAL FIELD as well as those who consider themselves a believer in a supernatural power. This relates to both male AND female practices of genital mutilation.

Keeping quiet - no. Understanding - yes. Educating - now that's prevention!

60. AAI Convention webcam

Comment #74579 by LeeLeeOne on September 29, 2007 at 3:33 pm

I like the idea of a response to a crisis! However, to go along with the ol' "something is better than nothing" ideal, even where religion, creationism, ID, censorship, and the like are challenges, RRS just does not quite 'make the grade.' The levels of conversation, "rational thought", their use of the available English vocabulary (as their info/websites are in English), added to the alleged level of education and experience the RRS has, quite frankly leaves myself, and obviously quite a few others, less than full of praise and the "atta boy" response.

If it is the "youth of today" they are trying to reach, then I say they are dumbing down the youth, speaking in intellectually demeaning tones. Is this how they thing all youth all over the world think today? If it is, that is pathetic. If that truly is the case - that our youth cannot understand words and phrases that are nothing more than knee-jerk reactions without any true thought behind the response, then it is a sad time for humanity.

Why would any person enjoy being spoken to in this way? Why would any youth react with any personal fervor if they were spoken down to in this manner?

The RRS needs to give more respect and intellectual credit to the abilities of our young members of society as well as give more of the same to us "older folk."

Is this type of 'something' really better?

Is there anything that anyone who believes in education, free speech, evolution, atheism, etc., can do as either an individual or as a community to ensure the intellectual level of youth (as well as adults) is not so insulted?

Could RRS do a better job? Yes, I think so.

Also, as RRS has solicited funds for their endeavors, I think that this alone calls upon the "RRS Squad" to have a bit more forethought into their own personal self-education which could enhance their presentation, communication, and relationship skills.

While our presentation of anti-theism needs a continuous push into the mainstream media and public, belittling the very persons whom we seek to educate to speak up is, at the very least, counterproductive.

61. Critical Analysis of Case for a Creator

Comment #72557 by LeeLeeOne on September 21, 2007 at 4:21 pm

This "video" representation for or against any argument has probably been the WORST! ever!

This is pathetic, it is choppy, fully of euphemisms and colloquialisms that have NOTHING to do with science!

I could not withstand completing the first video offered much less the second.

This type of "discussion", which obviously was based on reactionary juvenile emotionalism versus hard-hitting scientific information, is useless.

62. In Depth: Christopher Hitchens

Comment #72293 by LeeLeeOne on September 20, 2007 at 4:53 pm

This has given me a new respect for the opinions, the thoughts, the reasoning behind CH's ideals. Once again, I fully respect RD and am grateful!, and for and CH for allowing/giving these discussions.

They are not the 'product of... they are the result of...'!

Marxism is a METHOD of thinking....

CH's personal challenge for "debate"! going against the traditional "book trails."

I respect CH and RD for allowing this!

I could go on for "many points" regarding positives. But I want everyone, if you want to LEARN about CH, and then perhaps RD.

Frankly, the only negative I have is my personal inability to find an effective way to pause, to re-listen to all points.

CH - and therefore RD brings these many points, these many ideas to the forefront.

I am in favor of reproductive choice, and agree that this should be the LAST option, but should still be kept as an option, CH and RD have never represented themselves as being ANTI-choice or PRO-life. It seems to me that both are pro-choice.

This discussion also brings to light that financial independence (which is the ultimate survival mechanism - if you can't sell, you can't buy, if you can't buy you can't sell) for any country, for any society currently. A lot of societies are based upon GREED, self-preservation, versus communal or societal preservation.

So many points, so "little" time!

63. Taking exception to Jake

Comment #71854 by LeeLeeOne on September 19, 2007 at 7:16 pm

Thank you, PZ.... and thank you RD!

64. Childhood Origins of Adult Resistance to Science

Comment #69983 by LeeLeeOne on September 13, 2007 at 1:38 pm

Question, why does rely on anything that is considered "easier" or "better" when it comes to education.

I have been one who has purposefully "experienced the life of hard knocks" but just because I choose this particular learning curve, does it mean everyone should? or must?

Some people may learn with the "softer" approach, observe those before (without question as to circumstances) and take to heart - accept.

There is no ONE right way to learn.

Everyone learns at their own speed, their own pace, their own memory, their own resilience, their own environment, their own research.

I beg anyone to discontinue putting everyone "in the same basket."

Are we not all individuals? Pattern seeking aside, we still have our own brains; not brains with prerecorded intelligence or ideas embedded at birth.

The human mind is beautifully complex, why reduce it to a few "yes" or "no" opinions?

65. Mind Over Manual

Comment #69981 by LeeLeeOne on September 13, 2007 at 1:27 pm

oxytocin - love the name... too bad more do not understand the name and the symbol.

as a phd student (for my second) excuse abbrv and shorts... time is expensive!

psych. is a baby when it comes to science, and this is where neuroscience has failed miserably. we understand the mechanisms of dna and are discovering more and more literally minute by minute.

science has failed perhaps one of the most important aspects of all of live - of HUMAN evolution - the brain.

science has not even tried to play "catch-up" though. we desperately need scientists, engineers, chemists, any researchers. we desperately need funding for this research. yet without immediate, clearly visible (i.e. tumor shrinkage or disappearance as in cancer therapy), no funding is found.

no one realizes the long-term social and financial benefits to understanding the human mind. (i.e., schizophrenia - a potential life-time of dependence on resources that include public assistance for therapy, supervision, housing, daily living, education, medication, monitoring).

if science could really pinpoint the cause, a treatment plan may be as simple as a single gene therapy treatment, a single (i stress single because the majority of schizophrenics are on multiple drug therapies which fail more often than not) yearly/monthly/weekly/ or even a single daily medication without all of the horrible side effects.

science - where are you? where is the financing? where are the drug companies, the universities, the alumni, etc.?

66. Christopher Hitchens and Bill Donohue on Mother Teresa

Comment #66316 by LeeLeeOne on August 29, 2007 at 5:12 pm

The education of the many (mass public availability for information) outweighs the need for education of the few (i.e., behind closed doors disclosures).

This relates to all political, environmental, social, economical, etc., entities. Information and education of ALL must take priority, even at the expense of a "precious memory of the beholden" (as I was once verbally reminded of).

Truth teaches. Lies deceive.

To hold honesty and I mean rock-bottom, deep-down honesty, up to the test of "rose-colored glasses", what ultimately teaches more? Honesty to lies - which is better for humanity?!

Truth teaches, even hard-to-swallow, teaches truth.

Lies, even white-innocent-lies, teaches lies.

Ultimately, in the betterment for humanity, for the betterment of everything, which is best?, and I do not speak of short-term gains, I'm talking about the 'long haul', perhaps even billions of years!

67. Teresa, Bright and Dark

Comment #66309 by LeeLeeOne on August 29, 2007 at 4:53 pm

Please, for the love of reasoned, educated, and insightful thoughts that are regularly (albeit not consistently) posted on this site, do not "pick an agenda", i.e., abortion. Yes, Hitchens may or may not agree that abortion is an "abomination." Yes, Hitchens may or many not agree with "pro-choice" or "pro-life" stance.

What Hitchens is TEACHING all of us is to think FOR OURSELVES in this entire article! Can anyone else see this?!

BTW: Pro-choice does NOT mean pro-abortion! There is a HUGE difference! Does ANYONE understand?!

68. PZ Myers sued for a negative review in a blog post

Comment #65069 by LeeLeeOne on August 22, 2007 at 8:05 pm

Pivar is a litigious crackpot. Pivar is a litigious crackpot. Pivar is a litigious crackpot. Pivar is a litigious crackpot. Pivar is a litigious crackpot. Pivar is a litigious crackpot. Pivar is a litigious crackpot. Pivar is a litigious crackpot. Pivar is a litigious crackpot.

I suppose this does not "count."

So how many times can I get sued?

ONLY once?!!

dammit, dammit, dammit....

69. Bill Maher Making New Documentary Movie, 'Religulous'

Comment #64353 by LeeLeeOne on August 19, 2007 at 5:50 pm

Need more of this Bill Maher movie! This is just such a teaser! Love the proposed name "ridiculous" is perfect. Bill Maher needs to be more main stream to get to the masses. Perhaps this is the first step.

70. Democratic Candidates on a Personal God

Comment #64351 by LeeLeeOne on August 19, 2007 at 5:44 pm

Power of PRAYER! To do what?!

Prayer?! To whom?!

Prayer being used to influence their god, come on! Influence an all-powerful, omnipotent being?!

Prayer being used to "console, counsel, and/or comfort" oneself? Isn't that what a therapist does?!

Democratic candidates are as bad and as pathetic as Republican candidates when it comes to submission of themselves as intelligent men and women.

They cannot cope with reality so they have a one-sided communication in their imagination with an entity that does not exist?

I want a candidate who does not endorse the "santa clause" theory. I want a candidate with enough guts to say that "your thoughts are YOUR thougts, mine are mine." That would be the beginnings of a Republic, a democracy.

I am so sick and tired of this theocratic BS!

71. God Answers Prayers Of Paralyzed Little Boy: 'No' Says God

Comment #60805 by LeeLeeOne on August 2, 2007 at 9:41 pm

This entire situation is sick and is nothing less than abuse of a child by adults.

Sick Sick Sick Sick Sick blech blech blech

This child would have been in the hands of a state authority or federal authority if anything other than non-traditional religion (such as wicca or any similar beliefs).

Our own laws support blatant bigotry and have done so for centuries. What have YOU done about it? Call your elected official lately, hmmm?

This child is blatantly being emotionally abused, if not physically (is anyone supervising his home situation as well as rehab situation?)

WE, meaning ALL of us on this planet are ultimately responsible! If you do not use your voice or your words to SPEAK OUT, then you are ultimately complacent or willing. One voice may not correct any inhumanity alone, but one, added to anther, added to anther,....

THINK ABOUT IT! You have a voice, USE it!!!!

72. God-Fearing People: Why are we so scared of offending Muslims?

Comment #60180 by LeeLeeOne on August 1, 2007 at 8:41 am

WILL IT BLEND?! If only I had a blender large enough, but would it be too unethical to take copies of a koran, a bible, a torah, a god is not great, darwin's theory of evolution, steven hawkins' universe, a few metaphysical/wiccan/witcraft books, panda's thumb, a mystic tale of celtic lore, washington post, slate, wall street journal (you get the idea, anything "respected" and "not respected" - don't care who does the respecting or disrespecting), and blend them one by one to see "Will it Blend?!"

73. Resisting peer pressure: new findings shed light on adolescent decision-making

Comment #59130 by LeeLeeOne on July 27, 2007 at 1:28 pm

If a person has an area of brain that is "doubtful" (susceptible) and if these areas are exposed to reinforcement with information, does this mean that other less reactive areas become dormant or die out? Are any of these areas reactive ever again in the life of their host?

In other words - those so-called "fence sitters" who happen to respond to delusional religious ideology, life-styles, paranormal psychology, etc., is there truly any way to reactivate the part of the brain that was "doubtful" in the first place?

74. Texas Leads U.S. in Teen Birth Rate

Comment #59126 by LeeLeeOne on July 27, 2007 at 1:16 pm

Why is it that all of my kids, biological (2) and adopted kids have had no "surprise" children or "suspected" children? Financial aspect does not hold up because when raising these kids, we were dirt poor. Neighborhood environment and peer pressure does not hold up because we were in a rougher part of town with less than desirable neighborhood contacts. I say EDUCATION is the key. I stressed education and "enforced literacy" in reading, writing, science, and mathematics.

Ultimately don't know why, but perhaps it was because I was frankly honest in a no-nonsense non-condescending manner with all. Kids are NOT stupid. A lot of adults forget that kids have the capacity to learn far beyond the reach of an average adult! I stressed prevention of pregnancy and NOT abstinence. Hey, 0-6 ain't bad odds!

75. Richard Dawkins on Hardtalk

Comment #58641 by LeeLeeOne on July 25, 2007 at 2:37 pm

Is anyone missing the basis for the "not labeling children argument?"

Infant is born, infant knows nothing, automatically labeled (baptized, named, conferred, etc.) as an extension of a religion by birth.

Infant is born, infant knows nothing, does anyone anywhere label this infant as "polite" or "bratty" based on its birth to polite or bratty parents?

Infant is born, labeled as a polytheist or monotheist, depending on the birth religion, child grows up in a polytheist or monotheist household, and naturally tends to be polytheistic or monotheistic because that is what it is taught.

Infant is born, labeled as polite or bratty, and as a child, becomes polite or bratty dependent upon what the parents' disposition is and the environment the child is raised in.

Why would anyone label an infant anything? Why would anyone label a child, who has not yet developed a sense of self, as being anything?

This is where labeling of any infant or child wrong! Labeling is utterly absurd and it is time to put the idea of labeling to the nether world that no longer exists.

76. Ditching God: Emboldened Atheists Are Finding Purpose In Coming Out Of The Closet

Comment #57988 by LeeLeeOne on July 22, 2007 at 7:08 pm

There were and are always "Newman Centers" on or very nearby many college campuses. These are religious based (blech) but still have the same "clique" attitude mentioned by Locri. Any organization, has its base (hence, organization). Sometimes it is very difficult to break into the mindset but, with a lot of searching and repeated attendance, I finally found a local student atheist (off campus) organization I felt comfortable with. It takes time, and a lot of work on your part. As an atheist, I can only assume you do not expect a hand-out, a free-ride, or the "easy way in." Do some volunteer work with this group; no flags, no bells, no whistles, no expected recognition. Being honest and endearing yourself with any qualities or skills you may possess really does make a difference!

77. Response to the God Delusion

Comment #57964 by LeeLeeOne on July 22, 2007 at 5:03 pm

Had to stop listening to it... literally had to STOP. When the speaker mentioned the "watch in a box" and "designer for this watch."

Come on, this is pathetic. I could take a crushed sea shell, put it in a box, shake it around and come up with the same results! An "alleged designer's creation" - the sea shell, and in the box, mixed around as the watch is, come up with the same results!

Is this all they can come up with to refute "supernatural design, power, etc.)?

Pathetic.

78. Can the rest of us have our planet back?

Comment #57749 by LeeLeeOne on July 20, 2007 at 9:56 pm

Thank you Beth - left a positive review. Hope this counteracts any negative "attacks."

I have given many family/friends information regarding this program and regarding Prof. Dawkins' web site.

An excellent broadcast. Brought me to tears with laughter (needed that after a rough week)!

79. The New New Atheism

Comment #56856 by LeeLeeOne on July 17, 2007 at 1:58 pm

Yep, another author who is "blinded by the light" of belief in a higher power and the institutions that go along with this farce (ooh, really bad song here), taken to the press. Where are the arguments FOR such a belief? This author is no scholar, as a scholar would only need to actually comprehend the texts and the authors he criticizes. D'oh (homer simpson's word)

80. Insurance for Sex Abuse: A policy tailor-made for the Catholic church

Comment #56855 by LeeLeeOne on July 17, 2007 at 1:53 pm

Sexual abuse by any religion has been taking place since the dawn of religion of ANY form. Why in the blazes would any insurance company (who are nothing more than blood sucking parasites, the lot of them!), even think to insure something so volatile? If I were a stock-holder in any insurance "business", I'd fire the board of directors along with the president of the board! When rumors of sexual abuse came about in the tiny farming village where I grew up, the archbishop and the diosesean officers moved the perpetrator to a new parish! This was back in the mid 1950s! Are these the pangs of the end of an era? Are we caught in the early stages of religious extinction?

For my great-(possibly great-great-great) relatives, hopefully so. Sooner would be better though.

81. Kenya: The Death of Religion And Rise of Atheism in the West

Comment #56853 by LeeLeeOne on July 17, 2007 at 1:43 pm

Why oh why does the author of this article sound educated and then turns the art of journalism into blathering idiocy?

82. Christopher Hitchens and Al Sharpton

Comment #53507 by LeeLeeOne on July 1, 2007 at 7:20 pm

To see yet another secular humanist, what happened to this woman demonstrated in this video?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2wPglHZQf-0

why is this no where else to be found?

This woman has sanity in an insane world.

83. Christopher Hitchens and Al Sharpton

Comment #53474 by LeeLeeOne on July 1, 2007 at 3:29 pm

So back to this "debate".... yuck. As an anti-theist, can we please have someone actually debate on an intellectual level rather than throwing random barbs? Information AND education, (and NOT linguistically enhanced but still "school yard BS") is what is needed. Pointing fingers, interruptions, name-calling on ALL sides defeats the purpose of any truly educated and enlightening discussion. There was no moderator. This entire sequence of alleged debate was not a debate at all. It was nothing more than "world wrestling federation" (blech, puke, phooey) style of "hype." Where's the nitty gritty? Where's the information from BOTH sides any one could actually gain? This "great debate" is turning into a cheap, grandstanding hype, to do what?, excite the masses?

blech blech blech blah blah blurg blah blah blurb kick, pinch, spit, blah, blurb

84. Christopher Hitchens and Al Sharpton

Comment #53471 by LeeLeeOne on July 1, 2007 at 3:18 pm

VJocys:

Thank you!

Any more insight, any more info, any more links would be greatly appreciated!

85. Nato accuses Taliban of using children in suicide missions

Comment #53448 by LeeLeeOne on July 1, 2007 at 1:48 pm

As nauseating as this is, as disturbing as this is, I could not, the first 3 times through, finish the article. First, I know the technique of utilizing the "innocents" to promote one's agenda has been around for thousands of years. This is a modern day version of manipulation. Secondly, it hits my gut knowing that I have children who could have been used with or without my approval to forward the set agenda. Thirdly, and perhaps the most disturbing, humans are the most inhumane to anything and everything, past - present - future. How humans manipulate history, how humans manipulate information, how humans have absolutely no concern how anything they do would affect the generations to come. The idea of using children to forward an idea or an agenda has been around for thousands of years - sacrifices to some god somewhere, pawns in legal arguments, disposable bodies in slavery, defense in wars, to "tug at the heart" in allegedly moral issues, to demoralize populations, to skirt laws, etc. Children, our very own most precious human asset are probably one of the least respected when it comes down to respect for all life. And if anyone wishes to automatically assume that I am "pro-life" when it comes to nonviable fetuses of any species.... nope. I am pro-choice.

These are children, viable humans. Such disrespect for our very own, to me, is close to the lowest of the low.

86. Scientists Transplant Genome of Bacteria

Comment #53300 by LeeLeeOne on June 30, 2007 at 4:21 pm

Perhaps someday the bastards of oil and anything else a modern human relies upon would no longer have a monopoly.

Dare we hope for a cure for Alzheimer's?, an end to the need for immunizations? the reprogramming of a schizophrenic mind to organize for survival without damaging pharmacology? a simplified way to purify water?

The possibilities are potentially limitless.

But, alas, I will not be of this generation. Bush has killed, eliminated, and burned beyond recognition so many human potential discoveries, so many potential realities (anyone remember the 'true beginnings of the self-charging electric car'?).

Support for any ideas to make life better for ALL (instead of a few privileged), is essential. This is why Prof. Dawkins is more profound than anyone living today could possibly imagine. Support education, as this is our only hope.

87. Scientist Build a 'Brain' From Rat Cells

Comment #53123 by LeeLeeOne on June 29, 2007 at 2:01 pm

If anyone would be old enough to recall a time when we advanced from manual typewriters (clack clack clack) to "selectric", to card readers, to word processors, to computers....... I hate to say this, but as far as I am concerned, ANYTHING in this field of study has me excited and sitting in sincere anticipation of the next completed step.

What I have concluded from this article and the many typical "read one, leads to another, leads to another, etc.", is that this is in its infancy.

How exciting that I may actually see some real progress to artificial intelligence in my own lifetime!

88. In Defense of Witchcraft

Comment #52274 by LeeLeeOne on June 26, 2007 at 3:50 pm

Still lovin' that Sam Harris! Laughed myself silly with this one just because it's very similar to what I tried with a few family members a while back. They didn't get it either! But hey, it was good for a laugh back then too, to see their faces contort and spit and sputter their blah blah blah.

89. Egypt mufti says female circumcision forbidden

Comment #52266 by LeeLeeOne on June 26, 2007 at 3:35 pm

The argument should not be getting rid of circumcision because it is "pointless." Both male and female genital mutilation has a point - that's the problem! The point for non-medically necessary circumcision for males is based on an ancient ritual. The point for non-medically necessary circumcision for females is based on ancient patriarchal control. Both of these are borne out of medieval superstitions and ignorance. Both are disgusting. Both are wrong.

90. Hitchens vs. Hitchens

Comment #51390 by LeeLeeOne on June 22, 2007 at 3:10 pm

Typical family squabbles... could hardly understand one for the other because they try to out-shout each other.

That poor moderator. I know what it's like, having grown up as the youngest in a huge (13 children) family. I was never a successful moderator in any family "discussions" either. (neither were my parents - mum would come to her wits end and say, no blood on the carpet, out, out, out!)

Ahhh families, siblings, parents.... aren't they just precious?!

However, I have learned showing by example that my anti-theism is of no physical threat to anyone in my family, they've listened to me now and again!

91. Doctors' beliefs can hinder patient care

Comment #51382 by LeeLeeOne on June 22, 2007 at 2:28 pm

Corylus, comment #13

You have it right.

Not most, but there are a number of physicians (MD, PhD, DO included) which includes researchers forget any form of humanity.

Physicians, heal thy selves.

Do NO harm! Which means DO NO HARM to the person sitting in front of you, not sitting in the next room, down the block, across the country, or any possibly imagined supernatural world.

92. An Inquisition in science's name

Comment #51132 by LeeLeeOne on June 21, 2007 at 3:43 pm

To _J_:O"n the other hand, Hitchens is a little bit in danger of alienating a lot of people who watch him just through the way he handles himself in debates - he looked sullen, and he sniped and interrupted frequently."

mmmmmmm, me thinks a bit more "shaking" up is justified.

OUR question (meaning yours, mine, and every other anti-theis) is how will we respond? With support or baking down in fear of not placating the alleged "religious" majority.

Where's OUR voices?

Scream loudly and often! Show what anti-theism and what science have to offer!

Thanks to hitchens, dawkins, harris, darwin, hawkins, etc., (and tongue in cheek to those prominent theists who get our arses a movin')!

Clarity, honesty, no fluff... our teensy, tiny microscopic universe NEEDS MORE anti-theists, not those who attempt to gloss over or feebly attempt to appeal to the masses.

93. Debate between Sam Harris and Chris Hedges

Comment #50537 by LeeLeeOne on June 18, 2007 at 4:55 pm

My impressions to the first 2 video portions of the debate:

Mr. Harris opened, without a doubt, with clarity and rationality for part 1 of this debate. Mr. Hedges portion, part 2, also is (quite surprisingly) extremely good.

However, with Mr. Hedges, if this is what truly any of our modern day religions actually practiced, I have no doubt that the anger and discourse between anti-theists and fundamentalists would dissolve into nothing more than an educated discussion. (What Mr. Hedges wishes for in his monotheistic ideals is not what is reality in our current situation.)

However, with this said, religion prescribes doctrines, dogmas, that are basically interpretations of an ancient idea, which are for the most part, irrelevant to our current, modern day society. As these dogmas are not evolutionary, (the further society progresses) from ancient civilizations, the less useful they become (and with much relief I might add, most of these dogmas are anti-humanistic, blech!).

Perhaps if religion simply threw away the bible, the quaran, the tablets, etc., never referring to them as justification, they could instead focus on more of their supernatural deity that is humanistic.

Ahhhh, an almost perfect marriage theism/atheism.... (pop goes the delusion!)

94. A battler beyond belief: Review of 'God is Not Great'

Comment #50330 by LeeLeeOne on June 16, 2007 at 9:08 pm

Dr. Benway (#10), regarding your "interpretation" of the term SECULAR, ... "Secularism is NOT simply the legal separation of church and state.

A simple internet search of dictionary definitions brings the following: "worldly versus spiritual" as I understand that arildno was attempting to point out.

Free-thought from myself: ANYTHING can become a "faith" or "dogma", and even the "worldly" (the secular) can become "faith/dogma" if you believe that strongly in it and fight for it to your own peril or even enslavement of others to your "faith/dogma" through any form of manipulation imaginable.

95. Interview with Christopher Hitchens

Comment #50328 by LeeLeeOne on June 16, 2007 at 8:45 pm

Aside from it being difficult to hear (they must have been using stationary microphones and not lapel microphones), and having to to back up and do volume adjustments to hear what was said, my gut instincts from this particular interview makes me feel that Mr. Hitchens seemed to be speaking from "both sides of his mouth."

Regardless, could someone please give me their "feelings", "interpretations", "ideas", on their gut instincts regarding this interview. Also, the phrase Mr. Hitchens uses, "... but I'm perfectly happy with their being irreconcilable contradictions..." I would be most appreciative of any opinions and/or interpretations.

96. Can we really learn to love people who aren't like us?

Comment #49154 by LeeLeeOne on June 10, 2007 at 5:00 pm

darwin2

God always "was, is and always will be." (you left out the best part: ...without end. RAmen)

Darwin2, this is from the xtian apostle's creed! You read it in a "big book", probably had to memorize it and repeat it thousands of times.

Darwin2, it's just so sad... to never to able to actually think for yourself.

The self-made ignorant, self-made delusional, and the self-made gullible, "was, is, and always will be."

d'oh 1 too, you are a very silly self-made ignorant, delusional, and gullible human.

97. Christopher Hitchens on Religion

Comment #48420 by LeeLeeOne on June 7, 2007 at 9:36 pm

Okee, dokee, this particular interview/show is one from many weeks ago, already posted on this site... (should I be embarrassed?) did the checking as the posers within the few posts noted this segment was a repeat.

Problem 1: perhaps I missed the first showing, many other people could have missed it...

Problem 2: perhaps I was not paying enough attention, and listening to this again, I admired it even more ... (it's message finally sunk in)

Problem 3: perhaps the moderators of this website thought this interview was too great to miss, or needed more responses or there is a lull in the news and we need a fill-in to keep the freethinkers thinking.

Problem 4: No problem... who cares if it's a repeat. We all need a dose of reality or a pep talk (however you look at it)!

Regardless, once again, kudos to everyone. Posters, moderators, owners, commentators, contributors, etc., are all educators. Education is NEVER lost... it's what we choose to do with it!

98. Christopher Hitchens on Religion

Comment #48394 by LeeLeeOne on June 7, 2007 at 5:35 pm

The gentleman moderating this discussion and this interview deserves many, many kudos! Christopher Hitches may hit hard in the gut, but this is where religion needs to be hit because religion continuously tries to hit below the belt (if you get my meaning).... (snicker)

99. Atheism shall make you free

Comment #46899 by LeeLeeOne on June 2, 2007 at 5:45 am

"The studies - of which there are now many - indicate that a tendency to religiosity is genetically determined; if one twin is very religious the other nearly always is too, no matter how they were brought up."

In my family, statistically, we fall through the cracks, having been raised from birth through adulthood in the same home with the same parents. Me: an anti-theist, my twin: a devout xtian.

I always find it quite interesting that people use "studies/statistics" in their discussions; studies which can be and are manipulated either consciously or unconsciously by the interpreter. "Statistics show…" "Studies show…" Understanding that no study is 100% accurate because of the thousands of variables, but the biases of the statisticians themselves never seem to be taken into account (or are they? I am not a statistician, so I don't know). Do studies/statistics really prove/disprove their position?

Out of curiosity, does anyone know if there is a computer program that can morph itself (i.e., a self-educating program) to be rid of human biases in order to interpret the bottom line in any study?

100. What I Think About Evolution

Comment #46526 by LeeLeeOne on May 31, 2007 at 2:43 pm

hmmm....

"Sam Brownback is a Republican senator from Kansas."

Kansas.... hmmmm ....

Can you say "Intelligent Design?" A JP degree does not automatically give the recipient common sense.

Are his the ancestors from the German Reformed Church of Pennsylvania?

Can you say fundamentalism?