51. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #162545 by Greyman on April 17, 2008 at 3:59 am

The problem is in the last four words. "... doesn't harm other people." All too often, that turns out not to be the case when you abandoning critical thinking and reason.

52. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #162532 by Greyman on April 17, 2008 at 3:45 am

2060. Comment #162525 by Egomaniac on April 17, 2008 at 3:36 am

How do you know they threw their lives away, even if it was a lie? What if pursuing that lie that they believed in made their lives more fulfilled?

So it doesn't matter what anyone believes as long as persuing it provides a sense of fulfillment?

Fair enough. I'll continue to believe truth matters and find fulfillment in it's persuit though.

53. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #162524 by Greyman on April 17, 2008 at 3:34 am

2022. Comment #162482 by Egomaniac on April 17, 2008 at 2:49 am

The notion of a continued existence after death, along with the idea that the manner in which one's life has been lived will influence the level of quality of said existence adds meaning to many people's lives.

The idea that people will be reunited with loved ones who have passed on adds great meaning to people's lives.

Neither of these seems possible without the existence of some higher power, does it?

54. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #162506 by Greyman on April 17, 2008 at 3:18 am

2034. Comment #162494 by Egomaniac on April 17, 2008 at 3:07 am

Regarding "hope" vs. "meaning" -- this hope is what lends the meaning. What's your issue with that?

55. For sale: 13-year-old virgin

Comment #161821 by Greyman on April 15, 2008 at 6:23 pm

183. Comment #161348 by wendelin on April 15, 2008 at 7:38 am

As long as these women are free to do as they wish, as long as they are earning enough money to take care of themselves and their health (as they clearly seem to be doing), what is the problem?

Their freedom of choice is: prostitution, marriage, or... no, wait, that's it. Plus once you choose one you can't latter choose the other. That's the problem. Not the lifestyle, but the limitation.

56. Richard Dawkins' secular army must be stopped. God is behind some of our greatest art

Comment #160447 by Greyman on April 14, 2008 at 5:40 am

89. Comment #160436 by isaone on April 14, 2008 at 5:17 am

As a resident of the Southern US. I just wonder what it must be like to live in a society where a major paper can state "Christianity is a myth" and that statement is so generally accepted that no one even comments on it. They would be burning copies in the streets of any newspaper that printed such sacrilege here.

It's pretty nice, I can tell you. Over Chrismas the Courier Mail, a very widely read paper here Downunder, reviewed The Golden Compass, noting that, "apparently Pullman's stories have upset various Christian groups, supposedly because the stories are neo-magical gibberish with little resemblance to reality that may encourage innocent kids to believe all sorts of fanciful nonsense. Unlike the Bible."

57. Ancient serpent shows its leg

Comment #159765 by Greyman on April 13, 2008 at 4:29 am

Clive, you may need to recalibrate your sarcasm detector.

58. Lungless frog discovered in Borneo

Comment #158671 by Greyman on April 10, 2008 at 10:56 pm

Most excellent news all round! So many species of frogs have gone extinct over the past few decades. The discovery of a new and fascinating species is remarkable on so many levels.

59. Richard Dawkins: 'Growth in creationist beliefs a problem for schools'

Comment #156617 by Greyman on April 8, 2008 at 4:05 am

DasSquid, you should take some notice. Rudd's religiousity isn't a new stance, and it has shaped his politics. He's quite open about it.

He's a firm believer that a Christian voice (ie church representatives) needs to be represented in political debates. He's also a main member of the Parlimentary Prayer Group.

Still, while he's pro-Christian values, he's not exactly anti-secular, and he's by no means a bible thumper or anything. There's also a fairly sensible amount of pragmatism in his policies.

Edit: Having read this post, I'm not quite sure what I'm saying here. Oh, well, buggrit. I'm sure you understand where I'm coming from.

60. Anti-gay Okla. lawmaker attracts 1,000 backers

Comment #155826 by Greyman on April 6, 2008 at 2:07 am

It is a relief. We wouldn't want anything to interfere with your terrorkissed activities.

61. Anti-gay Okla. lawmaker attracts 1,000 backers

Comment #155588 by Greyman on April 5, 2008 at 2:39 am

Diabolical. Where will you strike next?

62. Anti-gay Okla. lawmaker attracts 1,000 backers

Comment #154774 by Greyman on April 3, 2008 at 5:32 pm

So basically, archaeological evidence actually shows that societies which have accepted homosexuality have lasted for more than just a few centuries.  Perhaps it is this acceptant lifestyle that is good for any nation?

63. Sue Blackmore debates Alister McGrath

Comment #150979 by Greyman on March 27, 2008 at 10:27 pm

His argument was simply (paraphrasing) "unlike 2 plus 2 equals 4, we can't prove most of the important beliefs in our lives, such as democracy is better than facism". How on Earth does that even begin to address the question of God's existence?

Uhm, SteveN, the question actually was "is belief in God a dangerous delusion?". It was a debate about the utility of religion, not about its truth. Although this point didn't seem answer that either, as far as I can tell.

Firstly, he doesn't seem to consider that there are degrees of rigor in proofs between, "I can rigorously prove," and "I have no proof at all." Preference for Democracy over Fascism can arise from making comparative observations of societies. His belief in god appears to be based on nothing more than his feelings, but that's good enough for him.

Secondly, demonstrating that people do hold unsubstantiated beliefs, about things other than religion, and do make decissions based on such, in no way at all shows that this is harmless behaviour.

64. God's cure for gays lost in sin

Comment #146991 by Greyman on March 19, 2008 at 4:15 pm

Homosexuality - PRACTISING homosexuality, is a sin, as you no doubt know from your Leviticus.

65. The Atheist Apocalypse

Comment #146234 by Greyman on March 18, 2008 at 7:52 pm

I love the gothic dripping text when they condem the world to a new age of ... reason and compassion!

66. Writer Arthur C Clarke dies at 90

Comment #146139 by Greyman on March 18, 2008 at 4:54 pm

It is so sad to learn that after 90 years on this rock, Sir Arthur's tenure has finally expired. I am so jealous of a life well lived.

He will be missed, and greatly, for he has produced such fond memories in people he'd never even met. Yet his work lives on, having and continuing to inspire and entertain so many. A fitting memorial.

Thank you, Sir Arthur, for enriching us all.

67. Oklahoma: One Step from Doom

Comment #141057 by Greyman on March 9, 2008 at 10:57 pm

"Oklahoma families need to know their children will not be persecuted for exercising their constitutional rights and expressing religious beliefs at school," said Reynolds, R-Oklahoma City. "While students and guest speakers can't use state resources to proselytize, they have every right to express their personal beliefs and should be given the same protections afforded non-religious or even anti-religious officials."

Um, what exactly are these special protections non-religious Oklahomans currently enjoy? O.o

68. A natural phenomenon

Comment #137442 by Greyman on March 2, 2008 at 9:46 pm

David Attenborough's documentaries were a huge feature of my childhood. Ah, this article brings back such memories! Exotic locations filled with strange and wonderful beasts, and always with new and fascinating information.

69. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #121109 by Greyman on February 3, 2008 at 1:12 am

1602. Comment #121090 by the_assayer on February 3, 2008 at 12:33 am

Thats the problem. The evidence for God is not like evidence for "the earth being round". You need physical evidence to prove physical claim. But God is not like that. God has this meta quality to it. Trying to describe it to you would be like describing "red" to a blind person. You will get the evidence. Just that it won't be of the kind that we can describe using the English language. Does "red" need evidence for its existance? It is its own evidence.

That line of reasoning can be used to counter the lack of physical evidence of any imaginary friend.

"That's the problem. The evidence for the Invisible Pink Unicorn is not like evidence for "the earth being round". You need physical evidence to prove physical claim. But the Invisible Pink Unicorn is not like that. The Invisible Pink Unicorn has this meta quality to it. Trying to describe it to you would be like describing "pink" to a blind person. You will get the evidence. Just that it won't be of the kind that we can describe using the English language. Does "pink" need evidence for its existance? It is its own evidence."

"The Invisible Pink Unicorn does exist. To ask- Can we touch/smell/fell/see her is a tricky question. Most of us think it term of moving around in space-time as a way to get from one experience to another. What if that is not enough?"

"I can't direct you to a place where Invisible Pink Unicorn sits so that you can talk to her."

70. Morality and the 'new atheism'

Comment #119675 by Greyman on January 31, 2008 at 6:20 pm

There's an interesting article related to this post here:

From the Minds of Babes Come the Beginnings of Morals.

Interesting experiment indeed! I wonder if anyone has done something similar with chimps?

71. Irreligion: A Mathematician Explains Why the Arguments for God Just Don't Add Up

Comment #109860 by Greyman on January 10, 2008 at 12:54 am

Re: 90. Comment #109832 by Edanator:

Re 63. Comment #109775 by Greyman:

1. Everything that exists has a cause.
2. God (First Cause) does not have a cause.
3. Therefore: God does not exist.

Nice! If we, for the sake of argument, should accept the first premise, is there any logical flaw in Greyman's thinking?

Well, there's the arbitary definition that God is the hypothetical First Cause.

Of course, all that is actually proven that either not everything that exists has a cause, or that a first cause does not exist.

72. Irreligion: A Mathematician Explains Why the Arguments for God Just Don't Add Up

Comment #109775 by Greyman on January 9, 2008 at 4:47 pm

Comment: #109748 by bliktor on January 9, 2008 at 3:52 pm

1. Everything that exists has a cause
2. The universe exists
3. Therefore the universe has a cause

Theists such as William Lane Craig have tried to use this argument to prove God's existence stating that since the universe has a cause, it must be a creator since there's no other possible cause for a universe to come into existence.

1. Everything that exists has a cause.
2. God (First Cause) does not have a cause.
3. Therefore: God does not exist.