Skip to Main Content (access key 1)
Skip to Search (access key 2)
Skip to Search GO (access key 3)
Skip to comments (access key 4)
Skip to navigation (access key 5)
Skip to top of page (access key 6)

Comments by Peacebeuponme


301. Shaw TV Interview with Richard Dawkins

Comment #175296 by Peacebeuponme on May 5, 2008 at 6:15 am

gd_edi

Well what I was trying to point out was that it doesn't really mean anything for Richard to say that he suspects animals other than humans have subjective consciousness. Scientifically it's meaningless.
No its not. Its a very interesting question.

302. Pat Condell: Anthology DVD available now!

Comment #175280 by Peacebeuponme on May 5, 2008 at 5:00 am

AllanW

Did you see the RRS debate with Kirk Cameron and Ray Comfort? They made a complete hash of it. Similar with Brian Sapient's terribly worded open letter to Michael Shermer. Can you see that it is not good for Richard to say "Hey those Rational Responders, wow those guys are brilliant"? Such a comment would not reflect well on Richard. When atheists present unintelligent and ill-thought out positions, its best that prominent sophisticated atheists such as Richard make sure they are distanced from them.

If I for example said that Justin Timberlake was "a great scientist", you ability to take me seriously as a scientist would be lessened, would it not? Yet here we have Richard describing a fairly average youtube blogger as "unique", "suave", "articulate" and "intelligent"! Any theist reading this praise, and then watching and being unimpressed with Pat, is not likely to consider the merits of atheism.

303. Pat Condell: Anthology DVD available now!

Comment #175271 by Peacebeuponme on May 5, 2008 at 4:26 am

AllanW

Ok PBUM, you don't find him funny; is that your only problem with Condell? Or do you disagree with the fact that the RDFRS has decided to promote his videos in this way?
As I've said before, I think Pat would be a great guy to have on your side in a pub debate, but to promote him here alongside the likes of Dawkins and Hitchens does not seem right to me. I don't think he is in anyway as sophisticated (or funny; even Hitchens beats him there and he's not trying to be a comedian) as he needs to be and think his pretty simple smug routine would be vulnerable to any decent theist. I think him being promoted here lessens the impact of Richard (especially with that staggeringly positive strapline from Richard) and this site in general.

No problem with him doing his thing, and if people like it, great. No real problem I suppose with the odd youtube video of his getting put up here, but promoting him so plainly on the homepage is the wrong thing to be doing I think.

304. A New Jack Chick Tract: Moving On Up!

Comment #175178 by Peacebeuponme on May 4, 2008 at 6:16 pm

Cartomancer

Whatever it said about me was a gross exaggeration! Don't believe a word!
As long as Soho Slut Girl is not your alter-ego, I think you are ok...

305. A New Jack Chick Tract: Moving On Up!

Comment #175177 by Peacebeuponme on May 4, 2008 at 6:15 pm

I like to use my real name, but I also like to get people to work to know it...
Aha, Hazel! Every time I come on here I have to wikipedia something somebody has said. It's great!

I'm probably just jealous of everyone here who can deploy Latin as well as a 14-year old girl can text.

306. A New Jack Chick Tract: Moving On Up!

Comment #175174 by Peacebeuponme on May 4, 2008 at 6:08 pm

Cartomancer

You should have seen the graffiti in the toilets of the Bodleian Library before they were refurbished.
well, I saw the graffiti (why are so many such words Italian?) on the doors of G.A.Y. the other week. Now that was educational and funny.

307. A New Jack Chick Tract: Moving On Up!

Comment #175161 by Peacebeuponme on May 4, 2008 at 5:14 pm

Fides

athiests
A minor thing, but something that niggles me as much as your latin name (bringing out the latin is something you unfortunately share with some of my fellow atheists. They seem to turn into freshers when it comes to wannabe pretentious use of latin alternatives.) is your spelling of atheist. The i comes after the e. I know it doesn't conform to the old "i before e except after c rule', but isn't that quite fitting?

Anyway,
I did suggest one, no news on it being posted yet. The range isn't as wide as you think either, in fact it's carefully targeted.
hmm, not sure. Maybe you are right. I've had a few articles refused, and also seen a few fairly bland ones posted. That sounds like most peoples' experience of any other user-generated site to me. I wonder what the theist vs non-theist post-rate is, or more importantly the fundamentalist-theistic article vs "modarate"-theistic article post-rate is. Are you saying you have the stats?
Not everyone on this site is an athiest. Not all athiests on this site think as one.
I totally agree with that. Isn't that a great thing about this site?

308. Shaw TV Interview with Richard Dawkins

Comment #175128 by Peacebeuponme on May 4, 2008 at 2:03 pm

phasmagigas

thats pretty standard fare im sure, in fact some people probably figure thats the case, do crazy shit and then carry on their 'simulation' of a prison cell for a long, long time.
Yep. And it would dawn on those people, while they were sat in the cell, that it would be fairly illogical to be a lone consciousness which had chosen to experience extended periods of distress. The reality of the situation would become apparent.

309. Shaw TV Interview with Richard Dawkins

Comment #175124 by Peacebeuponme on May 4, 2008 at 1:43 pm

Cartomancer - thanks for saying, with your usual eloquence, what I was trying to.

310. Shaw TV Interview with Richard Dawkins

Comment #175120 by Peacebeuponme on May 4, 2008 at 1:24 pm

Mitchell

I thought the exact same thing. Beyond someone telling me they have subjective consciousness I have no more reason to believe they do than my cat does. Someone telling me something is true hardly is enough to say that it is positively true.
Well of course, philosophically, I suspect you can't even prove you have subjective consciousness (MPhil can sort my thinking out here). However, the fact that you seem to experience it, coupled with the fact that you are human, suggests that other humans experience it too.

Of course, you could just be a lone consciousness running a simulation of everything you experience. But if that is the case, there is no point even talking about "humans", "cats" or "tables". In fact, there would be no point investigating the world at all.

311. A New Jack Chick Tract: Moving On Up!

Comment #175111 by Peacebeuponme on May 4, 2008 at 1:00 pm

Catrtomancer

We're here to address a problem, not write a sociological study of differing cultural prejudices. Given that 45% of americans have apparently been taken in by this kind of facile nonsense I think there is more than enough of a problem to tackle, don't you?
Just read your post that latin boy responded to.

I would like to think "we", or this site, or atheists, whatever, are/is about rationality and truth. Whether there are extreme, or not so extreme, versions of religion; whether some forms cause suicide bombings and others well meaning inanity; we still should be saying "no this is rubbish" to all. Its important that all forms of silly thinking are addressed. After all, this site is supposed to be a "clear thinking oasis". I would welcome any "sensible christian articles". These would be torn to pieces pretty quickly.

312. A New Jack Chick Tract: Moving On Up!

Comment #175109 by Peacebeuponme on May 4, 2008 at 12:49 pm

fides_et_ratio

Any chance of posting a sensible commentary on the interaction of Christianity and science Josh?
This site puts up a whole range of articles. Why not offer some that you think are sensible christian articles? I'm sure they will get posted. We like discussing such things here.

313. Pat Condell: Anthology DVD available now!

Comment #175089 by Peacebeuponme on May 4, 2008 at 11:20 am

Rational_G

Condell is funny, angry, clever
Well, I'd only give him one out of the three, and would add in uneccesarily smug.
Oh, and peace - especially you uptight types.
I don't find him amusing or clever, so that makes me uptight? With views like that I'm struggling to see how you're adding "rational" to the "G".

314. Pat Condell: Anthology DVD available now!

Comment #174991 by Peacebeuponme on May 4, 2008 at 3:51 am

"Pat Condell is unique. Nobody can match his extraordinary blend of suavity and savagery. With his articulate intelligence he runs rings around the religious wingnuts that are the targets of his merciless humour. Thank goodness he is on our side." - Richard Dawkins
Amazed that Richard has given such praise. Suggests that he will give blanket praise to all atheists on the scene, which is not helpful.

Give me Stuart Lee, Marcus Brigstocke or, when it comes to religious comment, Billy Connolly any day.

Richard Dawkins describing Pat Condell as having "articulate intelligence" is like Michael Schumacher saying that Paris Hilton has "excellent driving skills".

315. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #172165 by Peacebeuponme on April 29, 2008 at 9:37 am

Steve

It is a worrying delusion to believe that voices in your head are from something outside your head, and are telling you truths.
To be fair, all voices are 'in your head'. There is no other way of hearing things. When Kate (who is sat next to me right now) says something to me, I know this voice in my head comes from outside my head because there is a host of other corroborating data from other senses. Kardashovel's problem is that he does not have this other corroborating evidence.

Whether Kate tells the truth of course is another matter.

316. Student's 'Be Happy, Not Gay' t-shirt ok

Comment #169929 by Peacebeuponme on April 27, 2008 at 5:12 am

Steve

my fumbling attempts to initiate relationships with women when I was younger ended up with me as close friend.
That experience is not wholly confined to gay men!

Chris Rock does a brillant skit about how all his platonic female friends started out as women he wanted to pull, but he "took a wrong turn" somewhere.

317. Student's 'Be Happy, Not Gay' t-shirt ok

Comment #169860 by Peacebeuponme on April 27, 2008 at 2:03 am

Teratornis

Oh, but isn't that unfair. Yes. So is life. I barely got noticed by girls until I got to college, so I can report that several years of having my budding sexuality completely thwarted, while annoying, was not fatal.

If I happened to live in a theocracy that frequently murdered atheists, I'd keep my atheism quiet too. It wouldn't kill me to keep my mouth shut for the rest of my life about atheism, if I had to. Ayaan Hirsi Ali probably could not go home and expect to live long.
I am staggered by this comment. Amazed. We spend time talking about what we can do to oppose bias and prejudice (in our case the theistic kind) and you come up with that shoulder shrug.

May as well shut this site down people. Any persecution you get on any front is just part of our unfair life.

318. Soldier Sues Army, Saying His Atheism Led to Threats

Comment #169675 by Peacebeuponme on April 26, 2008 at 2:15 pm

newskin - don't get me wrong. I'm not knocking them at all.

319. Soldier Sues Army, Saying His Atheism Led to Threats

Comment #169668 by Peacebeuponme on April 26, 2008 at 2:03 pm

All this talk of what the "founding fathers" wanted. Makes for stirring rhetoric, but not really relevant. What should matter is what the Americans who are alive today want.

320. Student's 'Be Happy, Not Gay' t-shirt ok

Comment #169663 by Peacebeuponme on April 26, 2008 at 1:52 pm

PGFM

The point is that allowing adolescent gay-bashing is much more serious than the navel-gazing, middle class angst you and PBUM seem to be equating it (and racism, after reading Steve's posts) with. You make some good points within that area, but it diminishes the importance of the problem to lump it in with, for instance, "being skinny".
I think you may not have read my posts fully.

321. Student's 'Be Happy, Not Gay' t-shirt ok

Comment #169649 by Peacebeuponme on April 26, 2008 at 1:26 pm

AllanW

Ok so the differentiator is best phrased as; 'It's unnacceptable bullying if it occurs systematically not as isolated, occasional abuse'. Yes?
Agreed. That's the only think I think you can reasonably try to deal with. Systematic bullying is something I think the law can recognise.

I think Steve has explained well in post #169626 how racism can be different to schoolground teasing of height, weight etc (though I think abuse based on these characteristics can escalate to systematic bullying).

This has been a pretty good discussion: my view has been shaped as I have read and posted.

322. Student's 'Be Happy, Not Gay' t-shirt ok

Comment #169628 by Peacebeuponme on April 26, 2008 at 12:29 pm

AllanW

I'm just interested in digging-out the social rules that distinguish between abuse that is acceptable and abuse that is not and is legislated against.
I think the distinction should be between the odd bit of name calling and systematic bullying.

323. Student's 'Be Happy, Not Gay' t-shirt ok

Comment #169623 by Peacebeuponme on April 26, 2008 at 12:18 pm

Allan. I think its different because the kids doing that didn't hate me, they were just being kids enjoying mocking someone.

Racism seems to carry a deep hatred and venom behind the comments. If you has this a school everyday, your classmates telling you you were not wanted, I can imagine that being a truly horrible experience.

324. Student's 'Be Happy, Not Gay' t-shirt ok

Comment #169615 by Peacebeuponme on April 26, 2008 at 12:10 pm

Sargiest - I was tall and skinny as well. Lost count of the amount of times I was called a "lanky streak of piss". Still, a bit different to being told "Go home, Paki." or somesuch, in my opinion.

325. Student's 'Be Happy, Not Gay' t-shirt ok

Comment #169554 by Peacebeuponme on April 26, 2008 at 9:34 am

Blieskies

Yet I like women very much.
Yes, and I expect you have to pay for their services.

326. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #169521 by Peacebeuponme on April 26, 2008 at 8:26 am

Conservatives are symbolized by the largest, most powerful land animal on earth.
Liberals are symbolized by the jackass.
Modern Liberals like imported beer (they add lime), but most prefer white wine or foreign water in a bottle. They eat raw fish but like their beef well done. Sushi, tofu, and french food are on liberal menus.
I think its time to stop trying when drivel like that gets posted.

My god remnant, you really should be embarrassed by what you put down here.

327. Student's 'Be Happy, Not Gay' t-shirt ok

Comment #169476 by Peacebeuponme on April 26, 2008 at 7:12 am

AllanW

As you can see. this is not exactly my area of expertise and I'd welcome any comments :)
I think this is an area where we are equally qualified. It not easy to come with the right answer here.
there are many people who do not let abuse, disparaging comments or criticism affect their sense of self. I'm sure you'd agree with that.
Of course, but if you were black and everyone at school called you a "nigger" all the time, you wouild not expect it to cause you anything other than profound distress.

328. Student's 'Be Happy, Not Gay' t-shirt ok

Comment #169463 by Peacebeuponme on April 26, 2008 at 6:40 am

AllanW

Show me where I dismiss uneducated people as thugs, please.
This comment
If you cannot use your intelligence to counter what you consider to be offensive words with equally devastating counter-arguments without resorting to violent reaction then you deserve to lose the argument
seemed that way to me. If that was not your intention, then apologies. It just seems redundant if you did not mean that to include an intelligence identifier. Why not just have said
If you counter what you consider to be offensive words by resorting to violent reaction then you deserve to lose the argument
?

329. Student's 'Be Happy, Not Gay' t-shirt ok

Comment #169462 by Peacebeuponme on April 26, 2008 at 6:37 am

Steve

You can feel as sure as you like, but once you have experienced bullying (as I did as school, and not because I was gay), then it is going to be very hard, I would suggest for anyone to share your view.
I agree that bullying can be verbal and that this is something we should not tolerate. But we have to be careful to distinguish between bullying and and offensive speech. Bullying is usually not just one sentence in isolation, but a whole campaign.

In this t-shirt example, if its just being worn one day and is not directed at any one particular individual, I'm not sure it can be classed as bullying. I'm sure the unfortunate things that happened to you at school were a lot more ongoing, organised and direct. Some of things kids went through in my school were truly awful.

In those circumstances its quite easy to build a case of verbal abuse going without needing to ban phrases like "I hate gays" or "nigger".

330. Student's 'Be Happy, Not Gay' t-shirt ok

Comment #169459 by Peacebeuponme on April 26, 2008 at 6:30 am

AllanW

Let me put the other side of that coin; if your stupid and unthinking it's ok to react physically to verbal abuse?
I don't see why you are linking stupidity and violence so closely. Of course its not ok to react violently. Its also not ok to discriminate against the unintelligent.

I don't really like the way you seem to be dismissing the uneducated as thugs.

331. Student's 'Be Happy, Not Gay' t-shirt ok

Comment #169450 by Peacebeuponme on April 26, 2008 at 6:03 am

AllanW

If you cannot use your intelligence to counter what you consider to be offensive words with equally devastating counter-arguments without resorting to violent reaction then you deserve to lose the argument (read this as 'fail to get society to accept your point of view').
Careful here, Allan. You appear to be opening the door to disciminating against the unintelligent. Just because somebody cannot debate well does not mean they are wrong.

332. Student's 'Be Happy, Not Gay' t-shirt ok

Comment #169449 by Peacebeuponme on April 26, 2008 at 6:00 am

Albedo

Queer as folk, as offending for certains people as it can be, never led to (and even less aimed to) hate crimes and suicides through self depreciation.
So says you. People get offended by all sorts of things and react in different ways. Its impossible to set a standard which says certain offensive things can be said while others cannot.

We currently have laws against incitement to violence, and I think that's as far as we can go.

333. Student's 'Be Happy, Not Gay' t-shirt ok

Comment #169428 by Peacebeuponme on April 26, 2008 at 4:28 am

Steve

Indeed. By telling students that certain T-shirts are not appropriate to be worn at school.
Oh, agreed. We have to consider the emotional distress to schoolchildren.

Albedo was talking about freedom of speech in general though.

334. Student's 'Be Happy, Not Gay' t-shirt ok

Comment #169425 by Peacebeuponme on April 26, 2008 at 4:17 am

Steve - Which we try to change to accept our views. We are less homophobic than we used to be - "Queer as Folk" would have been deemed offensive not all that long ago.

335. Tyrannosaurus rex protein proves dinosaurs evolved into birds

Comment #169423 by Peacebeuponme on April 26, 2008 at 4:12 am

usually do not bother to read them any more...
That should be the key point. Does babrock want to make himself heard or not?

There a theists here who cut and paste incredibly long sections from other sites. I usually scroll past these. Its not a good way to get your point across.

336. Student's 'Be Happy, Not Gay' t-shirt ok

Comment #169420 by Peacebeuponme on April 26, 2008 at 4:03 am

Albedo - Who would be the arbiter of what is allowed and what is offensive?

337. Student's 'Be Happy, Not Gay' t-shirt ok

Comment #169415 by Peacebeuponme on April 26, 2008 at 3:37 am

I remember seeing a t-shirt on the web once that said:

"Sat what you like about Hitler, he did kill a whole bunch of jews."

That's just about as outrageous as you can get I would think. Of course the t-shirt was tongue-in-cheek, but I can imagine that you would probably get a smack pretty quickly if you wore it out.

Freedom of speech means that you can display hateful messages, but that you accept that others may react in a certain way.

338. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #168563 by Peacebeuponme on April 25, 2008 at 7:53 am

Irate_Atheist

Headlines:

'Arafat Ablaze in Kerosene Oyster Hell'.

'Bank of England Recovers from Swollen Chairman Unusualness'.

'Boiled Dog Could do Maths, Claims Experimenter'.
"Very Sexy" Beams Clark As He Urinates Over London From Helicopter.

339. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #168481 by Peacebeuponme on April 25, 2008 at 7:05 am

Just read back over some of Remnant's posts. Scary stuff - getting his kids to push creationism in school, talking about "slime plus time", describing atheism as faith. He's really had a number done on him by AIG and Ken Ham.

340. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #168337 by Peacebeuponme on April 25, 2008 at 3:47 am

Remnant

One thing about the Bible, whether one chooses to believe the Bible or not, reading it develops comprehension skills, vocabulary skills, and expressive writing skills.
Well not quite. The King James translation does, but that's more to the credit of the translators rather than the bible itself.

341. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #167729 by Peacebeuponme on April 24, 2008 at 9:39 am

Remnant

Why won't you deal with the questions about objective morality, co-operation and law and order?

342. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #167660 by Peacebeuponme on April 24, 2008 at 8:43 am

Remnant

The point I was making was that it is a bit of a contradiction and rather irrational for one to believe that God does not exist and then express concern about how that God, that they claim does not exist, deals with humans that they claim he did not create.
Please.

The comments about the logic of a postulated god's actions are there to highlight the absurdity of the proposition.

343. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #167651 by Peacebeuponme on April 24, 2008 at 8:38 am

Remnant

I didn't say that, I said that under the evolutionary premise of survival of the fittest, the robber would just be following evolutionary dictates,taking advantage of his stronger survival skills, and as an evolutionist you would be in no position to condemn him for doing what evolved naturally. You might not like it, but he would just be following evolutionary dictates.
You did. You said that without objective morality nobody can object to another's morals. But they can. If I don't like something I can object to it. Whether or not there is some objective standard I would still "comdemn" someone for harming me. There is a reason why we all agree to have laws, so that anybody who carries out harm is kept away from us.

I find it curious that in the absence of objective morality, theists think our only option in dealing with agressors would be to hold our hands up and say "well, that's evolution for you. There's no standard by which we can judge him, so we have to let him carry on."

344. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #167616 by Peacebeuponme on April 24, 2008 at 8:03 am

Remnant

Daw 8:12 - christianity is a fairy story.

I win.

345. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #167609 by Peacebeuponme on April 24, 2008 at 7:58 am

Frankus1122

In fact, many of the qualities I listed above are in opposition to the survival of the fittest premise of evolutionary theory. Evolutionary theory would reward many of those qualities under the survival of the fittest model.
Someone else may be better able to deal with this but I would say you have a limited understanding of our current understanding of moral behaviour in the light of evolutionary forces.
I'm being simplistic, but altruism seems to have been a pretty successful trait, if you look at where we are as a species.

346. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #167603 by Peacebeuponme on April 24, 2008 at 7:52 am

Remnant

If evolutionary theory were true, then morals would be relative to the individual and therefore no one would be in a position to object to another person's standard of morality, or "moral evolution".
This is the one religious argument I find really bizzare. Are you saying that, if it were shown that there were no objective basis for morality (it has, but I know you don't accept that), you would no longer object to me stealing from you, or attacking you?

(btw - when it comes to things that don't cause me or others harm, I am in no position to object to another's activities, from a moral standpoint. The trouble with religion is that it always wants to interfere.)

347. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #167390 by Peacebeuponme on April 24, 2008 at 1:38 am

Sounds like a good idea. If I'm welcome then I'd be interested.
Same here.

348. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #167378 by Peacebeuponme on April 24, 2008 at 1:19 am

Bonzai

Women are property. If you break something you own it.
Happily, only if you are discovered though.

349. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #167124 by Peacebeuponme on April 23, 2008 at 4:32 pm

Phasmagigas - you seemed to cut and paste one of mine. Maybe there was confusion. No biggie.

350. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #167095 by Peacebeuponme on April 23, 2008 at 3:54 pm

ofir

I claim far, far less knowledge than any priest.
And obviously even less scientific knowledge.
Have I wronged you in another life?

More Pages: Previous | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 | Next