1951. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #162999 by Goldy on April 17, 2008 at 7:49 pm

Aaah, Diacanu and Sharon, what can I say! I laughed so hard I almost did shart!
Zaphod

Definition - Insertion mutation is a mutation caused by the insertion of at least one extra nucleotide base in a DNA sequence. a type of mutation where part of a genetic sequence is added to a chromosome, causing a frameshift in the genetic information on that chromosome.

I do believe we are absolutely chokka full of viral insertions. There was a lecture here (I missed it) where it was shown that one could track prehistoric epidemics by the DNA remnants left behind in our genome.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/1999/11/991110062023.htm
http://geneticsevolution.suite101.com/article.cfm/viral_genes_in_human_genome

1952. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #162898 by Goldy on April 17, 2008 at 4:24 pm

Diacanu, I think politics might be one answer, sheer utter total mentally gobshiteful fuckwittery is closer to the real answer.
Honestly, who the hell can differentiate between mico-evolution and macro-evolution? Probably the same people that can't figure out if one can take a step, one might just about be able to walk. You either walk or step, in their view.
Breathtaking inanity!
If only I could have their way of thinking - I'd be able to eat curry all night wahing it down with pint after pint of beer. Stands to reason, I'd either fart or shit - follow-through after a fart would never exist!

1953. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #162884 by Goldy on April 17, 2008 at 4:06 pm

Going back to kiwis (I'm late, I know, but hey, I live with the damn things (sort of...) so my time zone is out compared to the rest of the world's (it seems). Have you seen the size of the eggs they lay? Compared to the actual bird? Now that's what I call packaging!

1954. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #162874 by Goldy on April 17, 2008 at 3:59 pm

Micro-evolution is testable, provable and observable, but can the same be said for Macro-evolution?

What is macro-evolution but micro-evolution taken to greater lengths? Evolution has occurred for a long long time (well, unless you're YEC, in which case you have absolutely no idea about anything).
If you concede that micro-evolution occures AND that it can be seen, you are conceding that macro-evolution occurs too.
For proof, you may have heard about these things called fossils. You may also have read something about DNA and the similarities between different species indicating they have evolved away from each other but not as far as they have evolved away from other species (say, for example, whales, hippopotami and dogs).
It is so breathtakingly simple a concept I can't see where the problem lies...

1955. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #162483 by Goldy on April 17, 2008 at 2:50 am

Do you think the notion that some people here seem to enjoy looking down on others is absurd?

Why?
Never mind - I'm sure it makes sense to you. I'm off to bed.
A domani!

1956. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #162466 by Goldy on April 17, 2008 at 2:31 am

Cheers, Egomaniac :-)

1957. Teacher Expelled Over Religion

Comment #162389 by Goldy on April 16, 2008 at 8:50 pm

Huh..The Disco institute? Did Kardashovel time travel back to the 1970's?

Excuse my laziness. Disco is short of Discovery, as any Landrover owner knows :-)
A Turkish barber condemned to die for swearing at God - one almost thinks there is an opera there!

1958. Richard Dawkins and Bill Maher

Comment #162376 by Goldy on April 16, 2008 at 7:14 pm

Mr. Maher could now be Mr. Dawkins imaginary friend

I'm assuming this line is a veiled reference to your belief that God is imaginary ;-)

1959. Victims: Pope Benedict Protects Accused Pedophile Bishops

Comment #162374 by Goldy on April 16, 2008 at 7:08 pm

Joke that arrived in my inbox today...

The priest in a small Irish village loved the rooster and ten hens he kept in the hen house behind the church.
One Sunday morning, before mass, he went to feed the birds and discovered that the cock was missing.

He knew about cock fights in the village, so he questioned his parishioners in church.

During mass, he asked the congregation,

"Has anybody got a cock?"

All the men stood up.


"No, no," he said, "that wasn't what I meant. Has anybody seen a cock?"
All the women stood up.


"No, no," he said, "that wasn't what I meant. Has anybody seen a Cock that doesn't belong to them?"
Half the women stood up.


"No, no," he said, "that wasn't what I meant. Has anybody seen MY cock?"
Sixteen altar boys, two priests and a goat stood up.

1960. Richard Dawkins and Bill Maher

Comment #162372 by Goldy on April 16, 2008 at 7:05 pm

Well, off to pen an essay. Hmmm, The Dawkins Delusion perhaps...

Think that's been done already...

1961. Teacher Expelled Over Religion

Comment #162371 by Goldy on April 16, 2008 at 7:04 pm

Well Frankus, Kardashovel does go on about time travel. Maybe the Disco Institute knows something the rest of us don't. Maybe God is helping them... ;-)

1962. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #162366 by Goldy on April 16, 2008 at 6:46 pm

If any of the IDiots and cretinists are still here, something for you to read.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/main.jhtml?xml=/earth/2008/04/17/scidarwin117.xml
Dare say it'll appear here soon as a topic in its own right...

1963. Teacher Expelled Over Religion

Comment #162364 by Goldy on April 16, 2008 at 6:37 pm

Could be worse, mind...
http://www.arabnews.com/?page=1§ion=0&article=109032&d=17&m=4&y=2008

JEDDAH, 17 April 2008 â€" Officials at the Jeddah General Court confirmed yesterday that they are dealing with the case of a Turkish barber who is allegedly facing the death penalty after being tried for swearing at God.

When they start to execute teachers in Texas, then I'll start to worry

1964. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #162032 by Goldy on April 16, 2008 at 2:52 am

But from the perspective of the law, society and - at the very least - short term health outlook for the policeman, it is not to be condemned.

Assuming the policeman is right. And acting within the law. And it is still outside criminal ethics.
Bugger me, I do sound like Henri ;-) Only ten to ten at night and I'm ready for bed. Methinks the BBC calls.
I'll do the theist number 10 and catch you tomorrow.
BTW - I do actually agree with you, Irate. Just being a wee bit of a fucktard to see what it feels like. I think I know how RM feels...
A domani!

1965. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #162028 by Goldy on April 16, 2008 at 2:41 am

If you're an undercover policeman, certainly.

But not to the criminal.

1966. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #162024 by Goldy on April 16, 2008 at 2:29 am

Lying is not always unethical. We all lie, every day.

And why do we lie? To make others feel better? To hide our "sins"? And if the lie is a great big whopper - is that right? GWB and TB were OK with their WMD story?
Sorry, getting late here. Lying has its place, yes. So does infidelity and murder. Until I become Henri Burgsen, I can't see it as anything other than slightly unethical in it's best form. And I am an athiest. No gods in me! :-) Sorry Kardy!

1967. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #162020 by Goldy on April 16, 2008 at 2:23 am

"We love Him, because He first loved us."

Yeah, he sure loves us. Darfuris, you reading this? Tibetans, Gazans, all them dead Jews, Armenians.....he loves you!
What utter arsewipe!
Sorry Kardy, you say I'm finding a god - I offer this to you and please accept the gut busting laughter accompanying it. Seriously! I'm sorry to pop the old bubble Kardy, but there isn't any god on any of my horizons. Another child, maybe - let Nature take its course, wife only just tested ve...who knows how things might pan out. I'll sleep better after the first trimester - neither of us are getting any younger. Oh, and don't pray for me. There is no god, prayer is just empty words in the wind.
Talking of gut busting, he's getting his hernia seen to as well. Hope it goes OK. RM, if you do read this, take care and take about a week off! I tried going to work after 3 days and it hurt!

1968. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #162015 by Goldy on April 16, 2008 at 2:13 am

thisisme

In short, if there is no God, why is it wrong to lie for him?

Because it is lying. Lying is unethical.
That OK? Or you want more?

1969. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #162004 by Goldy on April 16, 2008 at 1:57 am

Jesus, man. And the Amarrone della Vapolicella.

Valpolicella I know. Jesus - hmm, well, even you can't answer my Jesus question. And I have no desire to worship some spin doctor! You'll have to tell me :-) Is it Jesus or is it Paul? You know what I think, I know what you fear - how can you convince me?
RM - sad man.

1970. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #161961 by Goldy on April 15, 2008 at 9:30 pm

And much as I like the idea of time travel backwards, there hasn't been much evidence in this universe (on Earth, now, I mean) of it, as far as I can see. If time travel is just for tourism, I can understand that. Hide all traces, don't disturb the history, that sort of thing.
But if it is to make things better for the future, I would have thought that getting a really early start would be the ticket, not wait a few hundreds of millenia. Or is there something I am missing?

1971. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #161958 by Goldy on April 15, 2008 at 9:22 pm

I looked. Best I could find is this...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/A2043398

Multiverse is a whole 'nother kettle of fish. But I'm not supposed to eat any more fish. Damn.

Yours is a self imposed restriction, mine is an imposed restriction. Eat all the fish you want. However, as my universe is different (even in time - I think I'm tomorrow relative to you), I still can't drink. Care to hold your glass near your screen? Just waft the smell over here...

1972. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #161951 by Goldy on April 15, 2008 at 9:09 pm

But actually, there are already proposed mechanisms within our current understanding of physics for time travel. Try again.

There was a program on the BBC World Service about time travel. Some boffin puts the ability to travel in time at centuries rather than billions of years.
It also went into alternate universes - you can go back in time and shag your grandmother as the effects of that will not affect your universe but will lead to consequences in another parallel universe.
Maybe God, who is actually our descendent, will be coming back, but as far as we are concerned it won't matter as anyting he does will be in another universe, as it were.
I'll try and find it - interesting listening, especially when lying on your back welding up diff mounts under an old Triumph TR6...

1973. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #161926 by Goldy on April 15, 2008 at 8:40 pm

Actually no, because although it refers to a plural, Elohim is a single word.

They have been called gods, I think. But they are not God. The difference is in the asymptote.

Aah, you mean like the word Mankind. OK, I get you. They're gods then. Hmmm, given God's pathological disliking of other gods, methinks he's not like that.
Valpolicella - mouth salivating! quite the favourite tipple of mine!

If I were you, I'd be on a home restriction.

And if I were you, I wouldn't be :-)

1974. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #161912 by Goldy on April 15, 2008 at 8:28 pm

but I've got most of a bottle of wine in me and the spirit says I answer Bonzai and Goldy's questions.

Lucky bugger! 3:30 here - hours to go before home time and I'm on an alcohol restriction at home :-(
Red?

1975. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #161909 by Goldy on April 15, 2008 at 8:26 pm

Elohim is plural for a reason.

Shouldn't that be "are plural" seeing as there is more than 1. Sorry ;-)
Are they gods?

1976. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #161906 by Goldy on April 15, 2008 at 8:24 pm

Oh yes. Jesus is central to my understanding of the afterlife, as well as this one.

Aaah - yes, could you answer my other Jesus question? It's floating around somewhere above.
No worries about your humour - known worse ;-) As it is, I shall punich you by sending this fucked up time over your way, mwuahahahah! You'll receive it sometime tomorrow :-)
Great I have a god. Haven't had one before.

1977. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #161901 by Goldy on April 15, 2008 at 8:21 pm

I believe that God actually participates with us directly, as do other beings that are part of the "plan".

Other beings?

1978. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #161892 by Goldy on April 15, 2008 at 8:16 pm

Not all of us live in your fucked up time zone, Goldy.

Ooooh, busted!
Wassa matter, God say nasty things on the phone?

1979. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #161884 by Goldy on April 15, 2008 at 8:10 pm

Pescatarian. I eat any species from any taxonomic class that has no members that care for their young.

Seahorses look after their young :-) Gonna have to check they aren't what Steve quoted...
Ummm, you been drinking there, Kardy?

1980. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #161862 by Goldy on April 15, 2008 at 7:50 pm

Goldy, I realize that you are only in the initial stages of your infection with the God meme, but whatever could you mean by that?

No worries, Kardy, I got my inoculations ;-)
Google extinctions. Seems there was a lot of them in the history of life on Earth.
Respect single cells - you're just a mass of them :-)

1981. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #161859 by Goldy on April 15, 2008 at 7:47 pm

Plants have no nervous system. I eat plants. No intellectual respect for plants.

Venus Fly Trap?
Are you a vegetarian? I forgets...

1982. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #161854 by Goldy on April 15, 2008 at 7:42 pm

Now the original statement that Steve made was that randomness in evolution, indicates that there can be no purpose to evolution. I object, because evolution is capable of producing complex organization out of randomness, and that could very well serve someone's purpose

Evolution could serve someone's purpose - farmers have been using it for years.
But in the great grand scheme of God-like purposes, it doesn't. Environmental constraints have by far a greater effect on evolution.
If God did have a purpose in all of this, why does he keep changing the goalposts? And why is it that the things that tend to survive everything that wipes out the complex creations on the surface of the earth barely dent the single cell (you sounded disparaiging about them - don't be. There'd be no life without them!) creatures that make up life. Complex creatures are merely the crust on the icing of this cake we call Earth.

1983. Richard Dawkins and Lawrence Krauss

Comment #161829 by Goldy on April 15, 2008 at 6:46 pm

Steve

Is it allowed if I hero worship Bonzai? Or is that too ironic?

Can't remember the rule exactly, but I think irony is OK until you start keeping pictures. You may be ironic, but not iconic ;-)
Frankus

I think it is my humility that most impresses me about me.

I was too, but beer soon cured that :-D

1984. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #161824 by Goldy on April 15, 2008 at 6:32 pm

The competing theories of Darwinism and Intelligent Design deal with the "creation of mankind".

Again, no.
The theory of evolution as proposed by Wallace and Darwin independently is about...evolution. Not creation. That's a different theory.
ID is about creation as there is no evolution as such.
Wallace and Darwin both spent a bit of time in the field before writing up their respective versions of the evolutionary theory. Modern scientists also spend some time in the field finding evidence to publish. IDiots spend time reading the, mostly, Bible.

1985. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #161779 by Goldy on April 15, 2008 at 4:42 pm

Is there an organized campaign within scientific academia to actively discredit the work or opinions of otherwise very well qualified professors and scientists simply because they hold that intelligent design theory is creditable in conflict with pure Darwinism theory?

No.
Working in a science-based arena (a university), hypotheses, theories, any acadamic work has to be scrutinised before publication. This is done by peers, hence the expression "peer reviewed".
Part of the process of being selected for publication is that data is needed to back up the hypothesis. That God did not leave data lying around to back up a design hypothesis is hard on the IDiots, but that's the way it is (for really, the designer is just a euphamism for God, isn't it?). God does work in mysterious ways, I guess, but mystery is what science doesn't like.
ID theories have been tested and found wanting. Even the irriducible part of many of the IDiot arguments have been found wanting - I believe there is something about the eye in this website showing that it can be broken down to smaller and smaller components.
It's not that the IDiots are excluded - if they can show that there is a hand of God in the way things are, then they'll be published. However, everything we get is easily disputed, so their credibility takes a heavy series of knocks.
To see how accepting the scientific community is, look at how homeopathy, acupuncture and other seemingly esoteric methods are studied. Some have actually been found to be efficatious and are readily available in proper medical centres (as opposed to the witch doctor or spiritual practitioner centres).
Scientists don't need to "actively" discredit IDiots. They do it to themselves so very very well...

Edit - you also forgot to mention Wallace!
http://www.firstscience.com/SITE/ARTICLES/wallace.asp
Bloody Darwinists! ;-)

1986. Richard Dawkins and Lawrence Krauss

Comment #161769 by Goldy on April 15, 2008 at 4:28 pm

Ooooh, hero worship? Can one worship oneself? Or is that not the done thing? Just that I know I am always right and my wife hints at this (though the tone in her voice suggests it is not a positive attribute...). I even have a true disciple - though as she gets older, I can see signs of dissent (time to have another child, methinks!)
:-)

1987. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #161762 by Goldy on April 15, 2008 at 4:11 pm

Why are a lot of you lauding this man (human being) as some sort of "messiah". You are worse then those evangalists... and thats saying alot!

Who are you referring to? Be nice if you could narrow it down a bit...
http://www.christian-oneness.org/chapter10.htm
http://www.dlshq.org/saints/mohammed.htm
http://www.aboutbuddha.org/
http://krishna.avatara.org/
http://sangha.net/messengers/zoroaster.htm
http://www.pantheon.org/articles/o/odin.html
etc, etc...

1988. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #161735 by Goldy on April 15, 2008 at 2:46 pm

Wonder if God is an asshole - given both cannot be typed in full. Hmmmm.....would explain Jesus' mode of transport into Jerusalem ;-)
Kardy - why do you accept the story of Jesus? Given your distaste for Paul...

1989. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #161733 by Goldy on April 15, 2008 at 2:45 pm

Wow, did I miss some good shit or what! Damn these time zones! Next time I emigrate, it'll be to some place where others are awake the same time as me :-)
Kardy, evolution is sort of random - the environment palys a part in the final product. that's why you have extinctions when the environment changes. Some animals can cope with changes, to a greater or lesser degree. Mankind seems to be one. So are rats. And flies, I believe (there are, of course, loads of others).
See evolution running down a waxed surface. It doesn't flow down straight because of the imperfections on the surface. Put something in the way of the flow and it changes direction. Indeed, the flow might even split. Upturn the surface half way and the flow stops. Evolution occurs hand in hand with the environment.

1990. Saudi Arabia Leader Calls for Interfaith Dialogue

Comment #161127 by Goldy on April 14, 2008 at 9:14 pm

From Arab News...

What Muslims Think
Aijaz Zaka Syed, aijaz.syed@hotmail.com

Opinion polls fascinate me. They are, if honestly conducted, perhaps the best possible way of gauging public opinion. At a time when spin is the norm and global media is controlled, manipulated and dictated by powerful corporate interests and governments, it's not easy to get a clear picture on any given issue.

This is especially true when the story involves marginalized minorities and dispossessed groups. And of late the Muslims have been at the receiving end. After the disintegration of Soviet Union, the West found itself a new enemy in Islam.

The 9/11 attacks in the US and 7/7 strikes in the UK were only excuses, not the causes, to hasten this process. They might have contributed to the current hysteria against everything Islamic but they never were the Original Sin as we've been given to believe.

Myths like this have been demolished in a most interesting survey conducted by Gallup. What makes this opinion poll like no other is that it was conducted over a period of six years, beginning after the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks. Gallup conducted research in 35 Muslim countries, interviewing more than 50,000 people, to come up with what it calls the first comprehensive survey of Muslim world opinion.

The results have also given birth to a book called, Who Speaks for Islam? What a billion Muslims really think by John L. Esposito and Dalia Mogahed.

The poll and the book offer a much-needed reality check on the relations between the West and Muslim world. Some of the findings are genuinely surprising even for someone like me who has been obsessed with the issue.

Many conclusions of the poll only go to confirm what we in the Muslim world have always known but couldn't succeed in putting them across to our friends in the West. For instance, the fact that it's not Islamic teachings that drive some individuals to violence but historical injustices inflicted and perpetuated by some Western powers.

Which is why one so hopes that the urgent message this poll seeks to convey reaches the Western audience â€" and the wider world. It would be such a shame if it doesn't. Because, as Dalia Mogahed argues in the book, this ostensible conflict between Islam and West is far from inevitable.

Many concerned commentators have repeatedly argued that what is fuelling the so-called clash of civilizations is not some absurd hatred of Christian West sanctioned by Islam but Western ignorance about Muslims. The poll backs this argument.

Most Muslims, regardless of where they live, whether in Saudi Arabia or Iran, are surprisingly well informed about the West and its values and ideals. In fact, most of them admire the West for its scientific achievements, economic progress and celebration of knowledge and excellence. The West is admired for the political freedom, democracy and rights it offers its people.

There are other findings that are equally interesting. Contrary to common perceptions in the West, the majority of respondents think men and women have equal rights. A whopping 94 percent of Indonesians share this view. Indonesia is the world's largest Muslim nation. In Iran, the figure is 89 percent. And in Saudi Arabia, it's 73 percent.

A great majority of Muslims also believe a woman can work outside her home in any job for which she is qualified (88 percent in Indonesia, 72 percent in Egypt and 78 percent in Saudi Arabia). And they also believe women should be able to vote without interference (87 percent in Indonesia, 91 percent in Egypt, 98 percent in Lebanon).

And what about the supposed Muslim sympathy for terrorism? While 6 percent of the Americans think attacks involving civilians are "completely justified," in Saudi Arabia this figure is 4 percent. In Lebanon and Iran, it's 2 percent.

And mark this, it's important. The majority of Muslims absolutely rejects violence and terrorism. In fact, many of the respondents quoted Qur'anic verses to point out that extremism goes against Islamic teachings.

Going by these findings, would any reasonable person in his right mind blame Islam for extremism and violence? And remember, the survey was not sponsored by Al Jazeera, Bin Laden's favorite channel, but by Gallup, the biggest name in the business.

So what is it then that drives the West and Muslim world apart? The answer lies in Western indifference, nay casual contempt, for a billion believers and all that they believe in. I am not saying this; Gallup poll does.

Again this shouldn't come as a surprise. While admiring Western values such as democracy and freedom, Muslims feel these values are conveniently cast aside when it comes to applying them to Muslim world.

More than 65 percent of Egyptians, Jordanians and Iranians believe the US will never allow people in the Middle East to run their own affairs and chart their own course.

When the Gallup pollsters asked Muslims around the world what the West could do to improve relations with the Muslim world, the most frequent responses called for greater respect for Islam and treatment of Muslims as equals, not as inferior.

The Western contempt for Islam, especially the ignorance of Americans, is not something imagined by us. The poll findings speak for themselves. The majority of Americans (66 percent) admit to having "some" prejudice against Muslims; one in five say they have "a great deal" of prejudice. Almost half do not believe US Muslims are "loyal" to their country; and one in four doesn't want a Muslim as a neighbor!

Given these views, is it any surprising that Muslims are invariably portrayed as terrorists in the US media, including that big propaganda machine called Hollywood?

If the Muslims harbor some degree of anti-US sentiment, it's not because of what the Americans are but because of what they do or have been doing in the Muslim world. But how would you explain the deep-seated paranoia and Islamophobia in the US and West?

Whatever its causes, this divide is unfortunate and unnatural. Because there is a great deal lot that unites the Muslims and Americans. In an increasingly materialistic world, they continue to hold on to their belief in God.

Unlike in Europe and much of the world, religion plays a healthy role in the day-to-day life of the Americans as well as Muslims. They both cherish universal values like honesty, truthfulness, hard work, accountability and being always loyal to your family.

Just look around. What we have in common is much more than what we do not. Which is why this divide is such a tragedy. We Muslims want to bridge this gulf. Is the other side equally willing?

â€" Aijaz Zaka Syed is a Dubai-based journalist and commentator.

1991. Richard Dawkins and Bill Maher

Comment #161111 by Goldy on April 14, 2008 at 8:16 pm

I'm afraid so. Why? "Because I'm fucking stupid, I guess" is the only answer I can come up with these days!

:-) Fucking stupid is to go the whole hog (hmmm...no more of that for you! Wonder what an Islamic hog is. Sheep, I guess...but I digress!). You like it, it fulfils a role in your life - nothing stupid about that. Odd, yes, but only to me (and a few others, methinks).
You still kinda-sorta believe, so I guess it makes sense.
I like the Middle East. Lived in Abu Dhabi in the mid to late 70s when it was a sandy island and worked in Syria. I also like Arab News :-) Mind you, I am also a sinophile (though my wife will raise her eyebrows at this as I always complain about Chinese superstitions and thought). Have to say the feelings never went as far as belief, though. But then, I am an athiest.
Anyway, accept my hand (shake, not marriage) and glad to have met you :-)

1992. For sale: 13-year-old virgin

Comment #161106 by Goldy on April 14, 2008 at 8:02 pm

Goldy "bedouins would be close" bedyoungins sounds closer.

Wry smile :-)
Still doesn't take that feeling of discomfort from me. I felt a bit sad reading this story. Wonder how I would have felt actually being there, seeing these young things all dolled up. Wonder how the men looking at them feel, knowing (probably) what they're thinking. I'm sure some of them are fathers, probably of girls who are probably the same age as the younger "prostitutes". They're probably very good fathers too...
But these young girls were born into the wrong caste/tribe/socio-economic group. Doesn't religion have a part to play in all this. I'll accept they help out, but they also caused the whole mess...
People left Africa millenia ago for this?

1993. Richard Dawkins and Bill Maher

Comment #161104 by Goldy on April 14, 2008 at 7:57 pm

Layla, you area convert to Islam? From Christianity or form something else? Agnostic too - that come later or is there a wee looking going on. Ask becasue a friend here had a spell of trying to find a religion that fitted with her (gods are so like shoes...ones that don't fit can hurt!). She's on Buddhism now.
Any chance all belief will die away? Within you, I mean - obviously the world is going to have this affliction for a long while yet!

1994. For sale: 13-year-old virgin

Comment #161097 by Goldy on April 14, 2008 at 7:43 pm

I recall the same sort of thing in Syria (young girls forced into prostitution, not nihilism). They were called the gypsies, but I guess bedouins would be close - I don't know - tents and stuff, with trucks parked out by the side. Some of the western workers went there. One was orally pleasured by some young girl while the father (?) got tea ready for the other waiting guests.
Of course, while all this is going on, people are debating morality and whether or not it exists as such and whether or not athiesm gives one carte blanche to turn ones nose up at established societal life.
Funny old world...

1995. For sale: 13-year-old virgin

Comment #161076 by Goldy on April 14, 2008 at 6:50 pm

Ummm, that's a constructive comment!

1996. For sale: 13-year-old virgin

Comment #161036 by Goldy on April 14, 2008 at 5:18 pm

And now, my friends, I must leave you as I have some videotapes to return. I shall simply end tonight by writing that any criticism leveled against me will be wrong: Pre-emptive strike.

Sorry, pre-empted you already ;-)
Comment #161023
:-D

1997. For sale: 13-year-old virgin

Comment #161033 by Goldy on April 14, 2008 at 5:17 pm

Henri Said:

TCT,
"equality, freedom, concern and sympathy for others" all derive from Christianity in the west (see Matthew 5-7: sermon on the mount).

I almost blew my coffee out my nose at that bit of drivel.

Max, I have to agree with you. It's as funny now as it was the first time he said it :-)
Can't wait until he start on his weak gene theory :-D

1998. For sale: 13-year-old virgin

Comment #161023 by Goldy on April 14, 2008 at 5:08 pm

...however, I am more far removed from that faith than you cultural Christians out here who don't believe in the Christian God but believe in Christian values.

:-) I see you're still maintaining ours are Christian values.
I still disagree.
I am right.
You are wrong.
;-)

1999. For sale: 13-year-old virgin

Comment #160929 by Goldy on April 14, 2008 at 2:48 pm

They have temporary marriage, where a dowry is given and a marriage is performed lasting from one day to 100 years... And you guessed it, people are using it as a means of prostitution.

Misyar weddings were a big thing in Arab News a while back. Quite a few of the correspondents were rather against them.

2000. For sale: 13-year-old virgin

Comment #160926 by Goldy on April 14, 2008 at 2:46 pm

Glad to see Henri back - been missing your nihilism :-)