51. Mr. Deity

Comment #18368 by melisande on January 20, 2007 at 5:47 am

more. More!!

I command thee!

...hmm.
I COMMAND THEE!

.........

I guess I better work on that.

52. Discussion of The God Delusion

Comment #18307 by melisande on January 19, 2007 at 1:44 pm

Thanks.

I had no idea it had reached such lengths until I tried to post it....
Obviously I needed to rage for a while. I feel better now.

I just imagine the couple that invited her to their wedding being totally mortified as she ripped into them on TV......And I'm still confused as to her definition of her kind of atheist....either you do believe in a deity or you don't. If there actually is a god, I think we'd all have some choice words for him.

Though he'd respond "I'm sorry I can't hear you over the roar of the eternal fires roasting your flesh!"

53. Discussion of The God Delusion

Comment #18229 by melisande on January 19, 2007 at 4:36 am

Ant that's the truth ,plthlzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

54. Discussion of The God Delusion

Comment #18228 by melisande on January 19, 2007 at 4:35 am

Is someone shrinking back because this book has identified their neutral agnostic position as weak and pointless? Does it sting? Why? What are you protecting? Does that idea deserve that kind of protection or is it really detrimental in the long run?
That type of self reflection is the point, I think.

The only thing that is detrimental about that is that people come away from the book with the perceived transgressions in language and opinion in "PClandia" as opposed to the actual arguments.
Though if the argument is "Stop being ignorant" I can see why people might take that the wrong way. I think they take the word "ignorant" with as much negative connotations as "atheist".
Unfortunately I'm only going from memory right now,but I think Dawkins described his school class, himself included, as ignorant then of whatever the point of the story was. I don't think it's the best word because of its connotations.
In any case, those offended people are then self identifying as ignorant or stupid? Or they might say "Well you shouldn't call _other_ people "stupid". That's uncouth. I mean, _I'm_ not stupid, I'm not like _them_. But those _other_ people who are stupid... You shouldn't call them that."

Are there any discussions where "players" have actually "leveled"? And we can move on a bit? I like to hear or watch segments of media, but it would be nice if once in a while someone had a frikken CLUE.
[/rant]

55. Discussion of The God Delusion

Comment #18227 by melisande on January 19, 2007 at 4:35 am

The host already had an agenda, and certainly took the book personally. I love when people are acting superior when describing a person they disdain as acting superior.


And I think the biggest problem with all of this is that no one thinks about it memetically. The Wedding Hater had some argument about religion being best for the gene, the social group and tribe protecting each other from other groups with different religions....something like that....?
But many religions have also had human sacrifice. HELLO? Christianity is based on a human sacrifice. This guy lets himself be killed for some amorphous "forgiving of everyone's sins"...Yes, there are examples of "taking one for the team" in order for group survival. But usually they're based in reality and danger at that moment. There wasn't a tiger about to eat the children, or something. (Except for maybe the Roman Circuses...but he certainly didn't help them...) It was an ideological sacrifice. If it even happened.
And these days we have people blowing themselves (and the unlucky bystanders) up all the time in the name of their religion.
It's not really about gene survival, it's about meme survival.

They said some bit about Dawkins altruistic genes gone wrong because he excoriated the buffer we've developed around those " sacred beliefs". Wouldn't it be a helpfule thing to show people how move beyond them, even if it's not couched in the most coddling and supportively constructive verbiage?

So, Is Dawkins just as intolerant as christian fundamentalists or whatever?
Sometimes I think that the people who are really offended by Dawkins' tone are reacting that way because they "resemble those remarks" as the joke goes. But more so (see the very calm christian as opposed to the vehemently outspoken "agnostics") their "politically correct" memes ring the alarum that says that no one is supposed to "go there."
That's the point. Why can't we go there? Is it really a valid reason?

56. Discussion of The God Delusion

Comment #18226 by melisande on January 19, 2007 at 4:34 am

[rant]

Ok. I like to torture myself I guess because I decided to watch this again, just to....make sure.....?
I usually refrain from insulting people and being viciously derisive of them, especially here because I don't want visitors to the site to think that we just angrily defend Dawkins out of hand....but...I just can't help myself this time....


I love how the host wrinkles her nose when she describes the book as "passionate".

The Flowergirl, sitting on the fence. The fence is the "Switzerland" of this debate. You don't really have to have any opinion up there, you don't need to get involved intellectually at all. I know, I've been there. And yet she's defensive because someone's telling her to take a stand . Yes, he's calling you out! Sorry if that's ruining your day. Someone says your stance is weak and pathetic, so you pout? Touché, I guess... Just stay up there smell your pretty daisies, then. Shake your legs out once in a while because they do go numb. And we'll be bringing popcorn by for this evening's showing of our double feature "an inconvenient truth" and "the corporation".

The Messy Atheist (Greer? I didn't catch their names). She at least tacitly agrees with the claim that the book is too venomous for a lot of people... then she goes on a spittle spewing, vitriolic tirade about this wedding to which I am supposing she was invited and then calls Dawkins "shrill"? Hello, Kettle, this is Pot. You're black.
I feel bad for whoever invited her to their wedding. Guess who's getting crossed off of guest lists right now.

I'm not a big fan of religious weddings. I don't know exactly where they live but it's not some kind of pipe dream to have a non god oriented wedding! I've been to quite a few! These people talk like _no one's_ ever_ accomplished such a thing before, and how is it ever to be possible? Serious incredulity at the prospect, like someone's declared they're building a ladder to the moon.

The Christian Guy seemed the most even keeled in his reaction but maybe that's because he was all smugly nestled up in his religious blanket by warm glow of the holy spirit (it is the yule log, right?) when he read it. If he did. The reveal, there, is that he met Richard and he was surprisingly "very respectful". The perception is that Dawkins is absolutely vitriolic constantly against religion and "people of faith". But even after he shredded Roughgarden's presentation at the Beyond Belief conference they greeted each other amicably and shook hands before diving back into the debate. It's a different kind of ....interface...I guess, but I think it's revealing to the levels of debate within the subject.

The Milquetoast. Yes science has caused harm, but at the behest of whom? And, as others have noted I can't believe he brought up art as an argument. Either he didn't read the book, or he just doesn't understand the argument. No one is saying that we really ought to go _ back_ in time and wipe religion off history. It served its purpose, but now it's out of date. Time to move on!

That no one refuted his argument made me really wonder if any of them had read it. Not only that, if they had read _any_ of his work. The ineffable? The grandeur? He's _already covered that_. Do some research, bizznatches.

57. Discussion of The God Delusion

Comment #18004 by melisande on January 17, 2007 at 10:23 pm

man,
I just wrote this extensive rant about this segment and these people and then previewed, fixed it up and submitted it....but it isn't here.
.It seems to have gotten lost in the tubes.

Well, I just wasted a _lot_ of time....

58. Evangelical Scientists Refute Gravity With New 'Intelligent Falling' Theory

Comment #18000 by melisande on January 17, 2007 at 10:12 pm

One of my favorite onion articles of all time. Of course it goes with
http://www.theonion.com/content/node/55807
"Kansas Outlaws Practice of Evolution"

59. Lil' Markie live, part 2

Comment #17598 by melisande on January 15, 2007 at 4:28 am

::BOOM::
What was that sound?

Oh...that was just the sound of my head..._exploding_.

60. Creationism special

Comment #17575 by melisande on January 14, 2007 at 10:46 pm

Anyone with an up to date computer could spit out hundreds of DVDs.
The initial making of the program might be spendy, but DVDs are practically nothing. They're lightweight and small too so sending them wouldn't be a problem.
That they are spending so much _time_ on it is baffling. Well not baffling but ...frustrating. Sad.

61. Creationism special

Comment #17543 by melisande on January 14, 2007 at 4:26 pm

Dover is not all that "rural"... I just recently got into a debate about dawkins with a British friend of mine who was talking about the social aspects of the church in terms of the disenfranchised in the midwest of America and I had to reply that I've lived there and it's not all that disenfranchised. There's a lot of people, and a lot of fervently religious people that have big cars and big tvs and all the trappings of the American Lifestyle and support American Family Values.

62. Richard Dawkins' Report Card

Comment #17105 by melisande on January 10, 2007 at 10:35 pm

No wonder RD was so into computers when they were first becoming popular. He says they're great for conducting experiments like the games in Nice Guys Finish First, but now I think the real reason -less ink- has surfaced....
;^)

63. Secret Life of Brian

Comment #16669 by melisande on January 8, 2007 at 1:53 am

That was great!
One of my favorite quotes and something that I remember as a sort of "epiphany" when I finally _saw_ christ on the cross for what it was and was suddenly sick to my stomach (recognizing that I had seen different depictions of it all my life and had been inured to the reality it represented):

"...any religion that makes a form of torture an icon that they worship seems to be a pretty sick sort of religion..."

Thanks so much for posting this! I never would have known or thought to look for it.

Now I want to buy the film to watch again...

64. The Trouble with Atheism

Comment #16134 by melisande on January 4, 2007 at 8:18 pm

I haven't read through all the posts yet, and I only just started to watch the first half...
But I'd like to remark on the shot by shot similarity between this programme and "The Root of All Evil?"
I just watched the latter again today and it's freakish how this one is put together in exactly the same way. Is that just the way things are made? Are they made by the same channel or producers?
Use the same format and say different things?

He's walking, there are snippets of conversation, then the overlying motivating music (although I do think the music they used in Root of All Evil was much more moving...) then he's on a bus, and then he overlays the film footage with questions....
And then they have the gall to put up a bit of Dawkins TV special, the very one that they are copying, moment to moment.

Tell me, is this just a "style" of inquisitive documentary that is being released nowadays? Are there tons of different subjects broached in this way? The narrator walking through crowds with an overvoice of himself in conjecture about whatever he/she has decided to dissect?

I've never seen anything like "The Root Of All Evil?" before and it's partly why I it blew me away as much as it did.
This seems like a hackneyed rebuttal fashioned as a remake....

65. Executing Saddam Hussein was an Act of Vandalism

Comment #16064 by melisande on January 4, 2007 at 11:37 am

I just need to get this off my chest and figured here was the best place:

I was at a holiday party with my mom and her friends when the news came in that he had been executed. Everyone got very excited and one man professed an eagerness to see him "swinging". I thought of the horsethieves of the old west or the guillotine in France...I even thought of that poor man in Afghanistan who was drawn and quartered for teaching girls math.

I argued that no matter who it is it's not entertainment to watch someone get killed. They responded with asking if it was Hitler would I feel different. And I don't think I would. Even those who did such a heinous deed to the math teacher. Seeing them die would give me no sense of satisfaction, I believe.
I didn't think of Dawkins interpretation at the time, and it wouldn't have mattered anyway. It was useless to make the point I was trying to make.

My mom agreed that it wasn't something she wanted to hear or see especially at a party but everyone was intent on seeing if there was footage on TV...

So we left.

The whole experience was utterly macabre and disturbing.

66. Richard Dawkins on The Late Late Show with Pat Kenny

Comment #12130 by melisande on December 10, 2006 at 5:43 pm

That was so frustrating to watch.

I need to cleanse my brain with some actual reasoned discourse....

67. Richard Dawkins: You Ask The Questions Special

Comment #11304 by Melisande on December 4, 2006 at 5:05 am

It just keeps us on our toes....
Would RD say his work on the paranormal(??)is going to "look cooler once the editors are done with it" ?
I think not.
Fool me once...as _they_ say...

Josh, do you ever sleep?

;^)

68. Richard Dawkins: You Ask The Questions Special

Comment #11293 by Melisande on December 4, 2006 at 4:37 am

ooh. Wow.
Apparently so are the folks in charge of the site.

<3

69. Richard Dawkins: You Ask The Questions Special

Comment #11291 by Melisande on December 4, 2006 at 4:34 am

10. Comment #11283 by Richard Dawkins

OK I think I'm getting better with this whole fake vs real RD thing that keeps happening.

70. Richard Dawkins: You Ask The Questions Special

Comment #11273 by Melisande on December 4, 2006 at 3:29 am

a) His answer about Lalla and her costume is "aw!" inducing.
b) I _was_ about to eat until I read about the drawn and quartered algebra teacher. There goes the idea that that type of thing was some sort of medaeval sickmindedness that humans have gotten past.
c).....should I....? No, I don't think anyone whose deemed themselves Pooper scooper deserves a rational retort to their inane comments.

71. O Come All Ye Unfaithful

Comment #11069 by Melisande on December 3, 2006 at 2:41 am

You know, I can understand that kind of impression that people might be getting...RD has shouldered his way into an arena that isn't his preferred area of study.
It must be fatiguing to field the same inane questions over and over.
At least the author of the article gets to see what's really going on by the end. I think Dawkins is doing what has to be done, in his view, and in the view of many others. I'd be grumpy about it too if I had to put down the work I was doing just to make sure that I and other scientists ( and future scientists) will be able to continue that work.
Although I've enjoyed the interviews etc with Dawkins about the new book, I especially enjoy the older discussions I've found on here, where the focus on whether or not there is a god isn't even part of it. That's when I can really feel the interest and excitement coming through everyone's voices, including Dawkins.
I hope at some point he's able to get back to that, because, as this article illustrates at the end, that's where the real fun is.

72. Humans show big DNA differences

Comment #10353 by Melisande on November 28, 2006 at 12:01 am

This is quite intriguing.
I want to find a more in depth article about this...but one that I can still understand.
::runs to google::

73. How Predictable: Richard Dawkins Supports Eugenics

Comment #9817 by Melisande on November 26, 2006 at 5:35 am

Comment #9562 by kansas city 47

Yay. Thanks for ditto-ing!
I've been feeling quite cowed by my gullibility in responding to that fake post so earnestly. So, yeah.

Welcome to the site.
:^)

74. Take a leaf out of their books/Books of the Year 2006/Guardian UK

Comment #9708 by Melisande on November 25, 2006 at 4:04 pm

Clearly this is part of that whole "End of the Year" type thing and not a review.
I think the editors of this roundup may have chopped this one down a bit since is seems to jump from a build-up to a point and then skips to the last sentence. That's where the confusion may be....
Of course the point is "Read The God Delusion".

75. How Predictable: Richard Dawkins Supports Eugenics

Comment #9687 by Melisande on November 25, 2006 at 2:48 pm

I wish there was a way to edit/delete our own comments here.

Guess I'll just have to post more carefully....
;^/

76. How Predictable: Richard Dawkins Supports Eugenics

Comment #9528 by Melisande on November 25, 2006 at 3:01 am

Sorry, I just thought you were being sarcastic.
I'm from NY, I don't know any better.

77. How Predictable: Richard Dawkins Supports Eugenics

Comment #9517 by Melisande on November 25, 2006 at 1:55 am

PS.
Not that I'm saying you should chain yourself to anything...
just to clarify before I get jumped on by someone....

78. How Predictable: Richard Dawkins Supports Eugenics

Comment #9515 by Melisande on November 25, 2006 at 1:46 am

11. Comment #9492 by Richard Dawkins

I remember discussing environmental action and people were arguing about tactics used by Earth Firsters vs Sierra Club vs Green Party vs people promoting recycling.... and I came to the conclusion that in order to really make a difference there would need to be all those levels, from people chaining themselves to trees, to the people teaching little kids to those opening biofuel stations.

So in a similar way I think this ...movement...? We need the frontliners that say "No Compromise" and the diplomatic mediators and the people working to balance things within the political sphere and the teachers who won't teach ID and the kids who raise the question in their bible class....

This guy is maybe better suited for the diplomacy area, but without people like you, who stand up and say "no compromise" we couldn't have people like him.

You might be taking the brunt force of antagonism, but for all the years that you've been trying to calmly and evocatively promote the greatness and wonder of science and our existence, you have every right to say "Enough already!"

Rock on, Professor.
;^)

79. Godless America: 'Letting Go of God' Excerpt

Comment #9221 by Melisande on November 24, 2006 at 6:42 am

Yes I see what you are saying.
I don't think that she was saying that nothing happens when you die, if in fact that's what you're implying...You may just be giving your thoughts on the matter, and not referencing something that Sweeney said.
For me it just hit home when she verbally brought the listener through her process of realizing that people, no matter how special they may be to you are gone. They're not waiting for you in heaven, and you'll never ever see them again.
After thinking about that for a little while it's easy for me to understand why we want to create a place in the afterlife where those "consciousnesses" (plural?) are still intact and we'll able to interact with again after we die.
I can _think_ about myself or another person as "starstuff", or part of the cycle on the planet and the solar system and the universe. That can work as a generalization. But that's not that person's sense of humor, or their laugh, or their observations, or the way they stand, or love etc... that's the thing that gets me, I guess.
And the best thing to do I suppose is make the most of the time you do have with those individuals...It's easy to lose sight of that in the mundanities of life.

80. God Delusion chosen as his Book of the Year

Comment #9190 by Melisande on November 24, 2006 at 5:09 am

I guess this was a positive review, but it was written in a backwards compliment kind of way.
I like the words "spluttering rage" next to a picture of Dawkins looking really quite docile and reflective..

81. Godless America: 'Letting Go of God' Excerpt

Comment #9189 by Melisande on November 24, 2006 at 5:06 am

That was great!

Near the end when she starts to reconsider her long held beliefs about the afterlife and comes back to her brother's death, I was moved to tears. I don't think about my brothers ....you know....dying...or my parents. I block that reality out pretty well, I realized, as I listened to her speak. hmm. I think I need to sit with that for a while, myself.
And then they faded in some of the poignant instrumental music from Donnie Darko! Way to break my heart, people!
Seriously, though.
I'm definitely going to look into her website and her work more. Thanks for this.

82. Beyond Belief 2006 Videos

Comment #8983 by Melisande on November 23, 2006 at 4:20 am

OK, Carolyn Porco's voice totally reminded me of Lorraine Bracco who plays Dr. Melfi on the Sopranos.

I love listening to Ramachandran roll his "r"s.

And I'm impressed the Roughgarden (what a fabulously evocative last name) even presented in front of that group.

83. Beyond Belief 2006 Videos

Comment #8852 by Melisande on November 22, 2006 at 1:02 pm

#8815 by TSN Guy
Yeah, I had the same problem---I got a big quicktime symbol but no apparent loading until I downloaded them directly to my desktop.
Then they work just fine!

84. Beyond Belief 2006 Videos

Comment #8721 by melisande on November 22, 2006 at 4:57 am

I hope I didn't come off as condescending, some people just don't know.
:^)
Unfortunately I think these would be a bit lengthy for a youtube upload, unless someone is of director status...

I guess bit torrent is out of the question too, work wise, eh?
I'm just up waaaaay too late, myself.

85. Beyond Belief 2006 Videos

Comment #8718 by Melisande on November 22, 2006 at 4:43 am

BTW I read that as Stuart Hameroff versus Ramachandran for a second.
I thought OMG
SCIENCE SMACKDOWN!

heh heh heh....

86. Beyond Belief 2006 Videos

Comment #8717 by Melisande on November 22, 2006 at 4:40 am

Wowzers.
I just watched #9 and I'm blown away. I would never be able to engage in this kind of debate. I could understand the perspective of all the speakers.
I felt a little bad for..Jim Woodward, I think it was....he seemed to feel (and maybe was) )way out of his league. But I wanted to give him a hug. I totally got where he was coming from. I understood the arguments presented by Harris in terms of that viewpoint, too...

wow. There were some heated moments!!!! I can't believe how riveted I was to it, as much as a the stereotypical housewife to the soap opera.

87. Beyond Belief 2006 Videos

Comment #8716 by melisande on November 22, 2006 at 4:33 am

8. Comment #8692 by Rob A
really? It should work....I don't think I have any special quicktime priveleges...
You should be able to -- on a windows machine -right click and choose save as, on mac control click and download linked file.

Unless you've already tried that...

88. Public school teacher tells class: 'You belong in hell'

Comment #8714 by Melisande on November 22, 2006 at 4:25 am

Go, kid, go!
So rad.

I liked hearing some of the other kids starting to question, though they were a bit fuzzy on the scientific process for a little while. It illustrates that feeling of inferiority in the face of a teacher, even though you know you don't agree but you can't quite piece together the argument or aren't even given a chance to rebuke his statements.

On a side note, all the chatter after the bell rings really hauls back the memories.

89. How Full Is Your Quiver?

Comment #8404 by Melisande on November 21, 2006 at 6:16 am

43. Comment #8395 by Moloth

HA HA HA HA HA!!!
FTW

90. How Full Is Your Quiver?

Comment #8317 by Melisande on November 20, 2006 at 9:14 pm

Just an aside:
Did anyone else get a flash of "Cold Comfort Farm" with all this Quiver talk?

"There will be NO BUTTER IN HELL!!!"

91. Future generations will hear far more about God and politics

Comment #7860 by Melisande on November 19, 2006 at 5:08 pm

oh good, it's not just me then.
wtf?

92. Dawkins's version of the deity does not exist

Comment #7494 by Melisande on November 18, 2006 at 4:14 pm

ARGUMENT FROM PAROCHIALISM
(1) God is everywhere.
(2) We haven't been everywhere to prove he's not there.
(3) Therefore, God exists.

93. I'm an atheist, BUT . . .

Comment #7306 by Melisande on November 18, 2006 at 6:56 am

I'm not an atheist but I play one on TV.....


No, wait, that's all wrong....

;^P

94. The God Delusion? Part 1

Comment #7287 by melisande on November 18, 2006 at 5:12 am

Comment #7052 by Joad

"As it stands now, I can simply state that my opponent presented a strawman argument, and I need make no further comment."

That would be nice but I see a constant reiteration of the argument anyway, so I felt initially that one should dispense with identification and get on with whatever it is they want to say.

But! I am newcomer to these ongoing debates so I had little contact with the terminology in which debates are to be held.

I've just seen the term utilized so much by either side I tend to skip whatever comes afterward. Maybe everyone should just get to the point, instead of all this hay.

But that is not the essence of Debate. The essence of Debate is debating! So I'm completely unfit in this regard.
It just seems like so many spitballs in the classroom.
I still think there are other terms that could say the same thing.
It's simply a matter of annoyance... I didn't think anyone would take that much offense to my half assed antagonism towards the phrase.

Tilting at windmills? Disambiguation? Misleading?
Whatever, I realize that it's a part of a terminology that I've recently come into contact with that wasn't part of my earlier vernacular.
Maybe like the black jellybean example, once I've become aware of this specific thing I see it everywhere....but I don't. Just this topic.
Maybe I'm just not involved in other topics where the word is bandied about so much.
Oh well. I'll still invite you to the burning of the straw man.
;^D

95. The sexiest man living!

Comment #7211 by Melisande on November 17, 2006 at 5:26 pm

I totally get a little fangirly about him.
More in an adorable kind of father figure way, though.
He had such a great voice! I wish he'd release audiobooks of his writings because I love listening to him speak.
tee hee!

96. The God Delusion? Part 1

Comment #7031 by Melisande on November 16, 2006 at 6:33 pm

#6903 by Jack Rawlinson
The critics of TGD use it, the people who are critics of those critics use it...in every single "debate" I've seen here, on the forums and on other lists I've been been a part of it's a term that's being used to death.
It's not that it's untrue.
But it's like "You have a straw man" "no you have a straw man"...
It reminds me of people invoking the Nazis when an argument gets to a certain place. We need a Godwin's law for the term "Straw Man".
There just must be another way to put it so it's not so redundant.
Both sides have accused the other so many times of putting up straw men that we have fields of scarecrows with no grain to protect.
Bottom line-- it's just become a pet peev of mine.
;^)

97. Neanderthal DNA secrets unlocked

Comment #6873 by Melisande on November 16, 2006 at 1:21 am

I just read this, too:
http://tinyurl.com/ssbra

Cool stuff, huh?

98. The God Delusion? Part 1

Comment #6861 by Melisande on November 15, 2006 at 10:45 pm

John Martin:
"One young woman asked him about anger at being misled by childhood role models. His immediately glazed response seemed to indicate he couldn't understand why a person should feel angry. This is the response one might expect from an introverted thinking type of person, according to Jungian typology, someone like Einstein or Hawkins. It isn't that feelings fly over their heads so much as their mental world becomes so absorbing it doesn't leave much room for anything else."

I agree with you on this, and I've wondered about that in terms of the other issues he brings up, and his incredulity at the behavior of those who still believe in God after being shown all the facts and evidence etc. What people see as arrogance I can see as his impatience when people still refuse to accept what's obvious in his scientifically trained mind.
My impression from the "anger" question was that it just wasn't part of his experience in the first place...maybe because of his personal upbringing or the general atmosphere he grew up in...
What I did like was that he started asking everyone else, and listened to them and at the end, very sincerely, said that he'd learned something that night. I've heard him say that before in interviews and honestly that's one of those moments I really enjoy. I can hear him assimilating this new information in that thirsty way a scientist's brain works.
Thanks for your thoughtful post.

99. We Might Be Chosen, But We're Still Going to Hell: Jews and the Christian Right

Comment #6860 by melisande on November 15, 2006 at 10:23 pm

That sure is some boundless love God has ...All those people in the concentration camps....and the continued fighting today over Israel...
Thanks for NOTHING, God!
Is this one of those parental "This hurts me more than it hurts you" type scenarios?
Put down the crack pipe, Hagee. SRSLY.

100. The God Delusion? Part 1

Comment #6855 by Melisande on November 15, 2006 at 9:36 pm

If I see the term "straw man" brought up again from _anyone_ on _either_ side of the debate I'm just going to have to make one and burn it in my backyard.