101. In Saudi Arabia, a view from behind the veil

Comment #48571 by NJS on June 8, 2007 at 12:16 pm

I read The third Chimpanzee by Jared Diamond recently and he wrote that it was ironic that the catholic church's "recommended" method of contraception was the rhythm method which tries to ascertain something that evolution has deliberately "hidden".

He also wrote that we should imagine a world where human females did "show" in the same way as chimps - though I think the enlarged genitals would be weird - I think he suggested a bright red face or something like it - either way - it would be fun if it suddenly happened now :)

The posters above are right - I think its a fundamental (sic) reason for the invention of religion to oppress women - as much a part of it as maintaining "order" among the masses. This political/cultural side to it is a major stumbling block - even if we could convince more people to give up the irrational side, the control side will be harder to give up in much of the world.

102. In Saudi Arabia, a view from behind the veil

Comment #48325 by NJS on June 7, 2007 at 1:06 pm

Rtambree: You missed the biggest one of all:

1. People reject religion.

103. Man to die over insult

Comment #47134 by NJS on June 3, 2007 at 5:19 am

"though it sounds like blasphemy laws are a good people-pleaser for the brutal and backwards Pakistani government."

Despite my earlier remark I think this may not be the whole story. I get the impression from this and other stories that the government is doing its best in the face of overwhelming odds.

I think if they abolished Sharia law tomorrow they'd be ousted pretty damn quick. The same probably applies to Turkey if they decided to take secularism further.

That raises the question of the approach - do you do as the west does at the moment and fail to condemn such atrocities in the hope that in time they will leave the dark ages behind or do you cut them off and suffer the consequences in the hope the people will "wake up"?

I have to say being honest I'd favour the latter.

104. Man to die over insult

Comment #47063 by NJS on June 3, 2007 at 12:24 am

The thing that gets me is that the "defence" is that he was provoked and really does respect Islam so should be let off. What if he did "mean" the insult - then the implication is the sentence is fair enough.

It seems its okay to condemn Iran as a theocratic hell but "friends" like Pakistan and Saudi Arabia are free to perpetrate the same evils.

Its also true as soneone said that many, many christians would love to see similar laws (though fair enough without execution).

105. Debate between Richard Dawkins and Robert Winston

Comment #45674 by NJS on May 28, 2007 at 10:50 pm

Further to my comment about burning in hell and the response that the good old CofE type theist doesn't really believe that, I think that provides another "opening" for debate.

As I've argued in the past the "fundamentalist" Christian or Islamic approach which includes creationism often strikes me as more worthy of a kind of respect as at least its "true" to the books and makes sense in that context.

When it all gets watered down a la CofE and they try and make room for evolution and the notion of a "good" person not being damned I find myself thinking whats the point? If they do believe their God isn't as vain as others think and would base the thumbs up or down on how moral you are then whats the point in worship/belief?

I think people like this Winston guy should be asked to clarify this if he feels we are "offensive" - Will I burn in hell? - if not why should I bother believing?

106. Debate between Richard Dawkins and Robert Winston

Comment #45614 by NJS on May 28, 2007 at 1:26 pm

I believe a valid reply to "your stance is insulting and offensive" is "You believe I will burn in hell forever - whats more offensive than that?"

107. Mysteries to Behold in the Dark Down Deep: Seadevils and Species Unknown

Comment #43732 by NJS on May 22, 2007 at 11:32 am

Does anyone know what the ultra-theist explanation for things like this is?

If all the animals were put here "for our benefit" then why were creatures we'd never realistically come across created?

108. Goodness without Godliness

Comment #43007 by NJS on May 20, 2007 at 9:19 am

Billy Sands: "One thing I would like to hear is a theist argue that homosexuality is "evil" and not resort to justifying on god's say so. We can all demonstrate why murder, rape etc are wrong, but try as I might, I cant come up with a reason why homosexuality is moraly wrong."

I've tried the same argument with sex outside of marriage - two unattached, consenting people have sex and I'm supposed to find something wrong with that? What is it?

I read a story the other day from my hometown paper about a brothel madam being jailed. I realise that that "industry" has a seedy side involving slavery but in this case it was a house filled with willing independent workers who were simply in one place. The judge said he realised the woman was at "The lower end of the scale" of the crime but I had to ask myself what crime?

If the two single people I mentioned earlier had a good night out which as it happens was paid for by the man (or the woman for that matter) when does it become a business transaction worthy of a crime?

Core morality is very easy - when you add delusional, opressive rules you get problems.

109. Hubble Finds Ring of Dark Matter

Comment #42884 by NJS on May 20, 2007 at 4:14 am

When I realise how all those galaxies have billions of stars with who knows how many planets "identical" to earth there must be, it makes me first of all feel humble and secondly makes me a million times more sure that some pathetic desert sky god is nonsense.

110. Furor over author Ayaan Hirsi Ali's visit stirs debate on religious freedom

Comment #40798 by NJS on May 15, 2007 at 2:40 am

Comment # 40574 by CJ

Evil Rotten People or Evil Rotten Religion?

Look beyond the meme, see the victims.

What chance does a Saudi child have?


Interesting point.

I'm very willing to be harsh with theists who can't see how irrational thay are but I suppose since we all realise the way indoctrination takes place that as you suggest "its not their fault".

However part of me does think that people have the chance as I did to use reason to break free of the meme (I was raised catholic) as did Ayaan Ali. Of course once again I realise its easier to do that in the UK than is Saudi Arabia so I think I would have a modicum of "symapthy" for ordinary muslims or other theists who find it hard.

However I think a Muslim cleric who lives in the US and calls for people to be killed in this way crosses the line from a simple meme victim and I have no problem describing him as an evil person who follows an evil religion.

111. Furor over author Ayaan Hirsi Ali's visit stirs debate on religious freedom

Comment #40535 by NJS on May 14, 2007 at 12:30 pm

She didn't "come to Islam" - she was brainwashed without choice as a child just like all the others.

Evil rotten people.

112. Let us pray for the soul of Richard Dawkins

Comment #40288 by NJS on May 14, 2007 at 4:49 am

If I'd known she was a rabid catholic I'd have added to the dilemma that the baby was Muslim or Jewish (I fully support Dawkins' position on child religion but doubt she does)

Wonder if she'd have given the same answer in honesty?

113. Supporters of abortion have no future in Church, Pope tells faithful

Comment #39094 by NJS on May 10, 2007 at 1:27 am

I know this is abortion and not contraception but relating the two, anyone who thinks that what South America needs is unchecked population growth is an immoral imbecile.

114. Gene mutation linked to cognition is found only in humans

Comment #39093 by NJS on May 10, 2007 at 1:25 am

"I am a creationist, and this is what I think"

Obviously not - respond to the actual article.

115. Better God-fearing than sneering

Comment #38707 by NJS on May 9, 2007 at 2:10 am

It's nice that the "new covenant" rejects stoning of non-virginal wives but keeps OT homophobia.

116. Unholy row at clergy soccer game

Comment #38114 by NJS on May 7, 2007 at 2:43 am

When I ever I read about "dialogue" and "reaching out" between the faiths I always ask the question:

How can you have a friendly chat and a nice polite social exchange with people who you honestly believe are going to burn in hell forever?

117. The moment a teenage girl was stoned to death for loving the wrong boy

Comment #37858 by NJS on May 6, 2007 at 3:24 am

I love the "it's culture, not religion" argument.

It reminds me how spontaneous medical cures are "miracles" but the original infection is "god free".

How prayers can be arranged for an abducted girl (with another posssible miracle if found safe) but no "Which God allowed it" question.

"Culture" and "politics" are excuses. The mindset is decided by brainwashing in dogma fom birth.

118. Republican candidates range from ignorant to dishonest

Comment #37466 by NJS on May 4, 2007 at 2:09 pm

When Tony Blair was asked about creationism being taught in a city academy he'd championed he described evolution as "just a theory" - its not just the US where idiots "get away with" being stupid.

119. How multiculturalism is betraying women

Comment #37034 by NJS on May 3, 2007 at 8:06 am

The BBC had a couple of HYS debates on the veil last year. There were a few posts from Muslim women insisting that they wore whichever garment of oppression it was "of their own free will" as they weren't forced. Leaving aside the fact that I'm sure there are many who are forced it struck me that this "willingness" to be oppressed is part of the problem.

I know as a "free" western man its easy for me to agree with those above who say the women should stand up without much thought for the consequences but we have to start with a bit of encouragement which I think applying the law in a kind of "positive descrimination" could do.

I think the judge in the case above should have granted the divorce and also awarded all of the man's assets to the women and told him it was "because" he thought it was culturally okay to mistreat her that it was done like that. Harsher sentences for the beaters/murderers along the same lines would send out a simple message that something is wrong.

120. How multiculturalism is betraying women

Comment #36979 by NJS on May 3, 2007 at 2:20 am

I've asked this question a few times:

Why won't somebody take the Koran (and the bible) to court for inciting violence?

In more general terms my contempt for the UK justice system has always been fuelled by "not in the real world" judges - I'm not surprised its not an exclusive problem.

121. The God Delusion

Comment #36386 by NJS on May 1, 2007 at 3:01 am

"Or the fact that many places, such as Saudi Arabia, seem not to be progressing morally at all?"

Er....I wonder why? :)

Otherwise a fair enough article.

122. Evolution Booklet

Comment #35519 by NJS on April 27, 2007 at 12:55 pm

"I don't like the fact that it claims to be about evolution, but then delves into theology"

As it says theres no controversy over Quantum Mechanics as that doesn't touch religion in the same way evolution does. I think if they "stuck to science" it would be seen as dancing around the crux of the matter.

123. Pope abolishes limbo

Comment #34003 by NJS on April 23, 2007 at 3:04 am

Another entry in todays "How stupid a statement can I make" contest.

The saddest thing is that not everyone who reads this garbage laughs.

124. Christians at Bible publishers have their throats cut

Comment #33054 by NJS on April 19, 2007 at 4:30 am

"Let me get this straight. You are saying that all gang murders, rapes, violence is done by religious people"

Judging by the predominance of the religious leanings of prison inmates in America thats not a bad analysis.

Of course nobody is really saying that but the Stalin/Mao response doesn't work for me. Both created regimes which were pseudo-religious in nature and suffered from the same intolerance.

The suggestion is somehow omne of "thats whay you'd get" - not so - Atheists now are suggesting a secularism which is based on "keep it in private" - not the active opression of faith as happened under those regimes.

125. Flea Circus!

Comment #33050 by NJS on April 19, 2007 at 4:23 am

Mr Robertson:

No answer to why your God is the right one.

Let me expand, just suppose as someone who "believes" in science I accept the "moved goalpost" of a God who exists outside of Space/Time who created the universe 14bn years ago. Why did he allow all the other religions to spring up on earth? Why only reveal himself to a tiny tribe in one area? Did he intervene in history to ensure the Roman adoption of him which caused his spread worldwide? Why send his son to that one tribe? Is this the only planet out of billions he bothered with?

Simple questions never answered.

126. Flea Circus!

Comment #33029 by NJS on April 19, 2007 at 3:20 am

WeeFree: One man with mental health issues acting alone is different to 4 men acting together or a gang acting together as in the Oslo Woman's case.

Believing your God prompted or guided evolution to me is a more ridiculous notion than outright rejection of evolution - thats why they're incompatibleand why any co-existence in a so-called scientists mind is "lying" to me.

I have all the understanding of religion I need - the myriad of independent, worldwide versions conclusively suggest a man-made phenomenon - unless you can do what no Theist has ever done - explain why your God is the "right" God.

127. Christians at Bible publishers have their throats cut

Comment #33016 by NJS on April 19, 2007 at 2:51 am

I'd also add that the VT guy had mental health problems - what are the chances of 4 men all having similar problems which would allow Mr Robertson or others to dismiss them as "nutters" - their common thread wasn't that - it was religious intolerance.

128. Christians at Bible publishers have their throats cut

Comment #33015 by NJS on April 19, 2007 at 2:47 am

Alpechaunist:

Thats what I meant - thanks for clarifying my intent with better wording.

129. Christians at Bible publishers have their throats cut

Comment #33013 by NJS on April 19, 2007 at 2:34 am

"Atheist nutcases kill as well. But I guess that's too much truth for this website"

Scorecard for crimes commiteed in the name of religion Vs atheism please?

No references to Stalin allowed.

130. Flea Circus!

Comment #33010 by NJS on April 19, 2007 at 2:31 am

Okay Mr Robertson explain to me how science and religion are not opposed.

Religion was invented to explain things - its been superseded and is now redundant.

Also I would presume McGraths degree was obtained by telling the examiners what they wanted to read without believing it. I see no correlation between evolution and Theism no matter how much you protest.

On tolerance I would like to know when was the last time an Atheist slit an infidel's throat.

131. The Empty Wager

Comment #32996 by NJS on April 19, 2007 at 1:13 am

Nonsense aside, I find the proposition that a "good" non-believer is hellbound and a "bad" believer has a chance of heaven to be one of the the most inherently evil ideas in religion. It sums up the "gang" mentality to a tee.

132. Medicine without Evolution Make Sense?

Comment #32714 by NJS on April 18, 2007 at 4:55 am

Since I started reading sites like this and reading debates I'm alarmed by how many people in the US especially can study courses at University which are critically affected by nonsensical theist dogma. I've read posts from creationists who are studying Biology who seem to suggest no conflict which I think is absurd but this slant of medical students worries me even more.

Two angles worry me - first I don't see how you can understand or treat illnesses in the modern world without an understanding of our evolution and that of viruses etc.

Secondly faith that is "deep" enough to reject evolution is the kind that would consider prayer as a valid weapon against disease.

I've often had a "fantasy" which I'm not proud of of a creationist/anti-science theist being told by a doctor that since they don't accept science they should go away and pray to get better. This was based on the idea that being a doctor would make you necessarily rational in the first place. If this is not the case then I'm even more concerned about the spread of anti-evolution than I though was possible. Moronic preachers and even presidents is one thing - Doctors are quite another.

133. Doctors Opposing Circumcision: An Appeal for Misha

Comment #32501 by NJS on April 17, 2007 at 7:29 am

One aspect I would add is that the father is also just as guilty in my view of forcing his Judaism on his son as he is mutilating him - no lesser a crime.

134. Doctors Opposing Circumcision: An Appeal for Misha

Comment #32494 by NJS on April 17, 2007 at 7:03 am

"While the removal of foreskin from the penis is painful - and I believe wrong - men can still achieve orgasm and enjoy penal stimulation. The whole point of FGM is to remove the opportunity for women to enjoy any sexual pleasure. Please - it is not female circumcision - let's not use that euphemism as it makes the practice seem much more benign."

Thats what I was alluding to above. When I first heard of "female circumcision" after an initial "Eh?" my first attempt at gaining knowledge suggested "only" the sewing up of the vagina which sounded bad enough but at the same time akin to the male vesrion which I always thought was stupid but not the end of the world.

When I later realised it meant clitoral amputation and the purpose behind this (subjugation) my absolute abhorrence was confirmed but it seems that this "lumping together" under the term circumcision suggests an acceptable practice.

I maintain that both are wrong but anyone who doesn't find the female version to be an abomination isn't worthy of the term human.

135. Doctors Opposing Circumcision: An Appeal for Misha

Comment #32427 by NJS on April 17, 2007 at 3:44 am

For Veronique:

You have it the wrong way around I believe - being uncurmcised means the glans is protected from day-to-day wear and tear which means once it exposed its more sensitive.

The "gunk" you mentioned isn't a problem - uncircumcised men soon learn that cleaning is required - can you imagine many men being "shy" about experimenting with the apparatus :)

I would also assume that masturbation is easier with the use of the forsesking than without - but of course thats a sin :)

On a serious note I find it abhorrent that any kind of mutilation is excused on religios grounds. As someone else said imagine other body parts being shed - I think just because male cirmcusion "seems" to be harmless shouldn't excuse the principle. The other danger is that acceptance of the male version discourages criticism of the infinitely more abhorrent female version.

This goes back to Dawkins views on any kind of religious influence on children - at a basic level its simply wrong.

136. New Primate Species Found In 42 Million-year-old Texas Fossils

Comment #32164 by NJS on April 16, 2007 at 3:36 am

"Hmmm - I wonder, for those that manage to believe in both God and evolution, at what point God is supposed to have said... 'I'll put a soul into the primate....wait....wait.....wait.....now'"

On a debate on the BBC Have your say last year I saw a post where someone's understanding of evolution was "God took an animal called Homo Erectus and gave him a soul making Homo Sapien"

As I keep saying, this kind of blending of theism and evolution makes less sense than biblical literalism.

137. Kadra attacked in public

Comment #32030 by NJS on April 15, 2007 at 10:00 am

In defence of the abhorrent practice of female circumcision, the old "cultural respect" card is always played. I see no difference between this and cannibalism which went "undefended".

I'd stop all aid and all business with any country that allows it but hey, I have principles.

Of course the beating is another fine example of the religion of peace's cowardly view and treatment of women. Whats the point of the spokesman urging police action when they will claim religious defence of their action?

138. Thanks for the Facts. Now Sell Them.

Comment #31914 by NJS on April 15, 2007 at 12:11 am

Among all the things about theism I don't "get" is this one about how theists CAN accept evolution and still have faith.

For me an appreciation of how life and latterly humans evolved over billions of years is the best argument we have that Gods are man made. In fact I'd say trying to reconcile Abrahamic theism with the "true" history of our planet and species fails more badly than the creationists 6000 years nonsense. At least in the latter context their God "makes sense".

139. On Desire

Comment #31202 by NJS on April 11, 2007 at 11:01 am

The "different immune system" sounds very interesting - anyone care to expand?

One thing that puzzles me about homosexuality is the suggestion by the good doctor here which I've read elsewhere that hormones can influence the production of an "effeminate" homosexual man which I accept but that doesn't explain to me the more "butch" kind of gay man who then is attracted to the former. I think the same argument could be raised for women - I can see the pendulum swing towards maleness which would mean women who want feminine partners but I don't see how that produces the feminine gays who don't want men.

Anyone know any thinking on this?

140. Prophets of the new atheism

Comment #30461 by NJS on April 8, 2007 at 5:53 am

"I am a person of reason."

The last couple of times recruiters have knocked at my door my reply has been "Sorry, I have a brain"

141. Militant atheists: too clever for their own good

Comment #30234 by NJS on April 7, 2007 at 9:38 am

The rationality of opposition to religion was held back for years by fear of persecution. More recently it has been held back by the "respect" card moreso now not the simple politeness but the fear of having to to use the word "stupid" and I'm getting sick of it.

We should not be ashamed or hestitate to use the intelligence argument. Those who are obviously intelligent but still believe should be outed as compartmentalised. We should aspire to educate and free people from the stupidity of theism and as the poster above said make atheism the default position.

142. The God Debate

Comment #29170 by NJS on April 2, 2007 at 1:37 am

All other arguments aside I'm trying to decide which is the most offensive notion that these theists hold:

1/ Their delight in the idea of people not in their gang being tortured for eternity.

2/ Their delight that their God would be so mean as to put "faith" in him above the actual "worthiness" of someone come judgement.

3/ The whole "Atheists are immoral hedonists" thing.

I have to say that 2 and 3 have annoyed me the most in the past but I'm beginning to feel that the hell thing is the worst - if they said something like "We get heaven, you get nothing" then I think I could live with it (obvious nonsense though it is) but to actually wish damnation on someone signifies a level of basic imhumanity which astounds me.

143. The God Debate

Comment #29079 by NJS on April 1, 2007 at 2:23 pm

"A person who is only good because of fear of punishment or in favor of reward is not a good person. Someone who is good because they feel it in there heart is far superior, morally, than some religious nutjob who only is good because of their religious aspirations and fears"

Ive been using that argument for the past couple of years since I really got "involved" with this debate. I think its an argument which should be shouted from the rooftops by Dawkins, Hitchens, Harris et al everytime the same point is raised.

144. John Paul Sainthood Nun 'Gentle, Simple'

Comment #28586 by NJS on March 30, 2007 at 1:45 am

According to the bible aren't all mental illnesses caused by demonic posession?

Or is that another "metaphor" - ie a biblical fact which when proved to be nonsense becomes a linguistic device the authors didn't know about.

I sometimes find it a shame that doctors are so "dedicated" - I think some people deserve to be told to go away and pray if their "faith" is so much better than science.

145. Hell is real and eternal: Pope

Comment #28110 by NJS on March 28, 2007 at 3:35 am

Are there any posters who are psychiatrists who could give an opinion on whether on removing the get out clause of religion, "beliefs" like stating that a place called hell exists become delusions which would count as mental illness?

Anyone who doesn't realise that hell is an invented control mechanism really is.... I'll stop there.

146. Dawkins v. Collins Debate

Comment #23407 by NJS on February 28, 2007 at 1:33 pm

The chrisian God of the bible is very much "of this space and time". For me everytime I read a theist doing this goalpost moving thing of starting to define a God "outside of space and time" I honestly think we're winning. This being may or not exist but if it does its not "their" God so why do they believe in the biblical version?

147. Pope speaks out against 'designer babies'

Comment #23273 by NJS on February 27, 2007 at 12:29 pm

I remember the last idiot saying he was against fertility treatment because he believed it was "God's will" that women were barren and man shouldn't interfere - apart from being a typically despicable slight on women I couldn't help thinking that surely the same logic applies to any medical condition and imagined being a dentist called to treat his toothache and saying "Sorry, its God's will - no treatment allowed".

148. Ayaan Hirsi Ali on Islam

Comment #22991 by NJS on February 25, 2007 at 1:34 pm

I completely support the raising of beheading as "outrageous" but I hardly consider the electric chair as a civilised tool.

149. The questions science cannot answer

Comment #21861 by NJS on February 11, 2007 at 9:01 am

"Prove corruption in the Church"

Widespread and massive cover up of child sexual abuse in the catholic church to the highest levels.

Any other organisation with such a criminal record would be proscribed.

150. The questions science cannot answer

Comment #21784 by NJS on February 11, 2007 at 4:46 am

"Why are we here? What is life all about?"

Science has answered them - we are evolved animals whose purpose is to propogate our species.

Next question?

The fact that evolved intelligence has meant that the simplistic purpose has become "to have a worthwhile life" does not alter that answer and does not lead to a contrived necessity for a supernatural answer.

I don't mind people asking these questions - thats very human - but irrational answers and a refusal to accept "the truth" renders the query pointless.