Comments by Steve Zara

Comment #255204 by Steve Zara on September 27, 2008 at 3:26 am

Fanusi-

Steve, read post 305

I did. I don't happen to think that those past actions you mention were admirable. In fact, actions such as the relocation of American Japanese is just the kind of abuse of rights I am trying to prevent. It remains something of a scandal today.

I think this highlights our differing views on human rights.

We also live in quite a different world today. A world with permanent databases, linked at high speed, a world of monitoring and where privacy is fast being lost.

We need to protect rights with increasing vigour, not remove them.

2302. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #255202 by Steve Zara on September 27, 2008 at 3:17 am

Comment #255197 by Diacanu

Go on, say "cut me down and I will become stronger than you can imagine".

You know you want to!

2303. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #255200 by Steve Zara on September 27, 2008 at 3:15 am

Comment #255192 by Fanusi Khiyal

In fact every society - not just nasty ones like the Reich, but well and truly every society - has been capable of unleashing whoopass on the enemy while being nice to its own. On purely factual grounds, that's nonsense.

No, it isn't. You are trying to confuse abandoning general rights for selected citizens with attacking an external enemy.

If I'm reading this right, it implies that guys like Abu Hamza are like the gays forty years ago - poor, misunderstood minorities, wouldn't hurt a fly.

No, you aren't reading it right.

What I am trying to say is that I don't have your faith that governments can be trusted with the kind of authoritarian and arbitrary powers you wish to give them. Governments have already shown how they are prepared to use such powers in a highly nasty way against their own citizens (as in the punishment and forced treatment of homosexuals). You seem to think you can restrict the use of such powers to one special case - certain fanatic preachers. That is hopelessly naive.

The fallacy of this is shown by the current presence of legally backed Shariah courts of arbitration. They are allowed because of certain "gaps" in arbitration laws. Open up the laws for "nice" courts and you get the "nasty" ones too.

We need to close such gaps to help ensure human rights, not introduce gaps to allow the human rights of a certain few to be abandoned, no matter how tempting that may be.

2304. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #255186 by Steve Zara on September 27, 2008 at 2:38 am

Comment #255184 by Fanusi Khiyal

Steve makes much of the fact that the Shariah-supporting fire-breathing Imams are, technically, "British citizens".

They are full British Citizens.

While that's technically so, it misses the fact that, due to the upbringing these guys have had, they've got a memetic legacy which means they might as well be from the planet Zongo.

That is just about what most people in the UK were saying about gay men decades ago.

We threaten the legal status of citizenship at our peril. Once it has been weakened, it becomes a dangerous tool for a corrupt government to use against those who it chooses. Such tactics are a weapon that fires both ways, and harms us too.

Once we erode such rights, it is going to be very hard to get them back, if ever.

2305. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #255182 by Steve Zara on September 27, 2008 at 2:26 am

Comment #255178 by Rachel Holmes

Something that helped change my mind was reading that such courts were handing out judgements that favoured men over women (such as dividing up property in inheritance cases). Legal backing for such courts would mean that the women could not later easily appeal against such apparent unfairness.

2306. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #255179 by Steve Zara on September 27, 2008 at 2:18 am

Comment #255175 by Fanusi Khiyal

As so often, we can mostly agree about problems, but are very far apart in terms of solutions.

There are some pretty interesting and liberal Muslims overseas. If you exclude all Muslims, you will also exclude, for example, Muslims in Canada that provide support for gays and lesbians. I would have thought that the immigration of such people would be an asset to our society. This is why I think we have to deal with individuals, and not assume all in a cultural group are the same.

2307. Those fanatical atheists

Comment #255174 by Steve Zara on September 27, 2008 at 2:05 am

Comment #255171 by Invisible Talker

Isn't it obvious to everyone what we're dealing with here

It is indeed. It is someone who is clearly way out of their depth.

2308. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #255172 by Steve Zara on September 27, 2008 at 2:01 am

Comment #255170 by Fanusi Khiyal

Except that they already have legal authority.

Indeed. So I would say (and somehow I suspect you may agree with me) that such legal authority needs to be removed, along with that of any other parallel system.

2309. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #255168 by Steve Zara on September 27, 2008 at 1:56 am

Comment #255166 by Fanusi Khiyal

The idea that these would be "voluntary" was always idiotic.

I am going to agree that giving these courts (or any parallel system of law) legal backing is extremely unwise. If people happen to be pressured into using such courts, they need to be able to subsequently decide not to abide by the decisions.

2310. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #255165 by Steve Zara on September 27, 2008 at 1:52 am

Comment #255164 by Styrer-

Then I am going to have to apologise. I do tend to use emoticons. I'll make an attempt to cut back!

2311. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #255163 by Steve Zara on September 27, 2008 at 1:46 am

Fanusi-

Now, let me refresh your memories about what is going on in the UK: Shariah courts. This isn't just financing. These are honest to god courts with full legal power of enforcement.

Correct me if am I wrong, but these are voluntary systems for arbitration. All have to consent to their use.

They have the same legal position as Beth Din courts which have been around for about a century.

It is a form of contractual legal arrangement between the parties concerned.

As far as I am concerned, providing something is based on consent, and entered into voluntarily, and does not breach UK law, I don't see how there can be a major problem with it.

But...

What would concern me is if there was not full consent and understanding. I can imagine cultural pressure being applied.

So, this development does concern me. In the UK we have a state-provided system that tries to ensure all have access to legal advice and support, no matter what their culture or religion. I am not happy if access to that is being bypassed because of cultural pressure or intimidation. To be honest, I suspect this is probably happening.

2312. Ministers to Defy I.R.S. by Endorsing Candidates

Comment #255156 by Steve Zara on September 27, 2008 at 1:26 am

Comment #255153 by Fanusi Khiyal

As for the "but I'm talking about real" - save it. That has about as much trackion with me as the "Islam is Peace" hogwash, or the even more idiotic "Islam promotes women's rights".

Come on mate, play fair. You said you wouldn't divert a thread to Islam until at least after I had called you nasty.

Or have I perhaps misunderstood? Do we get this diversion for free?

2313. Ministers to Defy I.R.S. by Endorsing Candidates

Comment #255144 by Steve Zara on September 27, 2008 at 12:25 am

Comment #255138 by Jesus86

It is little wonder the leftists on this website don't see the merits of my arguments for libertarian market freedom. They don't even know much about their own ideologies, much less anyone else's.

You don't need to know much about any other major ideology to reject libertarianism, in the way that you need not be an expert on cooking to reject starvation.

2314. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #255089 by Steve Zara on September 26, 2008 at 10:17 pm

Comment #255088 by Laurie Fraser

To be honest, neither McCain nor Obama worries me too much, but Palin really does. I am trying to imagine a Palin presidential press conference and it scares me.

2315. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #255083 by Steve Zara on September 26, 2008 at 9:47 pm

Comment #255080 by Laurie Fraser

I respect such laziness. I should have posted a link, but was too lazy. However, here it is

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GM3iWlTiEGc

2316. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #255075 by Steve Zara on September 26, 2008 at 9:26 pm

Comment #255073 by Laurie Fraser

There has also been an interview of Sarah Palin on CBS, which includes a statement on the subject of the financial crisis in the UK which is barely even coherent English, let alone intelligent.

2317. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #255071 by Steve Zara on September 26, 2008 at 9:05 pm

Comment #255068 by Sciros

It's called an "avatar" for realz

I know, but I like to give the impression of being an out-of-touch old fogey sometimes.

2318. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #255066 by Steve Zara on September 26, 2008 at 8:02 pm

Comment #255065 by GoatBoy36

Then be so kind as to extend the same courtesy to others as you expect yourself. And drop the tiresome ad hominem comments.

Sorry, but apparently being tiresome is one of my life goals, along with being irritating.

And I still don't like your icon.

2319. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #255063 by Steve Zara on September 26, 2008 at 7:45 pm

Comment #255059 by Styrer-

I disagree with your position. Labelling is very important, can carry weight, and can affect behaviour because of it.

I do understand what you are saying, and I agree.

What I am concerned about is that if we start to react just to labels, it shows a worrying weakness in our culture.

I think we have to show that we aren't afraid of labels, that our culture can cope with a diversity of ideas, while at the same time being forceful in our insistence that all practices should be within the framework of law and human rights.

EDIT: But you have made me think I am perhaps being too idealistic.

2320. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #255062 by Steve Zara on September 26, 2008 at 7:40 pm

Comment #255060 by GoatBoy36

Please try and write (and think) more carefully.

Sorry, this is the best I can do. I'm afraid you will have to just put up with my poor quality of thought and communication.

2321. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #255058 by Steve Zara on September 26, 2008 at 7:14 pm

Overall, though, I have to say - poor fucking Muslims. With guys like you, Steve, saying that they can forever look forward, even in the West, to a submission to even a small amount of Shariah law, granted to them because you personally feel oh so bad about being in any way authoritative about the way they should live their lives, I wonder if they won't feel a little short-changed.

This isn't about multiculturalism. To me, multiculturalism is about neglecting peoples' rights or turning a blind eye to abuses because they are of a certain religion or culture. I am utterly against that. This is about freedom.

It seems to me to be against supporting human rights to prevent people from requesting consensual use of certain rules, as in business, simply because they label themselves Muslim.

I don't care what rules people want to use, or what they wish to call those rules, providing they don't restrict the rights of others or conflict with the law of the land. That is what freedom in Western democracies is surely about.

2322. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #255056 by Steve Zara on September 26, 2008 at 6:45 pm

Comment #255055 by Styrer-

To clarify - you're saying that, as a non-Muslim, I personally would be able to arrange my affairs without difficulty along Shariah lines?

Of course you can. In the City of London many businesses have arrangements to provide financial services along Shariah lines. Those businesses aren't Muslim.

2323. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #255053 by Steve Zara on September 26, 2008 at 6:36 pm

Comment #255052 by Styrer-

The resounding NO to this question must put you on guard,

What resounding "NO"? This happens all the time in the UK.

If so, how can you possible square this, unless you admit to some undue influence - either religious or multi-cultural - pulling you away from a clear analysis of this issue?

I support freedom within the law. If someone wishes to insist that businessmen they meet up with dress up in gorilla suits and hop on one leg, I would have no objection to that, providing it is consentual and does not conflict with UK law and human rights.

2324. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #255051 by Steve Zara on September 26, 2008 at 6:30 pm

Comment #255049 by Styrer-

I cannot believe, Steve, that you really think - because of some multi-cultural ideal you revere - that our own laws, tribunals, arbitrations and settlement procedures are not enough for Muslims in our country, and that you would support Muslims' participation in alternative forms of law - based on cultural imperative - which are not only explicitly religious but also so often precisely those forms of law which Muslims wanted, by taking up residence in this country, to shun and to leave behind,

I think you are completely missing my point. I am strongly against parallel legal systems and people having different rights in different cultures. I strongly believe in universal human rights for people, no matter what their culture or religion or country.

But, people should be free to make up whatever rules they like for their own groups providing they respect the laws of the land and human rights. If someone wishes to work with financial systems that don't charge interest, for example, and get people to sign up to that, and people do freely sign up to that, why should we stop them?

2325. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #255048 by Steve Zara on September 26, 2008 at 6:11 pm

Comment #255047 by Styrer-

I am not advancing Shariah as a way forward for society. I think that parallel legal frameworks are potentially dangerous. But what we have to deal with are actual infringements of the law, and not act like cowards just because someone uses a certain label for rules they want to use.

But unless you can point to where a company in the UK that has been requested to implement Shariah business practices that has also been asked to flog employees found drunk, then I am afraid that you are just going to have to admit you are wrong.

2326. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #255046 by Steve Zara on September 26, 2008 at 6:02 pm

Comment #255043 by Styrer-

(for which, you seem to need to be reminded, the laws of Great Britain already hold legal sovereignty).

Don't be patronising. Of course I realise that the laws of Great Britain hold legal sovereignty. I have not implied otherwise.

And, of course you get to choose bits of Shariah. That is clearly the case. Some financial institutions in the UK allow use of Shariah business practices to encourage Muslim clients from both UK and overseas. The companies that offer such services don't also demand that all employees have compulsory baths on Fridays (one particular rule of Islamic hygiene).

2327. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #255044 by Steve Zara on September 26, 2008 at 5:54 pm

Comment #255042 by Sciros

If parts of Shariah business practices don't promote equal opportunities for women and men, then those parts are illegal. We have existing laws to deal with that.

Groups of people have always been making their own rules and those rules have always been legally binding. If you join a club and sign an agreement about following those rules, and those rules don't conflict with laws, and you break those rules, then someone can, if appropriate, take legal action against you.

If you join a Star Trek Society that gives discounts for those who dress as Klingons, and you have been claiming discounts without the appropriate make-up, you can be prosecuted.

If people wish to sign up to certain business practices that conflict with no human rights, why should they be stopped simply because they happen to label such practices "Shariah"?

What we need to do is actively promote rights, and not run scared because of certain labels that people use.

2328. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #255039 by Steve Zara on September 26, 2008 at 5:32 pm

Comment #250848 by GoatBoy36

Of course I acknowledge that Shariah is more than just business practices. What I am saying is that when someone says they want to use Shariah for business practices it does not mean that they also wish to use every last rule of Shariah in every aspect of their lives, or wish to impose all those rules on others. It might mean that for some people, but it is a fallacy to assume that all do.

Please try and read things carefully. This is about the third time I have explained this on this thread. It is tiresome to have to repeat myself.

2329. Diamonds May Be Life's Birthstone

Comment #254905 by Steve Zara on September 26, 2008 at 11:36 am

Comment #254903 by DamnDirtyApe

Insert appropriate Bond Movie Theme here.

The only good bond theme (apart from Goldfinger)

2330. When Atheists Attack

Comment #254895 by Steve Zara on September 26, 2008 at 11:20 am

Comment #254873 by ghost9

This is a field I work in and most all of us in it are left with the same question----since horrible things are done by only a small % of any -ism, group, philosophy, belief, etc.----how do we pre-empt, before a bad event, that small % of a group and respect the rights of its large %?

That is a vital question. I think it is important that we find ways to engage with groups without isolating them and driving them to support the views of the small percentage. We need to ensure that the majority of such groups realise we are concerned about the minority, and not the entire group. This is why I have such a problem with ideas such as banning all Muslim immigration, or condemning all who say they support Shariah law. There are groups of Muslims who don't support the extremists, and who are open to change. These include well-known journalists, and politicians We need to provide them with support, not condemn them.

Comment #254876 by Nairb

I totally agree. There are major threats to our society from fundamentalists, but when anyone who denies that extreme solutions to such threats is described as "bending over backwards in support of the extremists", then people aren't going to take the poster of such threats seriously.

Fanusi's knowledge and experience of Islam is an asset to this site. He needs to stop diminishing that with petty personal attacks on those who don't agree with his solutions.

2331. When Atheists Attack

Comment #254851 by Steve Zara on September 26, 2008 at 10:13 am

Comment #254804 by Ian

I see the threat fundamentalist Islam poses, but I don't want to sacrifice the freedoms which make Western culture unique or discriminate against any grouping wholesale; that's too close to racism for my tastes.

Well said.

I actually think that Fanusi provides a valuable service in highlighting all kinds of threats to our society - threats that politicians usually seem reluctant to accept.

Where we differ fundamentally is in strategy. I think there is a real danger that we will abandon key aspects of our civilization in an attempt to rid ourselves of such threats.

2332. More atheists are sharing their views

Comment #254846 by Steve Zara on September 26, 2008 at 10:06 am

Comment #254843 by Bonzai

I think it may be more correct to say "you can't do good science unless you are obsessed with it". I speak as someone who has been a scientist, and also has mild OCD.

2333. More atheists are sharing their views

Comment #254840 by Steve Zara on September 26, 2008 at 9:52 am

Comment #254830 by flying goose

I think there may be a tendency for people to like rituals because there is the same kind of comfort or relief involved with them as obsessive compulsives get from their rituals. Perhaps there is a bit of mild OCD in a significant number of us?

2334. Catholic maternity wards 'face closure' if abortion law passes

Comment #254815 by Steve Zara on September 26, 2008 at 9:05 am

Fanusi-

I have still to hear rocksolid proof that the fetus, at whatever stage you care to define, isn't a human being, a child.

As far as I can see the rock-solid evidence was presented very well by in comment #254028 by John Desclin: there just aren't the neural pathways present in an early fetus that are present in what we would call a baby or a child.

Perhaps I am asking the wrong questions - what would you consider as sufficient evidence to change your views? I apologise if this question has already been asked.

2335. Catholic maternity wards 'face closure' if abortion law passes

Comment #254793 by Steve Zara on September 26, 2008 at 8:07 am

Comment #254780 by GoatBoy36

I suggest you read Nigel Warburton's "Thinking from A to Z". It's available on Amazon. Pay particular attention to pages 3 and 4.

I have a Ph.D in Thinkology from the University of Alabama. I can tell you that Warburton gets it very wrong when dealing with "X".

But now, I'm off for tea break, and I will attempt to return on-topic afterwards.

2336. Catholic maternity wards 'face closure' if abortion law passes

Comment #254791 by Steve Zara on September 26, 2008 at 8:03 am

Comment #254790 by decius

I have just discovered an interesting fact. Apparently at age 50, we get an official government letter that authorizes us not to put up with being patronised by others, but at the same time gives a license to be as patronising as we wish. It is apparently an attempt to balance out the bad influence of the young.

As that birthday is only about 18 months away, I thought it was time I got into practice.

2337. Catholic maternity wards 'face closure' if abortion law passes

Comment #254774 by Steve Zara on September 26, 2008 at 7:42 am

Comment #254771 by GoatBoy36

Again: I'd appreciate a response. Thank you.

Sorry no. And as I apparently "litter my posts with ad-hominems", perhaps I should add I don't like your icon :)

2338. Catholic maternity wards 'face closure' if abortion law passes

Comment #254772 by Steve Zara on September 26, 2008 at 7:38 am

Comment #254768 by Brian English

I have been trying to get discussions to deal with the issue of how much of a "person" is present. I think (as others have pointed out) use the term "human life" is not just vague, it can be a deliberate ploy to confuse "person" with "living human body".

The issue of "person" is difficult. We have legal rights for new-born babies, even though their personality can take years, even decades to fully develop (assuming that development ever stops). We also assume that the "person" is gone when there is below a certain threshold of brain function and structure at the end of life.

2339. Catholic maternity wards 'face closure' if abortion law passes

Comment #254762 by Steve Zara on September 26, 2008 at 7:21 am

Fanusi-

What I have principally against is that peculiarly irritating brand of educated idiocy as embodied by Steve.

Yay! My "insult bingo" card is getting full.

Shame you included "educated", but "particularly" as a qualifier for "irritating" was a nice touch. I am actually quite proud to be irritating. Better than being ignored.

I realise now I have seen your kind of insistence of diverting each thread to your favourite topic, and your resistance to evidence, and your use of the "reset button" approach, repeatedly arguing as if certain debates with posters here (such as Bonzai and Nairb) had never happened.

You haven't by chance discussed techniques with Dianelos have you?

(There is an interesting potential discussion to be had about dogmatists, and their use of techniques in discussion, whether or not their repeated diversion of threads is important, and how to potentially deal with them. I might make that a blog post)

2340. Mysterious New 'Dark Flow' Discovered in Space

Comment #254698 by Steve Zara on September 26, 2008 at 5:44 am

Comment #254246 by jamesstephenbrown

That doesn't work because virtually all the interaction between matter and forms of energy involves attractive gravitational forces. There are some possible rather rare forms of energy and matter that are repulsive (we would need them to build wormholes), but they are very rare indeed.

2341. Catholic maternity wards 'face closure' if abortion law passes

Comment #254686 by Steve Zara on September 26, 2008 at 5:15 am

Comment #254683 by Sargeist

But I think also that people who do not go along with the entire contents of the Catechism (which I think of in the sense of a programming language standard) should not label themselves as Catholic.

But the fact is that they do. I think that is a good thing. It means that we are usually dealing with people who are adaptable and flexible in their views.

2342. Catholic maternity wards 'face closure' if abortion law passes

Comment #254677 by Steve Zara on September 26, 2008 at 5:00 am

Comment #254675 by Sargeist

Sorry, I didn't want to appear to criticise you for ranting. Rant away :)

I think that being Catholic, if it is to mean something, has to be a particular demarcated set of beliefs. Doesn't it?

You might think so, but in my personal experience, much of being Catholic is about family tradition rather than fixed set of beliefs. Being Catholic when I was young consisted of liking Mary a bit more than other versions of Christianity, and saying the Our Father differently from Anglicans. We also occasionally followed what the Pope said, but more out of vague interest than any sense of dogma being handed down.

We also considered Catholicism a "purer" version of Christianity, as what we believed was not set up by a lecherous King in the middle ages, so he could shag more women.

I would like them to be labelled like programming languages are.

Oh dear. That sounds like the start of a new meme:

If Catholicism is COBOL, then what is Hinduism?

2343. Catholic maternity wards 'face closure' if abortion law passes

Comment #254667 by Steve Zara on September 26, 2008 at 4:36 am

Comment #254664 by sunbeamforjesus

War is coming!

I really don't believe so. What tends to happen is that even though people identify with certain beliefs, they can adapt what they actually believe and practice and start to assimilate. This tends to happen with Catholics in Western democracies, where very many (perhaps the majority) use birth control, and many even accept abortion (especially when it involves friends or family). I have had Catholic friends come to my gay civil partnership ceremony, and have had best wishes for my marriage from friends from Muslim families (incidentally it is not that they refused to come, just that we had a small venue and I had known the Catholic friends for longer!)

2344. Catholic maternity wards 'face closure' if abortion law passes

Comment #254663 by Steve Zara on September 26, 2008 at 4:30 am

Comment #254662 by Sargeist

I have a Catholic friend who overcomes the problem of evil by assuming that God is a bit incompetent.

Knowing her is one of the reasons why I believe that assuming people have certain views because of how they label themselves is plain wrong. When I was young (and Catholic) I knew of a parish priest who would not condemn birth control, or even abortion.

The problem is though, that these people continuing to label themselves as Catholic gives support to the Catholic hierarchy, who continue to push unpleasant dogma.

2345. Catholic maternity wards 'face closure' if abortion law passes

Comment #254657 by Steve Zara on September 26, 2008 at 4:01 am

Comment #254646 by Bonzai

Aaah.... clever. That does make a lot of sense.

2346. Catholic maternity wards 'face closure' if abortion law passes

Comment #254654 by Steve Zara on September 26, 2008 at 3:54 am

Comment #254650 by Mitchell Gilks

There is no pragmatic different between a fundamentalist or an atheist if they both hold all of the same insane right-wing views in my opinion. I'd rather a world full of moderate religious people than right-wing atheists.

I wholeheartedly agree. The fight for reason and clear-thinking involves a battle against dogma. That dogma may be political as well as religious.

2347. Catholic maternity wards 'face closure' if abortion law passes

Comment #254651 by Steve Zara on September 26, 2008 at 3:51 am

Comment #254638 by decius

Thank you. Both were appropriate.

2348. Catholic maternity wards 'face closure' if abortion law passes

Comment #254635 by Steve Zara on September 26, 2008 at 3:18 am

Fanusi-

Steve's view that it's okay to kill 'em up to the twenty-eight week.

It isn't just my view. It is the consensus of medical opinion that there is not likely to be consciousness before 28 weeks.

In an argument like this, it is important to understand who is holding the view that is the scientific and medical consensus. Saying that this is "Steve's view" does not recognise that fact. It is rather like arguing against global warming and saying that "Steve's view is that CO2 makes the world hotter".

if the fetus isn't ~~going to become~~ a fully fledged person, it can't be considered for those rights.

Fixed it for you. Otherwise you have problems, as a hot date involving a bottle of wine and a faulty condom would also have to be considered as being on the way to a new fully fledged person.

2349. More atheists are sharing their views

Comment #254338 by Steve Zara on September 25, 2008 at 2:50 pm

Comment #254328 by the great teapot

No. What it means is that anyone is going to have a very hard time providing any convincing evidence that a God exists.

Comment #254330 by Bonzai

That's why some theists believe exactly because there is no scientific evidence for God.

I know. I am afraid words fail me at this point.

2350. More atheists are sharing their views

Comment #254332 by Steve Zara on September 25, 2008 at 2:48 pm

Comment #254321 by decius

"Paranormal" is kind of OK with me. What I won't accept is "supernatural" in the sense of forever beyond description in terms of natural law.

Even clairvoyance could potentially be defined in terms of some physical phenomena.