Paul ’s Comments (group member since Sep 12, 2010)

Paul ’s comments from the Atheists and Skeptics group.

I can hear a comedy sketch about this done as Kenneth Williams...

While I do think Xox's style is rather inflammatory (and we love him for it), I'm all for educating islam out of existence, along with all other primitive backward looking belief systems.

I think RCs first comment is on more or less correct; it was a choice between Karzai and the taliban. While the situation in Afghanistan is a mess, we can only go from where we are. However, it does stick in my craw to see some of the things that are being done, and I do think that the west should be more proactive in encouraging rights, education and modernisation. On the one hand the US has been incredibly pushy about its military role, while on the other being far too timid about causing cultural offence.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middl...

My apologies for being crude, but does he think they'll sit on the gear stick? That begs the question about his own style of driving.

One of the 'defences' (or distancing religion from this) that I always hear used is that "it is a cultural thing within some muslim countries, rather than something muslim", which fails on so many levels. Even apart from the koran specifically stating the women are property and less important than men in so many ways, it is something that the islamic authorities in many countries support either directly or implicitly by their treatment of women under the law.

There was a story about the Church of Scotland starting trouble too. Personally, I think they're only further marginalising themselves and causing internal splits, which is all for the good.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-...

Hi Elomari, welcome to our happy band!

I think that's just dedication to your cause

MadgeUK wrote: "I rather think that her speech is playing into the hands of those religionistas who call atheists 'aggressive' just because we put another p.o.v. on the table."

I think Greta clearly makes the distinction between anger and aggression, as well as stating at the outset that she is speaking for herself rather than atheists as a whole (although the audience reaction shows how much support she has).

Perhaps 'passion' would be a better word than anger, but I think it is important in a society like the US to speak up strongly.

Hazel wrote: "I dunno Paul, I always preferred shouting GOURANGA!!! :P"

ha!

Will wrote: "My mom used to tell me that meditating is about opening up your mind, and opening up your mind leaves room for the devil to come in."

At last we have logic about why the religious remain close-minded!

Hazel, perhaps we ought to organise a mass gathering at a rep. convention and all chant 'ommmmmm' really loudly :D

Geoff (G. Robbins) wrote: ""While the Jesuit’s remarks might strike many as the ravings of a man possessed", poor turn of phrase that."

or possibly deliberate ;D

Hazel wrote: "slightly related, but a bit tangental, its been a while since I read the Harry Potter books, but is religion ever even mentioned at all? I'm reasonably sure that it isn't, but I may be misremembering."

Not really (to the best of my knowledge; I've only read the first two and a half though). I was actually very impressed that Rowling always refused to be drawn into argument until after the last book was published, when she did say she was herself a christian but that is was a private matter, entirely separate from her work and that the religious criticisms were moronic.

This priest is just one of those all too common throwbacks who see any mention of things non-christian (or even non-orthodox) as heresy. The fact that he says practising yoga might lead to hinduism (gasp!) shows how prejudiced he is. At least he's honest; I think many church leaders agree but are more diplomatic.

Will wrote: "Is this a satire? I mean really, they're making it too easy for us."

That made me smile

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world...

to quote from Greta's speech:

"When you look at the things that make so many atheists angry about religion...you realise that most of it is not about harm that's being done to atheists; most of it is about harm that's being done to believers. It's anger on other people's behalf. Atheists are not angry because we're selfish, we're not angry because we're whiny, we're not angry because we have no joy and meaning in our lives, we're not angry because we have a god-shaped hole in our hearts. Atheists are angry because we have compassion. We're angry because we have a sense of justice. We're angry because we see harm being done to people, we see terrible, horrible harm being done to people and our hearts go out to them. Atheists are angry because we want to see this stop.

Atheists are not angry because there's something wrong with us. Atheists are angry because there's something right with us."

MadgeUK wrote: "More reliance can be placed on broadsheets like the Guardian, Independent and Telegraph - avoid our tabloids like the plague!"

Sad that The Times doesn't make that list any more.

The fact it happens at all is deplorable, and I have absolutely no doubt that it's a growing trend - especially with the increased emphasis on 'faith' schools. We need to absolutely strengthen central control of those damned foundation schools.

George wrote: "Because the book was about religion, I'm sure that the author felt that it couldn't be criticized. Does that sound familiar?"

That's what most of my most scathing reviews about, but only because I can't bring myself to read any Ann Coulter books.

Will wrote: "Wait, that's not why? The ones with longer necks were more adapt to survive because they could reach more food, right? Don't laugh at me, I've never been taught evolution on any level."

That is, what I've subsequently learned, to be a theory proposed by Lamarck, that change during the lifetime is passed on. On one hand reasonable, as genes and DNA weren't yet known, on the other hand, as more than one person has pointed out, that would mean that Jewish boys should be born without a foreskin.

Darwinian (or neo-Darwinian) selection teaches that survival and breeding select for those naturally occurring slight mutations. So an early giraffe gained a slight advantage from a slightly longer neck and bred more successfully, a process carried on by its descendants.

M0rningstar wrote: "I'm not very familiar with the press landscape in UK; sorry if the source is not reputable. :-/ But the fact that *anybody* does this is at all is mind-blowing."

No worries. The scary thing is that, in pandering to extreme and ill-informed opinion, papers like the Mail make them more widespread. The British press as a whole has become pretty appalling to be fairly honest.