351. The Scientists Speak

Comment #89372 by briancoughlanworldcitizen on November 20, 2007 at 1:12 pm

I wonder will this convince the nay sayers? Somehow I doubt it:-) We will soon see a steady stream of familiar faces posting the same tired, long refuted, "creation" class arguments we've all seen before.

We can hope there will be fewer of them this time, the steady, relentless stream of contradictory info has got to be wearing some of the more sensible denialists down. I mean they are rationalists right? They've got to accept mountains of mutually supporting evidence. Right?

Good work scientists!!! We might get out of this unscathed, but it won't be because of prayer, and it will be in spite of the best efforts of the american republican party to bury us knee deep in CO2, depleted uranium and tele-evangelists:-)

352. URGENT APPEAL: Please Help Protect Ayaan Hirsi Ali

Comment #89251 by briancoughlanworldcitizen on November 20, 2007 at 5:42 am

I have a great deal of respect for Sam Harris, Richard Dawkins et al and maybe their high profiles could be used to ask the Islamic faith to step up to the plate and put its money where its (supposedly moderate and peace-loving) mouth is.

That is an inspired idea!!! Suggest it to the admins. I think that is serious runner.

353. URGENT APPEAL: Please Help Protect Ayaan Hirsi Ali

Comment #89204 by briancoughlanworldcitizen on November 20, 2007 at 2:29 am

We seem to be reaching some sort of consensus. Maybe:-)

When I was a theist, and as my perspective widened and became more inclusive, I came to the conclusion that any religious group claiming some kind of absolute certainty about their moral, biblical or ethical claims was suspect.

Now that I am an atheist (a 5.92 on the Dawkins scale), I am even more suspicious of such claims from either religious or secular quarters.

We (chimps minus half a chromosome) are making this stuff up as we go along, anyone who tells you they KNOW is either not thinking clearly, naive or cynically trying to manipulate you.

Schemeing Machavellian appeals to our emotions are not limited to televangelists, and naive credulity is not limited to the religious.

I personally am confident that this particular appeal is above board, worthy and should be supported. I just don't hold with it being presented as a self evident moral imperative, that is (almost certainly:-)) dangerous nonsense.

354. URGENT APPEAL: Please Help Protect Ayaan Hirsi Ali

Comment #89183 by briancoughlanworldcitizen on November 20, 2007 at 12:36 am

And Brian, you disgust me. You humans, who regard themselves male first, can flounder about being unemotional, but I am outta here.

No please, don't take it that way. I'm merely pointing out the objective reality of our motivations. Men are motivated at some level by a pretty face, it's surely better to know this and try and compensate for it, than to simply ignore it?

I've examined my motivations, and I think my choice to donate is unrelated to attraction, or emotional responses. But who can be certain about that?!

We are of course first human, I absolutely know and endorse this perspective, and I totally regret having offended you. I genuinely wish I could undo that:-(

355. URGENT APPEAL: Please Help Protect Ayaan Hirsi Ali

Comment #89179 by briancoughlanworldcitizen on November 19, 2007 at 11:54 pm

... idea that a whole group of people can decide they have the right to kill you because they don't like that you have left the the religion that you got accidentally born into really barbaric.

Totally with you! However this is more of an emotional argument than a purely rational one. It is a horrible injustice, but as you note she is not the only one suffering it. The question for me, when I divest myself as fully as possible from the emotional response is this.

What would be the impact on secular progress if she were killed? I think it would be a disaster. If the west cannot protect such a high profile, articulate and passionate expression of freedom, why should anyone turn to us? Why should anyone take the risk?

Why does everyone think she is wealthy ? I can't see the books bringing in that much money.

Perhaps wealth is overstating the case. I know next to nothing about her finances. However, she is a succesful author, a speaker in some demand and with ready access to the very, very rich. I infer from this that she is unlikely to want for material comforts, however the security bill is a massive additional overhead.

My point was simply a cold calculation. What are we getting for our money here? As it happens, I think it's an investment in secularism that will pay off.

356. URGENT APPEAL: Please Help Protect Ayaan Hirsi Ali

Comment #89169 by briancoughlanworldcitizen on November 19, 2007 at 11:15 pm

So if she was ugly
I'm certain it would influence me on some level. I'm certain it motivates every heterosexual male at some level.

It's obviously hard to quantify, and I like to consider all my decisions entirely objective and rational, but I know it's just not true. Do you think yours are?

As regards her effectivness, this is surely the pivot on which the whole argument turns? If she is not a beacon of truth and hope for oppressed women, how is she any different from the millions of outspoken women at risk everywhere? Why should she be singled out and protected at enormous cost? Given her obvious success and wealth, couldn't funds be more productively employed elsewhere?

I happen to think she is a beacon. I personally find her example inspirational, but I might be wrong. For example, a statistically sound poll of women generally may find that they think she's a mouthy bitch who is denigrating Islam, and that they embrace Islam more fervently as a result, or that they are simply unmoved, or none of them have ever heard of her. I think these results unlikely, but we don't really know.

Hence some of the moral certainty on display needs slapping. Moral certainty, to be blunt is dangerous. Every single lunatic responsible for millions of deaths had "moral certainty", including the atheists.

All of them talked (or talk!) about honour, justice and truth as if whatever ideology they happened to be peddling had absolute certainty about these issues.

We need to watch it, just like every other "not quite a chimp, but still prone to bouts of irrational slaughter" primate on the planet.

357. URGENT APPEAL: Please Help Protect Ayaan Hirsi Ali

Comment #89161 by briancoughlanworldcitizen on November 19, 2007 at 11:00 pm

131. Comment #89138 by lesa on November 19, 2007 at 8:24 pm
Ayaan shouldn't have to pay for her right not to be murdered. I will proudly donate.

I absolutely agree with you.

And I agree with the previously posted opinion -- Help if you can, shut up if you can't or don't want to.

Here however, we must part company. There is a detailed case to be made against donating. There is the issue of returning to the Netherlands, the problem of the viability and practicality of providing round the clock bodyguards for anyone threatened directly and the perfectly legitimate questions about her actual efficacy as a representative in the Muslim world given her decade's long residency in various states in the west.

I personally don't find the case (against) that compelling, but I haven't researched every inch of the thing, and my decision to donate is partially motivated by emotion. I can see that there is another side, and given time and access to complete information, it's possible I could be convinced to change my mind.

I've simply weighed the risk of giving to a potentially bad cause, against the LOE of further research and opted for giving as providing the best return for what I want, a secular world and the protection of an attractive and courageous woman.

However, to present the option to donate as some kind of moral imperative is obviously, to this ex-theist anyway, a religious position.

For example, how about stumping up cash to protect this woman?
https://therealnews.com/web/index.php?thisdataswitch=0&thisid=602&thisview=item

358. URGENT APPEAL: Please Help Protect Ayaan Hirsi Ali

Comment #89058 by briancoughlanworldcitizen on November 19, 2007 at 3:59 pm

This has absolutely nothing to do with any in-group/out-group mentality, but with civility.

Well maybe. Perhaps you've been a paragon of reasoned debate, I'm not sure I've read all of your posts on this thread. However let me draw your attention to some fairly intemperate remarks.

After reading this thread, I think the largely unwarranted stereotype of tightwad Jew should be accurately re-applied to our atheist fellows. Are we not a bunch a sniveling little pocket pinchers looking for any rational excuse to do nothing with our lives.

Any group on the internet will always attract its share of lice.

I'm all in favour of donating, it strikes me as a very sensible cause. It is merely the outraged sense of violation, of something profaned, that pervades the thread that I find disturbing and, yes, religious for want of a better term.

Just me is it? Oh well.

359. URGENT APPEAL: Please Help Protect Ayaan Hirsi Ali

Comment #89051 by briancoughlanworldcitizen on November 19, 2007 at 3:27 pm

It has been pretty interesting to watch this little spat.

As a cash stumper upper, I feel pretty comfortable observing that this has been a classic case of ingroup/outgroup behaviour resulting in the demonisation and attempts to repress, an unpalatable minority view point. With a few demagouges (as usual) leading the attack.

Frankly, there may be a little testosterone involved too, perhaps triggered by a need to protect and defend an attractive female? Don't read anything sexist into that, it's just an objective observation. As the great Hitch says, we're just a half a chromosome removed from chimps.

Steve, Goldy, Rtambree am I off base here? Shoot me down if I am, but gently please. I'm just sayin'.

Josh, if you'll forgive the observation, you seem to have allowed yourself to get caught up in the emotional rush somewhat.

360. URGENT APPEAL: Please Help Protect Ayaan Hirsi Ali

Comment #88972 by briancoughlanworldcitizen on November 19, 2007 at 10:17 am

I sent my contribution but I'm not going to sit on my high hourse and judge people for choosing not to do so. It's their business. This strategy of guilting and silencing people isn't how we should do things. This is one of the things I dislike the most about organised religion: The manipulative overuse of guilt to get people to do what you want.

I have to agree. I have no hesitation in supporting Ayaan, and have gone along and done so. However, the tone of those insisting we "must" help, and how "dare" we question Ayaan's motives, has a distinctly religious and rather familiar feel.

If more theists (including myself when I was one) had asked skeptical and probing questions about what exactly their money was being used for, the fawning deference for religion that is now an absolute must for every American politician, might not have become so inevitable.

Skeptical questions are good, to be welcomed and actively encouraged. As it happens I'm convinced of the case, but others surely have the right to satisfy themselves, to express some doubts and even a little skepticism about an appeal for money, without being subjected to the Spanish Inquisition?

I think we often loose sight of the fact that religion is not the problem. Ideology is the problem, successful ideologies that leverage on the plethora of cognitive weaknesses (now thankfully gradually coming to light) in the human brain.

Atheists are just as likely to fall prey to these mental blind spots as any theist, and the only defense is relentless skepticism. If there is one attitude that we should prize above all others, that's it.

361. The Transcendental Argument for God

Comment #88965 by briancoughlanworldcitizen on November 19, 2007 at 9:49 am

479. Comment #88947 by Dianelos Georgoudis on November 19, 2007 at 8:39 am

Actually I reject the observation that this thread keeps repeating the same.

Well you appear to be pretty isolated on that front.

I refer you to Steve's comment

A God we can't know, but is good (how do we know?) somehow responsible for objective ethics and stuff (how?); objective ethics we can't know, but we sort of have to guess at (which is no help at all - as I have said before, the existence of a map is no use if you don't have it to hand), and the idea that God is a vast Mind, when we know that whatever the substrate, minds are hugely complex.

The question is repeatedly asked because you have failed to demonstrate explanatory power, lack of paradox and simplicity. At least not as we use those words.

Let me put it this way.

You live in a kind of philosophical flatland. From this limited perspective you think that you're making sense, progress and major "breakthroughs". However from our 3D perspective, we can clearly see you're simply looping endlessly around the same basic themes.

However, I've already said more than I intended. Leave these good people alone.

362. Richard Dawkins at AAI 07

Comment #88964 by briancoughlanworldcitizen on November 19, 2007 at 9:32 am

Maybe I got the wrong end of the stick about your views because I also can't see any way to protect buses and trains etc. And of course, once you've secured them then you have to secure shopping centres and a thousand other places. I simply found it daft that you claimed that because you had never been blown up on a London bus, there was really no need to worry. I think there is. In fact 7/7 proved it so.


Let me stick my oar in the water here. Identity cards? No problem. I live in Sweden and everyone is numbered at birth. As a result, my wife can get a passport in about a week simply by picking up the phone. She literally called the police station, ordered a new passport and picked it up a week later. It may be more complicated now, that was mid 90's.

So frankly I'm a fan of numbered populations, I think an ID card was one of the first things I got when we moved here:-)

As regards, not worrying about public transport. There I'd have to agree too!!! How likely is it that you'll be the one that "gets it"? Vanishingly small. By obsessing about it, you produce the exact kind of reaction these dolts are hoping for. I say leave it to the security services and give it as much thought as you would being struck by a meteor.

363. Richard Dawkins at AAI 07

Comment #88760 by briancoughlanworldcitizen on November 19, 2007 at 12:19 am

544. Comment #88653 by krisking on November 18, 2007 at 10:11 am
briancoughlanworldcitizen

Don't be obtuse. It's clear to everyone that the underlying reasons for WWII are multi faceted and complex.

However, the primary lever to motivate the German people to co-operate was inextricably grounded in religion.

Jew hating? A massive personality cult? Nordic pagan rites? C'mon.:-)

Absent it, could they have been convinced to go along with Hitler? As I noted, possibly. However, to discount the centrality of religions malevolent influence is what is facile.

364. The joining of church and state

Comment #88602 by briancoughlanworldcitizen on November 18, 2007 at 2:39 am

3. Comment #88599 by elfstoned on November 18, 2007 at 2:31 am
I read somewhere that Robertson is supporting Giuliani because he believes it will hasten the Apocalypse.

DUDE!!!! That was a spoof article! This is a clear thinking oasis remember? Lets not post crazy shit, not even about religious nut jobs, without making sure it's true.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/andy-borowitz/pat-robertson-says-giulia_b_71744.html

Roberstson is a cynical old fart, thats what this clearly indicates. So no surprise there then.

365. Richard Dawkins at AAI 07

Comment #88600 by briancoughlanworldcitizen on November 18, 2007 at 2:33 am

540. Comment #88598 by krisking on November 18, 2007 at 2:17 am

So it's ideology that you take exception to.

Oh absolutely. You'll find that practically all of my fellow atheists hold similar views. Religion is just a virulent mutation of the personality cult. In many respects, Stalin and Hitler were simply going "back to basics".

Perhaps the youtube clip below will help you join the dots.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gmsis-motuY

366. The Transcendental Argument for God

Comment #88591 by briancoughlanworldcitizen on November 18, 2007 at 1:42 am

Someone please take this thread out and shoot it.

No disrespect to the atheist posters here, great work really, but even you chaps must be wearying of saying the same thing over and over in different ways.

At what point do we qualify someone as a troll and move on? The 10th time they make the same debunked (or plain pointless) claim? The 20th? The 100th?

367. Saudi gang-rape victim is jailed

Comment #88584 by briancoughlanworldcitizen on November 18, 2007 at 12:23 am

16. Comment #88581 by Corylus on November 18, 2007 at 12:07 am
avatar

The victim's lawyer was suspended from the case, has had his licence to work confiscated, and faces a disciplinary session.

What amazing and courageous muslims these two are. I sincerely hope they find justice, and change the law, at the very least they have exposed the utter hypocrisy of the religious establishment, that is always a good start.

368. Richard Dawkins at AAI 07

Comment #88583 by briancoughlanworldcitizen on November 18, 2007 at 12:17 am

Surely, no-one here could claim that the two world wars were fought over religious issues, or started by religious reasons.

I think a pretty compelling case could be made that ideology, the umbrella under which religion fits as a major subset, was primary. However, certainly in WWII (55 million dead) religion was absolutely central. Ever hear of judaism, christianity and Nordic paganism? Ever hear of a chap called Martin Luther and his religiously grounded anti semitism?

Would the little corporal have come to power without these influences, killed 6 million people because of them and sucked 55 million people into oblivion if they had never existed? Maybe, but religion is a pretty handy lever to motivate people and on a massive scale.

WWI is less obviously religious. However, what are monarchies but religions where some human is the focus of adoration and worship?

It always comes back to people doing stupid things for very bad reasons. Religion, while not the only "very bad reason", is one that has a spectacular capacity to marshall the inate hatred of others that all humans are born with, and motivate them to utter lunacy. Food for thought.

369. Judgement Day: Intelligent Design on Trial

Comment #88541 by briancoughlanworldcitizen on November 17, 2007 at 3:46 pm

check this out ... pretty good. I done found myself a torrent for it!!!

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0297188/

370. Judgement Day: Intelligent Design on Trial

Comment #88500 by briancoughlanworldcitizen on November 17, 2007 at 6:09 am

Wow. Just finished watching the whole thing. I love this kind of stuff, it helps counterbalance my own acknowledged tendency to anti-americanism, the world needs to see and hear much more of this.

Here are common or garden american citizens, fighting tooth and nail for rationality, good sense and truth, with the final outcome hinging on a Bush appointed republican!!! Holy sheet!!!

The American system of government, and constitution has it flaws, but it came up trumps here. Go USA!!!

371. Mind your manners

Comment #88494 by briancoughlanworldcitizen on November 17, 2007 at 4:57 am

If I wanted to read unsubstantiated, despicable right-wing propaganda, I'll go to a website that caters for stupidity and lies. There's a whole collection of right-wing freak shows on the web, MuNky82 doesn't have to come here to spout his ignorant drivel.

I totally agree. We should robustly challenge all idiocy, be it AGW deniers, creationists, IDiots, anarchists, new agers, rabid free marketeers, back to nature freaks or stalinists. Everything is up for discussion and debate, and if you say stupid stuff you should expect a verbal pummeling, especially if you claim an atheism arrived at rationally.

372. Mind your manners

Comment #88483 by briancoughlanworldcitizen on November 17, 2007 at 2:31 am

18. Comment #88395 by arogop on November 16, 2007 at 1:01 pm
I am not a big fan a Marzism, Socialism or any of that liberal stuff.

Give me good old Capitalism with some minor checks and balances.

Marzism eh? Is that rule by Martians, or the Marzipan economy? Seriously though, you dismiss an incredibly diverse sweep of subjects rather casually here, not least the compelling reality that those societies with social security nets exhibit far less religion.

Want to kill US religion dead in a generation? Institute universal health care and properly funded free education. When people have less to fear from life, they couldn't give a rats ass about Jebus, this really isn't said often enough.

373. Saudi gang-rape victim is jailed

Comment #88480 by briancoughlanworldcitizen on November 17, 2007 at 2:10 am

6. Comment #88421 by NormanDoering on November 16, 2007 at 2:35 pm
arogop wrote:

Reason enough to buy E85 fuel.


Reason enough to invest billions in creating the infrastructure needed for a wind/solar/hydrogen fuel economy.

Or shifting a fraction of the Trillion $'s plus spent annually on weapons, to fusion research. A measly 6 billion is all the most powerful countries in the world could scrape together? Yet, somehow they find a trillion each year for the military. Absurd, disgraceful and pissing me off.

Mind you a $ doesn't go as far as it used to ... good or bad news?

Awww, come on. Don't knock gospel music.

Likewise. I still love Don Francisco for some inexplicable reason ...

374. 'Expelled' Movie: The Extended Trailer

Comment #88327 by briancoughlanworldcitizen on November 16, 2007 at 2:41 am

40. Comment #88306 by clearthinker on November 15, 2007 at 11:15 pm

I refer you to my post #13. Yes they have a point, but is the same point that everyone who thinks they are some kind of lone genius going against the flow, has.

Of a million people who think they have overturned some well established scientific fact or principle, how many do you imagine actually have? For the answer to that question simply have a google browse on the subjects of perpetual motion, cold fusion or the "moon landing hoax".

We diss this movie not because we are irrationally unreasonable, but because to even the modestly informed it is self evidently disingenous, long debunked, endlessly recycled drivel which is perpetuating the deception of people and retarding progress in a broad spectrum of scientific disciplines as a result. It is at least as morally reprehensible as television evangelists, although I grant you, that would be hard to top.

375. 'Expelled' Movie: The Extended Trailer

Comment #88236 by briancoughlanworldcitizen on November 15, 2007 at 1:45 pm

14. Comment #88233 by robert s on November 15, 2007 at 1:39 pm
"If you were really a poached egg, you wouldn't have a shell, would you?"

Exactly! It subtly underpins and supports the primary derangement. Well spotted!:-)

376. 'Expelled' Movie: The Extended Trailer

Comment #88232 by briancoughlanworldcitizen on November 15, 2007 at 1:34 pm

They have a point of course, they are being ostracised, sidelined and ignored. In much the same way as the guy at the party insisting he is a poached egg, "No REALLY I am a poached egg, here ... stroke my shell!!", is likely to be avoided.

The problem, such as it is, is not with the other partygoers.

377. 'Expelled' Movie: The Extended Trailer

Comment #88226 by briancoughlanworldcitizen on November 15, 2007 at 12:58 pm

Another celebrity non-entity leveraging lunacy to elbow themselves temporarily back into the limelight. Pathetic really, especially at this guys age, and sort of sad.

378. Mind your manners

Comment #88224 by briancoughlanworldcitizen on November 15, 2007 at 12:39 pm

Today one is 'excommunicated' from public office or debate if one does not believe in the present ideology: cultural Marxism/political correctness/multi-nationalism.

Well there are ideologies which are worse .... fascism for example, or nationalism (basically fascism lite) or racism. Though I'd dispute that Marxism is being practiced anywhere. I'd honestly be keen to know where you think Marxism as ... you know ... envisaged by Marx is being practised? Wouldn't that be something of a first? Is anywhere even socialist these days?

379. 'Growing Up in the Universe' now available free online

Comment #88223 by briancoughlanworldcitizen on November 15, 2007 at 12:32 pm

37. Comment #88198 by bayareadude on November 15, 2007 at 8:24 am

Hilarious!!!

Torrent is working, I'm downloading the first edpisode now. Download speed isn't great though ... c'mon you bastards, get back online!! I need my Dawkins fix tonight, especially after that blurb in Salon.

380. Richard Dawkins at AAI 07

Comment #88063 by briancoughlanworldcitizen on November 14, 2007 at 1:09 pm

I'm curious to know if people on this forum are opposed to survelliance being done on a person because they are Iraqi.

As an Irishman, I was never particularly put out in the 80's and 90's when pulled aside in British airports. The questions (and questioners) were always polite, I never felt remotely threatened and I was never seriously inconvenienced.

What I experienced then, seems a sensible precaution to take with people of middle eastern descent now. Not everyone, that would be silly, but the kind of polite spot checks I was subjected to as a mid 20's white male with an Irish accent travelling to Germany through Britian, seem perfectly reasonable to me.

381. Richard Dawkins at AAI 07

Comment #87976 by briancoughlanworldcitizen on November 14, 2007 at 12:13 am

The London bombers were Englishmen, weren't they?

No argument there, and we are likely to see more of the same. The YT below summarises my view fairly completely.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i0lRffYTStw

382. Richard Dawkins at AAI 07

Comment #87966 by briancoughlanworldcitizen on November 13, 2007 at 10:02 pm

How I perceive it, is that thought-crime is a real offence to the fundamentalist, and is not to the gang member.

The critical point for me remains capacity, and actual results. The islamic extremists can't even achieve in Turkey what some hysterical hand wringers claim will occur in Europe. The Spanish recently tried and imprisoned the people responsible for the bombings in 2004. The rigorous application of law is, with some tweaking (along the lines of how the FBI deals with organised crime), sufficient to cope with islamic fundamentalism.

It is a threat, but nothing like an existential threat. Just a badly organised, and temporarily well funded religious mafia. Well actually, they are of course all like the mafia! But Islam is certainly worse than your run of the mill religious cult.

Nothing would do more to undermine these people than for the west to get fusion power up and running, and replace all other uses of oil with synthetics that can be produced agriculturally. The key thing is not to panic, we (mostly) didn't when we faced down communism. We can follow a similar playbook (with even less violence given the relative strengths of the parties) here.

I'm afraid that the rising so called Islamic fundamentalism is perceived as a reaction to the long-held belief that the US is an imperialist state bent on conquering the world, particularly the Islamic world.

Well, they are probably mostly right about that. The difference is the US may actually be able to do it. Not that I wouldn't prefer a US to an Islamic dictatorship. However, well ahead of both options, I'd prefer accountable global structures that ensure all of us are treated fairly and have a say in how the world is run.

Exhibit A : If participation in the election of the US president was global (i.e. not just a little under 1% of the global population), George Bush would never have been elected.

383. Onward Science Soldiers

Comment #87875 by briancoughlanworldcitizen on November 13, 2007 at 1:00 pm

The Bush administration has done a lot of damage to public policy and our poor "wall" is crumbling. I just have to hope the next president can fix it. January, 2009 cannot get here soon enough!

It is intolerable how the entire world is basically marking time, in limbo, looking to the day that the reeking excrement that is the Republican "president" George Walker Bush, be finally scraped from the heel of history.

With luck we may see himself and Rummy in the Hague within a decade. Now that would be worth waiting for:-)

384. Richard Dawkins at AAI 07

Comment #87851 by briancoughlanworldcitizen on November 13, 2007 at 11:18 am

I think Islamic fundamentalism in Europe is evidence of the thriving of extremism at the expense of all passive world views- not just passive religious world views.

I agree with the basic idea of being intolerant of intolerance, but "islamic extremism" in Europe is vastly overblown. Gang wars in major US cities account for exponentially more deaths annually, and per capita, than islamic extremism in Europe.

Basically, it's part of the right wing agenda to wip up hysteria on the subject. Take care that you aren't being an unwitting sock puppet for people you probably have the good sense to despise.

385. Richard Dawkins at AAI 07

Comment #87769 by briancoughlanworldcitizen on November 13, 2007 at 4:20 am

505. Comment #87700 by krisking on November 12, 2007 at 10:33 pm


Thank you for this. It all seems very convincing. Plenty of people brought up in Christian homes and Christian churches have struggled with these verses, and continue to do so.

And what is the standard response to that struggle? More faith, believe harder, pray for illumination. Do you see how the perfectly sensible skeptical instincts of humans, your skeptical instincts, are subverted and undermined by faith?

All the major religions do the same thing. Jesus/Allah/Krishna not working for you? You're to blame. It's an ingenous scam, but I get the distinct impression you are almost prising yourself free of it's grip. Keep thinking, questioning and probing.

I found the following book very helpful to make the final break.

http://www.positiveatheism.org/hist/homer1a.htm#TOC

All the best:-)

386. Richard Dawkins at AAI 07

Comment #87342 by briancoughlanworldcitizen on November 11, 2007 at 11:35 pm

What is more, Christians in the UK (those who take it seriously) are appalled at what purports to be Christianity in the US and the (as it seems to us) hard-line right wing, unbending, unforgiving reactionary, dogmatic, ideas and views that are preached.

As for many televangelists in the US, they are seen no better than highly organised money-grabbing conmen.

You summed it up pretty well, and it's a graphic illustration of why it's nonsense. Without the constant threat of death, or relentless butteressing from family and friends, the specific religious impulse simply withers on the vine.

Massive chunks of the new testament are dedicated to explaining how to ensure the above process does not happen and how to effectivley brainwash and absorb new converts.

Yet if you look at this religious wasteland and consider that your little group has plumbed the depths of the Bible and truly understood it, you are clearly a lunatic. How likely is it that you, or some group of people you hang out with, have grasped some earth shattering truth closed to the rest of us?

This is the core of all sects, the root of all religions and it is always, and without exception complete nonsense. Do yourself a favour and let it go, sounds like you are more than half way there already. For that I salute you.

387. Richard Dawkins at AAI 07

Comment #87151 by briancoughlanworldcitizen on November 11, 2007 at 10:54 am

So, we live and we die.

I'm afraid so. Simply because you dislike something, doesn't mean it's false. It merely means you have an emotional problem with that particular fact.

You're not the first, and you won't be the last. Still though, there is something to contemplate that is worse than death. The uniquely religious concept of eternal damnation. This is a wrinkle that really makes my blood boil.

The religious mind has taken something natural, but very sad and made it terrifying. Death would not hold the fear it does, if it were not for millenia of religious indoctrination insisting that death is not mere non-existence, but eternal torment. What monstrous cruel arrogance.

388. Richard Dawkins at AAI 07

Comment #87118 by briancoughlanworldcitizen on November 11, 2007 at 8:36 am

437. Comment #87108 by krisking on November 11, 2007 at 8:13 am
I suspect that most european societies live practically atheistic lives.

Yet they have stable just societies, topping everything from education to international donations.

Right and wrong does have an absolute standard, but it isn't divine instruction. It's a collection of biological modules that can be loosely rendered as "do unto others as you would have them do unto you". Altruism has utility hence it survives.

The bible and the koran are arguably worse than useless, full of pointless, vague and frequently objectionable injuctions. Best to start again from scratch and realise that right and wrong are in constant flux, and barring some core basics we need to take each case in context.

389. Richard Dawkins at AAI 07

Comment #87005 by briancoughlanworldcitizen on November 11, 2007 at 1:09 am

But, you have also got to acknowledge the slave owners in the antebellum south who used the Bible to show that blacks were inferior and that slavery was their natural position in life (see "Noah's Curse : The Biblical Justification of American Slavery" by Stephen Haynes for more details.)

This position was held as recently as the mid 1990's by South African christians to endorse apartheid. So forgive us for taking the whole "Christians stopped Slavery" with a great big handful of salt.

390. Richard Dawkins at AAI 07

Comment #87004 by briancoughlanworldcitizen on November 11, 2007 at 1:02 am

Why is the Bible and the morality it proposes more correct than these?

One can go back even further to the Sumerians and the Egyptians. There is clear evidence that entire chunks of the Bible were lifted wholesale from the writings of these ancient civilisations.

The adage "Do unto others, as you would have them do unto you". Was formulated in a range of different civilisations well prior to Jesus, and entirely independently of the Bible.

The Chinese particularly, managed to stabilise and feed the myriad citizens of the worlds largest unified state for millenia. The works of Chinese philosophers had a lot to do with that.

391. Pat Robertson Says Giuliani Presidency Appears in Book of Revelation

Comment #86890 by briancoughlanworldcitizen on November 10, 2007 at 11:28 am

23. Comment #86465 by steve99 on November 9, 2007 at 10:34 am


Not that I want to interfere in US politics, but it might be worth researching his recent statement about cancer treatment comparing the USA and the UK. He seems to have an interesting relationship with the truth.

On the contrary, I take every possible opportunity I can to "interfere". The american president is the most powerful politician in the world, yet 6.3 billion of us have absolutely no say whatever in who gets into that position.

At the very least, we should be doing everything in our power to highlight the outrages of the republican party to americans. I'll heave a sigh of relief (as both an atheist and a humanitarian) on the day the republican party is taken out back, shot by the electorate, and pronounced politically deceased.

392. Georgia plans service to pray for rain

Comment #86887 by briancoughlanworldcitizen on November 10, 2007 at 11:19 am

"The only solution is rain, and the only place we get that is from a higher power," Perdue spokesman Bert Brantley said on Wednesday.

Man, that these people can keep a straight face. Besides, what about cloud seeding? Or building aqueducts? Wasn't someone doing that like 2500 years ago?

These people really need to get into the iron age.

393. The Cancer From Within

Comment #86855 by briancoughlanworldcitizen on November 10, 2007 at 10:24 am

Good to see this being commented on.

While people are obsessing about Iranians trying to get nuclear weapons (a claim they consistently deny), here we have the worlds largest nuclear arsenal gradually being infiltrated by people at least as irrational.

I wish this blighted presidency was over. I'd rest a little bit easier knowing Bush was no longer asleep at the wheel. Just asleep.

394. AAI 07

Comment #85218 by briancoughlanworldcitizen on November 5, 2007 at 10:02 am

677. Comment #84961 by bayareadude on November 4, 2007 at 10:55 am
Can we just stop responding to Scooternyc's posts from here on?

If we pretend he's not here, maybe it'll be true some day and he won't be.

Even bad opinions are rarely entirely without merit. For example scooter thinks people should be made to fend for themselves, and who would want to argue with that? People bloody well should fend for themselves.

This is the good sensible core of a terrible argument. The idea that anyone, least of all children should die for lack of food, accomodation or medical attention in rich countries that could provide all of these basics to everyone is the bad part.

If we ignore or (suppress) it all, we miss the good stuff too, which may give us pause for thought. Freedom of speech should be a bedrock, especially here. All voices should be heard and assessed.

395. Atheism is a religion and you're as bad as the fundamentalists

Comment #84766 by briancoughlanworldcitizen on November 3, 2007 at 1:33 pm

You just can't get away with trying to claim that science works as badly as religion. The 'you are just as bad as us' approach of theists is a sham.

Still progress though:-) Used to be they could burn us at the stake, now all they can do is grind their teeth in impotent rage and claim "science is just as bad as religion".

It's obvious nonsense which Steve has dismissed with the brevity it deserves:-)

I'd like to see religion make a prediction as accurate as Newtons theory of gravity, Einsteins general relativity or Feinmanns quantum physics. Then you might actually be on to something.

Gotta love the progress:-)

396. AAI 07

Comment #84702 by briancoughlanworldcitizen on November 3, 2007 at 8:56 am

647. Comment #84701 by Logicel on November 3, 2007 at 8:47 am
avatarphil rimmer, is this the sort of person you would like to meet?

http://www.indianpad.com/story/109086

WOW! Respect.

397. AAI 07

Comment #84688 by briancoughlanworldcitizen on November 3, 2007 at 7:38 am

Scooter, I'm very sorry to hear that. My best wishes are with you during this very sad time.

398. AAI 07

Comment #84671 by briancoughlanworldcitizen on November 3, 2007 at 7:05 am

This would be very simple to do: publically funded elections (small taxpayer cost, HUGE gain in democracry), and lobbyists have to get in line to see their local member, just like any other action group or environmental organisation.

Sweden has that covered already, but it would be a great idea for the US. This is clear cut example of a dangerous cycle of expanding dependency between politicians, and very rich individuals and corporations. For a healthy democracy that link should ideally be severed.

399. AAI 07

Comment #84667 by briancoughlanworldcitizen on November 3, 2007 at 6:58 am

626. Comment #84664 by phil rimmer on November 3, 2007 at 6:49 am
Direct voter influence of taxation levels and governmental spending would be catastrophic. Carefully considered governmental budgets, balanced against a myriad different requirements would be trashed on a regular basis. The public can be fickle and can also be easily, if briefly, manipulated by non-democratic forces and random events.

Good points, my enthusiasim is temporarily curbed. Perhaps then initially as a recommendation, with league tables showing how closely government spending mirrors tax payer wishes?

People could still express a preference, and later judge if a given administration had either done as they asked, or had compelling reasons for not doing so.

400. AAI 07

Comment #84663 by briancoughlanworldcitizen on November 3, 2007 at 6:42 am

Can you see it happening? :)

Maybe one day in the distant future, when the zeitgeist has moved on, and they look back on our times in the same way that we look back on the past. After all, it was only 100 years ago that most European countries had powerful monarchies.

I can indeed. One of the most common complaints about representative government, is that it isn't "close enough to the people". This complaint is becoming more strident as regional bodies begin to elbow out local ones, think EU versus national parliaments, or federal versus state in the US. If we could get a virtous circle running, with the various legislative bodies competing with each other to involve the citizenry .... ah happy days:-)