251. Tolerating intolerance is still this country's besetting sin

Comment #20601 by Luthien on February 5, 2007 at 12:53 am

8. Comment #20599 by matlot on February 5, 2007 at 12:04 am
I saw the channel 4 dispatches program and it tested my JS Mill inspired liberalism to the limit. Freedom of religion is an absolute right proclaimed in the European Consensus on Human Rights and is contained in the same article as freedom of thought, but I'm almost tempted to give up this right just to be rid of Islam.
I say almost because, on reflection, we have to let these medieval twats retain the freedom of speech that they march incessantly to refute.

We should consider a ban on minors attending religious services (brainwashing). You would have to enforce the ban on all religions though, and I think that they would make a lot of noise about their "rights" being trampled on (but what about the child's right to decide for themselves?).

Perhaps we should consider a kind of "false advertising" legislation for religions. If your teachings contain anything that is (if acted upon) in breach of someone elses human rights, you cannot force them upon children, or gain charitable status for "spreading the word" of whatever god you believe in. This would be the intelectual equivalent of a ban on junk food ads during children's television.

Of course anyone who is an adult is free to believe what they want, and give money to whomever they wish, but if they want to teach it to children, or gain charitable status just for being a religion, they have to risk their teachings / holy book being dragged into the open (warts and all) and examined in detail by a court of law.

252. Tolerating intolerance is still this country's besetting sin

Comment #20586 by Luthien on February 4, 2007 at 3:10 pm

There is only one way to break the extremist's hold, and that is to educate and protect women, and make sure that children get an education instead of religious brainwashing.

253. Taking the fight to Islam

Comment #20583 by Luthien on February 4, 2007 at 2:54 pm

Someone needed to say it, and she has. A very brave woman.

'The veil,' she says, 'is to show that women are responsible for the sexual self-control of men.'

What an accurate assesment of the situation, I'm going to make an effort to remember it.

254. The Chronicles of Kearnya, or, Principles of Evolution Observed in the Field at Kearny High School

Comment #20569 by Luthien on February 4, 2007 at 10:54 am

In the UK it would be illegal to stop students from taping a teacher. This is to allow students that have a disability, who may be too slow at taking notes / unable to take notes, to record the teaching for later study.

255. Evolution Debate - Pigliucci vs Hovind

Comment #20465 by Luthien on February 2, 2007 at 5:57 pm

from the news article:

"I am not a tax protester and never have been," Kent Hovind told Rodgers. "The laws are just fine. It is just that some are enforcing laws that are not there."

Classic stuff ;-)

256. [Warning: Graphic] Children's foreheads slashed in Muslim saint's name

Comment #20462 by Luthien on February 2, 2007 at 5:40 pm

56. Comment #20441 by whisper on February 2, 2007 at 1:24 pm
I have to agree with Squiddity.

Sensationalism is a problem in the media.

Nobody is disputing the "facts" so much as the way they were delivered, and from a North American perspective.

I'm not saying that this 'ritual' is right or should be tolerated... but there are better angles for an arguement than appealing to the masses emotions... this type of approach is what really perpetuates these problems. We know it's wrong, bad, horrific... but let's not sit and argue the same arguements over and over again... let's try something else.

The responses I've been reading sound more like they are from people of 'faith' than people of reason.

You say that people know this is "wrong, bad, horrific", obviously this is not the case. Obviously these people think that this is a "good" thing to do to their children.

Taking a knife to a young child is wrong. We have evolved a "gut" reaction to things like this for a reason, so an emotional response is unavoidable. Do I need to give a logical and reasoned argument for why we don't eat our own shit? No, because everyone has an automatic reaction of disgust that does not require a detailed explanation (though we are perfectly capable of giving one anyway).

I think you are just argueing for the sake of it... Look, a black crow :-P

257. God and gorillas

Comment #20413 by Luthien on February 2, 2007 at 9:18 am

8. Comment #20267 by Riley on February 1, 2007 at 11:25 am
Hey Luthien, I've often thought that this term "respect" was very loaded. Is "worship and fear" the same as "respect"? I think that early civilizations feared nature, then anthropomorphized it as a means of coping with this fear, and then took to worshipping/appeasing the powerful personalities they saw in nature. Modern religion (for all its ills) was really a positive step forward. Because modern religions did not embue nature with supernatural human-like emotional needs and motivations, but instead regarded nature as an impersonal phenomena, people from such religions were more apt to study and master nature. It was a step in the right direction toward a more scientific thinking. It's only in our contemporary context (last few hundred years) that overcoming our fear of nature has become a particularly dangerous and destructive thing.


I suppose that "respect" can have an element of fear too. I know that people like "storm chasers", mountain climbers, vulcanologists, and animal handlers often speak of having "respect" for storms, mountains, volcanoes, and big animals. In saying this they mean that they are aware of the dangerous and unpredictable nature of these things, but extend them a kind of "professional courtesy" in not taking it personally if something goes wrong.

I'm sure that there was an element of "worship and fear" in these early humans, but the "respect" that I was particularly referring to, seen in many shamanistic cultures, is extended to animals in a way that asks forgiveness for the death of the animal. I think this is more to do with our capacity for compassion than fear of the unknown.

258. Sextuplet parents take B.C. to court over baby seizures

Comment #20373 by Luthien on February 2, 2007 at 4:13 am

Any belief that infringes upon another person's rights is (or should be) illegal to act upon.

259. God and gorillas

Comment #20254 by Luthien on February 1, 2007 at 9:47 am

I thought this was an interesting article. It always fascinates me to hear how complicated apes really are. I remember hearing about a group of chimps where the dominant male has hurt his leg and suffered from a bad limp. After the leg was healed, the other chimps would all mimic the limp while his back was turned, and stop doing it when he turned around to look.

As for religion, I think there is a strong distinction between religion as Dawkins sees it, and the kind of spirituality that our ancestors may have developed. Spiritual "religions" along the lines of polytheistic / shamenistic traditions are strongly rooted in having a deep respect for the environment and the creatures in it, even an empathy for animals who have to be killed and eaten (nor did they seem to make the assumption that humans are the only animals that can "think"). There is a sharp contrast between this way of thinking and the "big three" monotheistic religions, where the emphasis is on us being "special" and seperate from the environment, and having the right to exploit the planet (and all those intelligent, beautiful creatures we share it with) as we see fit. It appears that our ancestors probably had a deep respect for their surroundings because their very survival depended on that respect, whereas modern religion is disconnected from this.

260. Blashpemy Challenge Interview

Comment #20221 by Luthien on February 1, 2007 at 5:53 am

Well, I think the Blasphemy Challenge is just great. The more I watch these videos, the more hope I have for the world.

As I teen I wanted to scream to the world that these people are crazy, but was stuck in an oppressively religious situation (thankfully my parents are now atheists too, so reason can win through). This is a great way to vent your anger and frustration, so you can feel free and true to yourself.

261. Just 'Evolution in Action'

Comment #20002 by Luthien on January 31, 2007 at 3:32 am

The more rational resist vaccines for perhaps three reasons: the long-term genetic, immune, and nervous system effects are unknown; those predisposed to hypersensitivity to the genetically-altered cells, adjuvants and preservatives in vaccines (delivered directly into the bloodstream) are not screened out; and because there are, plainly, very little justification for almost all of the widely-used vaccines, making the risk-benefit analysis quite clear.

Ooh, I'll bet you hate the MMR jab too (in spite of the media hysteria, the studies showing its safety are very conclusive).

Perhaps you should be lobbying for the compulsory registration of ALL studies; at present they only publish the favourable ones.

262. The Ego and the ID

Comment #19992 by Luthien on January 31, 2007 at 2:45 am

15. Comment #19988 by cheshirecat on January 31, 2007 at 2:14 am

Ok so maybe I was being stupid. I just don't like it when Dawkins says things like 'religion is child abuse'. That is a prime example of something for which there is no evidence.

No evidence? You HAVE lived a sheltered life.

263. [Warning: Graphic] Children's foreheads slashed in Muslim saint's name

Comment #19989 by Luthien on January 31, 2007 at 2:32 am

4. Comment #19982 by Squiddity on January 31, 2007 at 1:36 am

"This is an argument from prejudicial language and is therefore invalid.

If you accept that the Muslim (Shi'ite) faith is correct and true, then this behaviour is acceptable.
If you do not think it is true, then this behaviour may well not be.
It is not acceptable to me because I do not accept the Muslim faith and my personal morality tells me it is wrong.

However, using it as an example of how those heathen types are so evil plays to our idea of morality and deliberately tries to pluck at our heartstrings by overplaying the graphic and sensationalist elements of the story.
It avoids having to make a valid or reasoned argument by using prejudicial and sensational language.

This is what I would expect from our local mass market tabloid papers - it is not what I expect from this site.
I have come to expect better, I do not think this story, in this form, should have been proprogated here."

Sensational language? How else can you describe taking a knife to young children and cutting them? What is not "valid and reasoned" about the article, it's not like you need to quote academic sources to prove that this is child abuse?

264. Atheists in Jail

Comment #19817 by Luthien on January 30, 2007 at 4:15 am

Lazy???

Nah, I just ain't been caught yet ;-)

Perhaps most of us don't get caught (we are supposed to be cleverer)? Do the statistics on unsolved crime match the size of the unaccounted for atheist population? :-P

265. Young, British Muslims 'getting more radical'

Comment #19654 by Luthien on January 29, 2007 at 5:45 am

TheCodeCrack, as many here have said, that will just make the problem worse.

I think the issue here is "faith schools", they are the institutions we should be banning.

266. Blasphemy Challenge on FOX

Comment #19651 by Luthien on January 29, 2007 at 5:29 am

The expressions on Brian's face were priceless! I'm glad he got his point across so well (in spite of an interviewer who wouldn't let his interviewee speak).

I just got a webcam for christmas, think I will go do the challenge now :-)

267. Church of England still valid as state religion?

Comment #19590 by Luthien on January 28, 2007 at 5:37 pm

The real question is:

Given the CofEs blatent support for the so called 'right' to discriminate against homosexual couples, should they still receive state funding, tax benefits and automatic seats in the House of Lords?

268. The Bright Revolution

Comment #19059 by Luthien on January 24, 2007 at 3:02 pm

5. Comment #19020 by jonathan espalin on January 24, 2007 at 12:05 pm
'Athiest and 'Bright' are both unfortunate terms. Athiest has, by definition, a negative meaning, and 'Bright' is not only confusing, but rather friilous-sounding. Whatever happened to the word "Naturalist," or "Naturalism.

LOL, if I went round telling people in Belfast that I was a 'naturalist', they would think that I was in the habit of walking round the house in my one button birthday suit.

I prefer Atheist, because I prefer to say "So what if I am?"

269. Do You Believe in Magic?

Comment #18870 by Luthien on January 23, 2007 at 10:31 am

Perhaps our ancestors instinctively recreated all the conditions present when something went well (like a hunt, or finding food), because they did not have the knowledge of the world that we have, and it was more beneficial to carry out "pointless" actions than to risk leaving them out and fail? This would explain their need to worship the elements of the environment that had the most impact in their lives (the sun, moon, or particular animals).

270. Neither intellect nor faith will save humanity

Comment #18814 by Luthien on January 23, 2007 at 4:07 am

38. Comment #18710 by Thad on January 22, 2007 at 3:00 pm


*Sigh*

271. Ruth Kelly, her hard-line church and a devout PM wrestling with his conscience

Comment #18809 by Luthien on January 23, 2007 at 3:58 am

24. Comment #18699 by Filistyn on January 22, 2007 at 2:03 pm

I am not a biologist or scientist, but I cannot see how homosexuality can be regarded as "good" natural selection. Surely it must be seen as some kind of physical aberration and a gene or two gone wrong.

If it did not have some benefit, the tendency would have died out. In actual fact, there were studies done that showed a link between homosexual men and "super fertile" women:

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn6519-survival-of-genetic-homosexual-traits-explained.html

One can also see how it would be helpful from a survival point of view for women with an excess of children to have close relatives who will not have children of their own (but still have the desire to look after them).

Also, check out this study showing how lesbians raise "well adjusted" teenagers:
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn6670-lesbian-couples-raise-welladjusted-teenagers.html

272. 12 Year Old Girl Prodigy Paints Pictures of God

Comment #18798 by Luthien on January 23, 2007 at 3:32 am

9. Comment #18718 by seals on January 22, 2007 at 4:03 pm
... (IMO) and the hands are way too small!

Hehe, my first thought as well!

273. Britons unconvinced on evolution

Comment #18796 by Luthien on January 23, 2007 at 3:25 am

12. Comment #18768 by robives on January 22, 2007 at 10:38 pm
Out of interest; does anyone in the UK know anyone who believes in creationism?

Sadly I know 2 people, one whom I have had long discussions with on the issue (because I enjoy a challenge :-P).

On the bright side, many people in work have asked to borrow "The God Delusion" from me, and every person who reads it recommends it to someone else. My sister is reading it, I bought the audio book for my dad, my mum is going to read it too. My partner bought it for his mum who loved it, now his dad is reading it and his brother has gone out and bought it too. My dad says that there is a guy where he works that is lending it out to people too.

274. Intelligent design to feature in school RE lessons

Comment #18793 by Luthien on January 23, 2007 at 2:54 am

I can't imagine my old school (catholic) teaching any text by Richard Dawkins. I'm sure they will do what they did when they were supposed to be teaching us about contraception, hand out the leaflets while telling us that it was deeply wrong and against Catholic beliefs, and saying that the only reason they handed them out was because the government forced them to.

...still, an introduction like that is bound to make Dawkins popular reading with today's kiddies ;-)

275. Neither intellect nor faith will save humanity

Comment #18630 by Luthien on January 22, 2007 at 5:48 am

35. Comment #18614 by Thad on January 22, 2007 at 3:37 am

The only hope for the billion Muslims to be released from a medieval life and future is for the establishment of democracy in the middle east.

It is condescending to think that they are not capable or worthy of it. The same was said of the German and Japanese. The point of the Bush Doctrine is that we now realize that with the ubiquity of modern weapons enlightened democracy, as a replacement for religious radicalism, is our only hope as well.

I would welcome a well thought out alternative to the actual physical destruction of those who seek, at any cost, the end of modern civilization.

I was not suggesting that they are not capable or worthy of democracy but, in addition to lack of education among the poor, people who are locked in the extreme delusion of religion are easy prey to religious extremist governments (for obvious reasons).

In searching for a solution, everyone is ignoring the people who are most likely to turn these countries on their head (in a good way), the women. Islamic culture keeps women isolated in their own homes, but the internet gives them access to information, and the ability to network with each other. There is already some evidence that this is happening abong the middle classes (the class that always leads revolutions) who have access to this technology, and some women are going a step further. There was a Saudi TV Presenter that bravely published pictures showing her horrific injuries after her husband had "exercised his islamic right" to beat her senseless. There was a public outcry against the husband; a great leap forward in their moral zeitgeist. Another brave woman in Pakistan who sought justice after being gang raped as part of a Sharia Law judgement upon her brother, raised public conciousness so much that the government were forced to make a change to the law.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3631743.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/6152520.stm

Sadly, all the Bush invasion of Iraq did (and you are naive if you actually think it wasn't about oil) is to destroy the infrastructure that allowed people to communicate ideas.

Here is your solution, in the words of Mukhtar Mai:

"And I set up my school because I believe education is the key to ending the cruelty I see around me every day"

276. Skyway to Heaven

Comment #18618 by Luthien on January 22, 2007 at 5:01 am

7. Comment #18578 by k1mgy on January 21, 2007 at 6:28 pm
In my neck of the woods, light poles are still adorned with very durable posters proclaiming the "rapture" and a date (my recollection): July 10th, 1987.

I suspect the highway maintenance crews have failed to remove them simply to allow the statement to live on for as long as the glue holds.

Oh ye of little faith, it is clear to me that the highway maintenance crews were taken up in the rapture, and we are now living in the end of times. :-P

277. Zeus devotees worship in Athens

Comment #18548 by Luthien on January 21, 2007 at 4:53 pm

4. Comment #18541 by mintcheerios on January 21, 2007 at 4:36 pm
This must be where Sam Harris gets his Poseidon hate mail from.

Yes, and Richard is in trouble now, he's been comparing belief in Zeus to those degerate christians ;-)

278. Skyway to Heaven

Comment #18545 by Luthien on January 21, 2007 at 4:48 pm

Damn, for a moment I thought I could go for a change of career as an Athiest back-up pilot...

I'm half qualified for that ;-)

279. Noam Chomsky Interview on Faith

Comment #18542 by Luthien on January 21, 2007 at 4:37 pm

23. Comment #18523 by Zappi on January 21, 2007 at 1:13 pm

Again, you're looking at everything from an American perspective. Many Asian countries (South Korea) went very well after a difficult start by embracing the market forces (may I say natural market forces?). Latin America is going down the Marxist path. If you believe that Marxism is good for Latin America but not good for other countries, feel free to express your opinion. I just don't understand how could it be good. I'm not talking about opening up imports. I'm talking about abolishing private property and restricting freedom of expression and liberty.

I'm not looking from an American perspective, I'm looking from an Irish perspective. I'm clearly not advocating Marxism, I'm just stating that there should be some minimum requirements before being forced into the "free" market, and get irritated when people equate these sentiments with some form of Communism. Totalitarianism (in all it's ugly forms) is a different matter entirely.

With regard to private property, many people in Latin America, Africa, and even in the USA are so poor they do not actually have "private property". I see nothing wrong with them organising themselves into what you would probably call a "socialist" co-operative to protect their interests. They quite literally have nothing to lose.

Clearly we need a sensible balance between protecting the vulnerable and allowing capitalism free reign, because so many countries are not playing fair.

280. Neither intellect nor faith will save humanity

Comment #18521 by Luthien on January 21, 2007 at 1:07 pm

21. Comment #18502 by Thad on January 21, 2007 at 10:02 am
"As far as I can tell, President Bush is doing something about the truly dangerous and virulent religious radicals that have murdered thousands and may soon be armed with nukes."

Go read some Chomsky if you want to understand that the people behind the current US administration are the same people who armed / funded Bin Laden in the first place. They also originally hired a young Sadam to assasinate the then democratically elected leader of Iraq, but he botched the job so they helped him go into hiding until someone else did the job "properly".

"Dr. Dawkins and other academics do not even attempt to offer an alternative solution to very real problem that exits and will continue to exist unless confronted."

Yes he does offer a solution, the solution is to stop people from brainwashing children to "believe" and follow orders without question.

"To morally equate Bin Laden and Bush is perverse.

It isn't peverse, they have both ordered forcefull action that resulted in the deaths of many innocent people, and are on record as saying they did it because God told them to.

The defeat of those radicals, with the establishment of some modern state in the Mideast is essential. Tens of millions in Iraq think so and approve of that policy , judging by their votes.

For this, let me refer you to Machiavelli, as he says it better than I can:

The people resemble a wild beast, which, naturally fierce and accustomed to live in the woods, has been brought up, as it were, in a prison and in servitude, and having by accident got its liberty, not being accustomed to search for its food, and not knowing where to conceal itself, easily becomes the prey of the first who seeks to incarcerate it again.

Basically, how can people who are used to having to vote for the dictator (or else) know how to make a free choice? People were selling their votes in Afghanistan.

George Bush may pray on Sunday, and he may give lip service to the Christians in a nation closely divided between Democrats and Republicans, and even stall federal funding for stem cell research for awhile, but I assure you the US is in no danger of becoming a theocracy.

George Bush is on record as saying that God talks to him (have the CIA hidden a speaker in his room?), on record saying God told him to invade Iraq, and many in his administration are pushing "abstenance", anti-abortion, and creationist agendas. In addition to this there is a general attempt to errode the seperation of church and state (the 10 commandments in courthouses etc.) If this isn't a theocracy then the Vatican isn't one either!

Is the alternative to be nice to those radicals? Perhaps a warm cup of tea and some pleasant conversation at Oxford will convince them that cutting through the neck of a screaming crying infidel with a dull knife is a bit unnecessary, and pushing that nuke button would not be cricket at all.

Quite an emotive rant, but I think it's one of the rare occasions that someone has alluded to Dawkins as having "plesant conversation" while defending the American Taliban. We need to reduce the pool of "volunteers" for all religious extremeists, and the only way to do that is education (invading Iraq has clearly made things worse).

I must also point out the rather obvious fact that the " Salman Rushdie" effect must be having an influence on our brave esteemed atheists in the west. Is it because they think that the wimpy Christians need to take the brunt of their analysis, or they are cowardly to equally express it about the Moslems?

The Christians are the most dangerous, they actually have nukes. Do a web search for "The Rapture".

281. Neither intellect nor faith will save humanity

Comment #18497 by Luthien on January 21, 2007 at 9:30 am

"Just imagine for a second if a genie granted Bush an intellect as lofty as Richard Holloway's for 24 hours in place of the near-simian one currently possessed by the President. What would happen? Does intellect always breed compassion and humanity? Not necessarily. History has provided us with a handsome variety of psychotic killers with highly tuned minds."

Depends on your definition of intelligence. A fully rounded "human" intelligence requires the ability to empathise with our fellow human beings, as this is what binds us together as a society. I would say that intellect will breed compassion and humanity. Psychopaths / Sociopaths have a developmental abnormality which stops them from giving emotional significance to other people, and their intellect has nothing to do with this in the same way that intelligent people may or may not suffer from diabetes.

282. Ruth Kelly, her hard-line church and a devout PM wrestling with his conscience

Comment #18495 by Luthien on January 21, 2007 at 8:44 am

11. Comment #18483 by Ian on January 21, 2007 at 7:07 am
I'm fully in favour of the Catholic Church closing down all their adoption agencies. After all, they have already proven themselves not up to caring for children by their handing of the peadophilia issue."

Agreed.

The thing that breaks my heart is the thought of all those children that have already had to grow up without a stable home because of this bigotry. The fact that they would threaten to close over this issue shows they are quite clearly not fit to be responsible for the wellfare of any child.

283. Noam Chomsky Interview on Faith

Comment #18494 by Luthien on January 21, 2007 at 8:36 am

6. Comment #18456 by Zappi
"Chomsky never mentions they are anti-market communist groups that happen to use this version of the 'Catholic Church' as a way to reach as many people as they can. Chomsky is much too intelligent not to notice what he's doing, I wonder what his real political motivations are."

Yikes!

The so called free market only works if everyone has a fair and equal start. Forcing poorer countries to open up to imports only results in the market being flooded with cheap (and in the case of American produce, subsidised) goods that local farmers can't compete with. If farmers can't sell their goods they can't put money by when times are hard, and subsistence farmers therefore starve if their crops fail.

...and no, I'm not a bloody communist, it's just common sense to protect the vulnerable from the "free" market, in the same way that it was common sense for our ancestors to band together into tribes for survival!

284. Atheist Richard Dawkins on 'The God Delusion'

Comment #18281 by Luthien on January 19, 2007 at 9:38 am

Gosh, can I have that read at my funeral? ;-)

285. Can Jews and Evangelicals Get Along?

Comment #18091 by Luthien on January 18, 2007 at 9:05 am

"The idea that Evangelicals want to turn America into a Christian government is both alarmist and mistaken. For one thing, there is no Evangelical legal system like Islamic sharia. Evangelicals have an agenda, but it is largely the restoration of moral and ethical standards that have typified the U.S. since its inception but have been neglected in the last half century. You may disagree with this agenda, but it is not theocratic."

What planet is this guy living on? The "Evangelical Legal System" akin to sharia is detailed in the Old Testament (has he read it???), and involves things like stoning people for adultery. What are the 10 commandments if they are not "Laws" (or like the pirate code, are they more like "guidelines")?

Oh, and the moral and ethical standards America was built on were clearly secular (has he read the US constitution???), and the evangelicals are now erroding these values at an alarming rate.

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

Comment #18087 by Luthien on January 18, 2007 at 8:51 am

RE: 42. Comment #18078 by David A Robertson on January 18, 2007 at 7:41 am

David, you didn't answer my comment. Which is it to be?...

(reposted from above)

"Wow - even when it is clearly posted at the top that this is a joke, the atheist fundies still manage to write in and express outrage at how stupid the Christian fundies are! The irony is delicious. "Had me fooled" - I guess it does not take much to fool some atheists...And this is meant to be an oasis of clear thinking???"

So you admit the "Intelligent Falling" theory is "stupid" then? Are you admitting that the idea that God would intervene in this manner is a "stupid" idea?

If you say that the God intervention theory isn't "stupid", then your statement that "it does not take much to fool some atheists" is not valid (if it was even slightly credible it would be reasonable for people to be fooled).

If you say that the God intervention theory is "stupid", then it must be equally "stupid" to just assume an intelligent force is at work elsewhere in nature.

I guess you don't actually have an answer then ;-)

287. 'God Is Not a Moderate'

Comment #18064 by Luthien on January 18, 2007 at 5:53 am

"The fact that the current pope freely uses terms like "reason" and "truth" does not at all guarantee that he is on good terms with the former, or would recognize the latter if it bit him."

Classic!

Regarding the following:

"As the Pope said last year, I believe that God is truth and truth is, by definition, reasonable. Science cannot disprove true faith; because true faith rests on the truth; and science cannot be in ultimate conflict with the truth."

Replace the word God with Zeus, or pink unicorn. Do you see how silly this statement is now? You can't just say "I believe that X is truth, and truth is reasonable therefore X is reasonable", it doesn't make any sense, its like saying:

"I believe that Hitler was nice. Most people would say that artists are nice and Hitler was an artist."

I'm sure no one would nod their head in agreement to the above (at least on this site)!

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

Comment #18035 by Luthien on January 18, 2007 at 3:24 am

19. Comment #18026 by David A Robertson on January 18, 2007 at 2:35 am

"Wow - even when it is clearly posted at the top that this is a joke, the atheist fundies still manage to write in and express outrage at how stupid the Christian fundies are! The irony is delicious. "Had me fooled" - I guess it does not take much to fool some atheists...And this is meant to be an oasis of clear thinking???"

So you admit the "Intelligent Falling" theory is "stupid" then? Are you admitting that the idea that God would intervene in this manner is a "stupid" idea?

If you say that the God intervention theory isn't "stupid", then your statement that "it does not take much to fool some atheists" is not valid (if it was even slightly credible it would be reasonable for people to be fooled).

If you say that the God intervention theory is "stupid", then it must be equally "stupid" to just assume an intelligent force is at work elsewhere in nature.

289. Interview with Richard Dawkins

Comment #17887 by Luthien on January 17, 2007 at 9:17 am

RE: 2. Comment #17782 by Sancus on January 16, 2007 at 10:52 am

Sanctus, you seem to have focused in on the role of the Parents in your comments. I agree with you that children do not follow everything their parents say but this is only in the case where there are other people close to them giving them an alternative. The cliff analogy is an example of something that everyone in a community would have told a child, not just the parents. If a child's reality is controlled so that people are all telling them the same thing, they will 'believe' that it is true. I don't think Dawkins has made any undue assumptions in his analogy, his only mistake was to use the word "parents" instead of "everyone".

290. Christian Shrine Needs Two Exits, Israel Says

Comment #17867 by Luthien on January 17, 2007 at 5:01 am

Saneatheist says:

"Since god would never allow a fire in one of his churches, the church you mention must obviously not be one of his 'true churches'."

Perhaps we could determine who the "true church" actually is? Someone should compile the statistics on all accidents occurring on the "sacred ground" of every religious denomination. If there really is a "true church" they should have a clean record. ;-)

291. Atheist Outreach: Group Coaxes Unbelievers Into the Open

Comment #17861 by Luthien on January 17, 2007 at 4:31 am

9. Comment #17825 by Old Coppernose on January 16, 2007 at 8:18 pm

'I find the Catholic priest's comments a bit odd. - Does he think that athiests don't believe that "you are part of the universe" or that "you are not god".

This is either a weird definition of atheism or of religion, and i can't work out which - maybe both?'

"Theists are always coming out with this rubbish. Yes, they seriously do believe (or claim to believe) that atheists think they live in a vacuum and/or they think they are God.

They claim that one has to believe in a God in order to realize that one isnt God oneself."

Erm, but if you think you ARE god, you can't by definition BE and Athiest!

292. Christian Shrine Needs Two Exits, Israel Says

Comment #17851 by Luthien on January 17, 2007 at 3:36 am

1. Comment #17799 by Mel Z on January 16, 2007 at 4:01 pm

"If there was a fire inside the church near the door, people inside would have no way of escaping,"

And this is bad because?.....

Well, who will save them, eh? ;-)

Re. the lightning rods on churches comment, I seem to remember someone saying that was the first great victory of science over religion.

293. Wash. school board restricts Gore's global-warming film

Comment #17774 by Luthien on January 16, 2007 at 7:30 am

RE: Comment #17723 by DrShell on January 15, 2007 at 5:38 pm

Well said DrShell!

RE: 13. Comment #17773 by madpatriot on January 16, 2007 at 6:46 am

"Hey, I've got a new game we can play. The idea is to come up with sentences that are logically equivalent and equally nonsensical to this:

Condoms don't belong in school, and neither does Al Gore. He's not a schoolteacher.


I'll start:
Nuclear weapons don't belong in the zoo, and neither does the train. It's not an animal. "

"Condoms don't belong in school" is a way of saying "I'm a Christian Fanatic", therefore what I say after this is 'morally' right.

Oh, and "Musical instruments don't belong on the moon, and neither do zombies, because everyone knows the moon is made of cheese"

294. Lil' Markie live, part 2

Comment #17622 by Luthien on January 15, 2007 at 6:52 am

4. Comment #17597 by Logicel on January 15, 2007 at 4:26 am

"Hey, Fox, I don't think you or some in your audience should eat ANY cookies until you get down to a healthy weight."

Yeh, and none of that "Mc Donalds" food he mentions either (are they paying him, or did he once work as "Ronald"?).

Seriously though, the police should search his home for a "dungeon" hidden behind his portrait (Donnie Darko reference).

295. Creationism Song

Comment #17585 by Luthien on January 15, 2007 at 2:14 am

Disturbing, but a pretty standard technique for religious brainwashing. I remember having to repeat religious 'beliefs' over and over again at school, and I know my mother had her arms beaten black and blue at school for forgetting the words to a prayer (she was only 7).

One little girl in the front row looked a little embarassed to be singing it, so perhaps the sheer "cheeseyness" of the song might put some of them off it (wishful thinking I know).

296. Copy of The God Delusion Purchased for $20,000

Comment #17506 by Luthien on January 14, 2007 at 7:45 am

5. Comment #17445 by DavidJMH on January 13, 2007 at 7:18 pm
"Ladies and Gentlemen,
I know it is difficult to categorize Humanists, Atheists etc. but how would it be for us to have a universal symbol of unity, something simple and easily recognizable to others. It could be made into a small lapel pin, broach, tie pin etc. I don't mean a badge. The Christians have a cross, Islam a crescent moon although they do not wear it often.
Perhaps Richard Dawkins could come up with an evolutionary idea and promote it on this website. For what it is worth, I humbly propose the Double Helix; what is more universal or symbolic of reason than that."

What about a fractal? It is infinite, natural and described via mathematics. Many things, from coastlines to plants can be described by fractals.

297. For Human Eyes Only

Comment #17398 by Luthien on January 13, 2007 at 8:53 am

3. Comment #17393 by JohnC on January 13, 2007 at 8:24 am
"Certainly fascinating! But the almost irresistible temptation to start spinning Just-So stories from such data should be firmly resisted. First, there are two differences mentioned: 1. difference in visible white of eye 2. Attention from infancy to direction of gaze rather than head. And the second provides the "confirmatory" evidence upon which the further speculations are launched."

I was reading an article (I think it was in New Scientist?) not that long ago about an experiment where the subjects had to look at photographs of human faces, with lights on either side. When a light switched on they had to register it with a button press. The study found that women performed much worse than men at this task, but only if the person in the photograph was looking in the opposite direction to the side where the light was switched on. It seems that women in particular have an unconcious tendancy to follow the gaze of the person they are looking at.

There is also a great deal of evidence that women have a stronger tendancy towards cooperation than men. This "reflex" to follow someone elses gaze would not be possible without the evolution of the whites of our eyes. If women do it more, and are also better at cooperation, there is a possibility that they could use gender difference to determine if the "cooperative eye hypothesis" is correct.

298. You come up here and say that, Dawkins!

Comment #17390 by Luthien on January 13, 2007 at 7:54 am

6. Comment #17290 by Duff on January 12, 2007 at 5:46 pm
"He is not only bald and fat, but he's also old. What's with that?"

Yes, isn't he like 6,000 years old or something? :P

299. FiveLive debate on faith and discrimination

Comment #17385 by Luthien on January 13, 2007 at 7:26 am

"Jesus was very friendly with prostitutes"

Priceless, must remember that one :D

300. Judge: Men can seek damages from church

Comment #17211 by Luthien on January 12, 2007 at 2:06 am

4. Comment #17209 by Logicel on January 12, 2007 at 1:50 am

"The Vatican is a festering pustule that needs to be popped."

Hehe, nice one! ...and very poetic too ;-)