1. Group finds Starbucks logo too hot to handle

Comment #180921 by Dinah on May 16, 2008 at 5:42 am

A fishy tale indeed...

2. Church of Scotland mediators to quell disputes

Comment #179911 by Dinah on May 14, 2008 at 1:39 am

Vaughn-Williams is far better but didn't write jingoistic material so he isn't as generally popular. He was the great-nephew of Charles Darwin, so he should be celebrated by more on this site at least.

3. A natural selection

Comment #179884 by Dinah on May 13, 2008 at 11:38 pm

I bumped into a United Church minister who was touring the exhibit with his wife and two friends. I asked him what he thought about it. "Great," he said.

4. Vatican: It's OK to believe in aliens

Comment #179874 by Dinah on May 13, 2008 at 11:06 pm

How are they going to tell the difference between the Second Coming and an invasion by super-aliens? (All that thunder, lightning and voices from the clouds could be confusing - and if the aliens were REALLY clever they could pretend to be Jesus, couldn't they? Though perhaps that wouldn't impress the Muslims so much...)

5. Americans pray at the pump for cheaper petrol

Comment #179316 by Dinah on May 13, 2008 at 5:34 am

Will their tanks be filled by the Holy Spirit?

6. Childish superstition: Einstein's letter makes view of religion relatively clear

Comment #179306 by Dinah on May 13, 2008 at 5:14 am

Re Comment #179225 by black wolf

...how come almost every time I check on statements that come from theology groups, I find that they quote-mine, misinterpret and misrepresent philosophers, historians and scientists. From theology at Oxford to the Australian Catholic Church, can we trust anything they write without taking the burden of checking on them first?

7. The Stupidity of Dignity

Comment #179295 by Dinah on May 13, 2008 at 4:36 am

Can we assume that these defenders of our dignity will refuse any curative treatments obtained by 'undignified' means such as embryo research, should they be unfortunate enough to need them? Perhaps they should be told that choking to death or drowning in their own secretions will be very far from dignified.

In any case, I agree that the mere fact of being human makes dignity an extremely superficial and/or artificial concept. Urinating, defecating, menstruating, having sex, giving birth - all are messy procedures, which most people prefer to experience in private. They also point to the fact we are evolved creatures, rather than ones created in the image of any god - if god created the human genitalia he must either have been having a laugh or a bad day.

8. Church of Scotland mediators to quell disputes

Comment #178564 by Dinah on May 11, 2008 at 3:41 pm

Re: Comment #178244 by Paula Kirby

This article is specifically about the Church of Scotland, and David Robertson is with the Free Church of Scotland. Confusing, I know. Then there's the Free Church of Scotland (Continuing), the Free Presbyterians, and a myriad others.

9. Church of Scotland mediators to quell disputes

Comment #178551 by Dinah on May 11, 2008 at 3:25 pm

Senior kirk members admit many ministers are not used to being questioned on matters of faith that in the past were accepted as absolute.

10. 'My daughter deserved to die for falling in love'

Comment #178381 by Dinah on May 11, 2008 at 10:20 am

This article brought me close to despair. Any religion or culture that can entirely snuff out the natural affection a father should instinctively feel for his child must be inherently evil. To feel no shame, no sense of grief or loss, to be able to go out and boast about what he has done...is beyond horror.

11. Richard Dawkins interviewed by John Humphrys on Cardinal Murphy O'Connor

Comment #178143 by Dinah on May 10, 2008 at 3:23 pm

Poor Cardinal. How he must long for those good old pre-Enlightenment days, when he could have had those foolish enough to declare themselves atheists rounded up, thrown into jail, tortured and finally burnt at the stake. This was of course entirely unreasonable behaviour, but reason leads to all kinds of shocking things like freedom of conscience, freedom of speech, the separation of Church and State, the emancipation of women, universal suffrage, secularism...it's just terrible.

12. British Airways takes beef off the menu to avoid offending Hindus

Comment #178111 by Dinah on May 10, 2008 at 2:15 pm

This strikes me as being a bit of a storm in a stew pot. I mostly find the food on planes so disgusting I'm unable to work out what kind of meat is lurking in those foil trays (it could be horse for all I know) and I end up just eating the roll and cheese and leaving the rest. I suspect this decision is far more to do with economics and profit margins than religious dietary requirements.

13. Faith in Britain today

Comment #177541 by Dinah on May 9, 2008 at 9:14 am

On the plus side, RD did get the chance to comment - brilliantly - on the Cardinal's speech and even managed to flummox John Humphries. And the Cardinal didn't get a completely free ride from JH, though it was nothing like the kind of interview JH subjects politicians to. On the minus side, Richard was put on much earlier than the Cardinal, at a time when fewer people were likely to be listening, and got far less time than he did to make his points. If anyone other than a prominent religious figure had come up with such a load of old waffle as the ever-so-'umble Cardinal's, they certainly wouldn't have got so much air time, or if they had, they would have been taken to pieces by the interviewer.

14. Faith in Britain today

Comment #177367 by Dinah on May 9, 2008 at 1:38 am

I, Cardinal Cornflake Murky O'Conmore, in my inestimable, ineffable sanctimoniousness, reserve the absolute right to waffle on interminably about my god - no not your god, or the one that Professor...er...um...who I haven't listened to is on about - What? How many gods are there? What a silly question! Er...everyone knows there are...one, two, three...mutter...now you've made me run out of fingers...um...Anyway, there is only one real one. Mine. So there! And if you don't like it, I'll...um...er...you are being UNREASONABLE...no...er...that's not right…those nasty Communists who killed everybody were being REASONABLE weren't they? What? Religious extremists? Um, well, you see, they don't love their neighbours, the ones at number seven, so they don't count...Er...What? Oh - you have to get on with the rest of the programme? Now, where did I leave my hat? Yes, the tall silly one...

15. Faith in Britain today

Comment #177078 by Dinah on May 8, 2008 at 2:15 pm

Re Comment #177067 by Lycosid

I'm just glad he doesn't have children.

16. Faith in Britain today

Comment #177045 by Dinah on May 8, 2008 at 1:50 pm

I find it astonishing that anybody could spend 5000 words saying absolutely nothing of substance.

17. Faith in Britain today

Comment #177025 by Dinah on May 8, 2008 at 1:28 pm

A God who can be spoken of comfortably and clearly by human beings cannot be the true God. Si comprehendis, non est Deus, said St Augustine: 'if you understand, it is not God'. I wonder if we Christians have led people to think that it is easy to talk about God and to think that we know clearly what we are talking about.

18. The detail in the Devil

Comment #176469 by Dinah on May 7, 2008 at 12:12 pm

Re Comment #176282 by windweaver

Thank you for that - it has made everything really...um...clear. Now I need a very large drink - not to mention a degree in theology. But I think I'll have the drink first.

19. The detail in the Devil

Comment #176249 by Dinah on May 7, 2008 at 2:24 am

If God is omnipotent, why does he put up with the Devil when he could easily destroy him with one blow of his mighty fist? Is it that he gets so fed-up with being good and loving and perfect and er God all the time, he employs him for a bit of after-dinner entertainment? Or is the Devil God's alter ego - the other side of himself he uses to consign the unworthy and ungrateful to hell for eternity? I think we should be told.

20. Evolution's Critics Shift Tactics With Schools

Comment #174789 by Dinah on May 3, 2008 at 2:11 pm

The Catholic Church placed Galileo under house arrest because his discoveries conflicted with passages from the Bible which stated the sun orbited the earth and not the other way around. Four hundred years later, a sizeable number of Christians still believe that myths contained in ancient texts written by people who knew nothing about science carry more weight and should override observable facts about evolution and the origins of life. Worse still, they believe these myths should be taught in classrooms, not as part of RE lessons, but as serious science. It is the equivalent of today's students of medicine being taught that blood-letting is an effective way to cure disease, and no doubt if this practice was endorsed by the Bible, some crackpot Christians would be lobbying for its inclusion in the curricula of medical schools.

21. Was the new finger a 'natural' miracle?

Comment #174605 by Dinah on May 2, 2008 at 11:23 pm

I was extremely sceptical about this news item when it was reported earlier this week, so visiting this site has evidently enhanced my capacity for critical thinking. Hurrah!

22. Muslim Rebel Sisters: At Odds With Islam and Each Other

Comment #174603 by Dinah on May 2, 2008 at 11:06 pm

Re Comment #174533 by Vinelectric
[Choice of wearing the veil] 'But that's practically the case in most countries except Iran and Saudi'
Well, even at this time in the morning I can think of a few more off the top of my head - Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Iraq - in the case of the latter, women have increasingly been forced to cover up since the invasion.
Comment #174544 by rod-the-farmer
'Why do they [Muslim diplomats] not speak up about the abuse of women by some muslims ?'
Why indeed. Only when I see the majority of educated Muslim men protesting about the treatment of women under Islam rather than engaging in rants about cartoons and other perceived 'offences' against their religion will I believe that Islam is beginning to reform itself.

23. Muslim Rebel Sisters: At Odds With Islam and Each Other

Comment #174524 by Dinah on May 2, 2008 at 2:54 pm

The three major monotheistic religions (Judaism, Christianity and Islam) have traditionally used their imaginary (male) god and misogynistic writings supposedly inspired by him to oppress women. While Christianity has gone through an Enlightenment, there are plenty of Christians around today who would love to strip women of their rights in the name of their god and their bible. But it is Islam which is the greatest current threat to women's rights. Only this morning I listened to a programme where a British woman defended her 'right' to wear the veil, evidently regarding it as something of a fashion accessory. She stated, 'It is just a piece of cloth, after all.' No, it isn't. It is something imposed on Muslim women by men, and in many Islamic countries women who refuse to wear it risk being abused, injured or even killed. Women are seen as temptresses, as unclean and polluting, and must cover themselves to avoid inflaming the passions of males. The veil will only revert to being 'just a piece of cloth' when every Muslim woman has a genuine choice about whether or not to wear it. Meanwhile, the British Muslim woman on the radio this morning who DOES have that choice is betraying her less fortunate sisters by trivialising the issue.

24. Religion a figment of human imagination

Comment #172206 by Dinah on April 29, 2008 at 10:41 am

The human imagination has led, among other things, to great poetry, novels, paintings, the works of Shakespeare, and religion. Humans are story-telling creatures. A religion is just another story which some have come to accept as fact. We shouldn't really be surprised at this - some people think the characters in modern soap-operas are real.

25. How to reconcile Richard Dawkins?

Comment #172189 by Dinah on April 29, 2008 at 10:21 am

I suspect Peter McKnight has allowed himself to be over-influenced by the negative comments and interpretations of TGD rather than assessing the book for himself. The religious-minded will continue to condemn the book for daring to question the legitimacy of their claims, but McKnight should have the courage of his own convictions - it does sound as though he's inclined our way rather than theirs.

26. How to reconcile Richard Dawkins?

Comment #172173 by Dinah on April 29, 2008 at 10:01 am

Did Stalin execute religious figures specifically because they were religious, or because he saw them as representing an alternative kind of power and therefore a threat to his leadership? He did after all suffer from paranoia, and executed many people he imagined were plotting against him.

27. Interview with Dan Dennett

Comment #168902 by Dinah on April 25, 2008 at 12:45 pm

Re Comment #168857 by BigJohn

'There/their/they're' Yes, I agree. This is very basic grammar, and people should take the trouble to find out the difference if they don't know.

Another thing that annoys me is the frequent misspelling of the word 'atheist', usually as 'athiest'. How can atheists expect to be taken seriously if they can't even spell what they are supposed to be?

28. Humans nearly wiped out 70,000 years ago, study says

Comment #168696 by Dinah on April 25, 2008 at 9:46 am

REPENT! The end is, I mean was, nigh, I mean nearly was nigh, was nigh nearly, but wasn't really, oh never mind...

29. Investigating Atheism

Comment #167714 by Dinah on April 24, 2008 at 9:27 am

This is akin to vegetarians running a site about carnivores, or should that be the other way around? Anyway, it is highly unlikely that unbiased information will be obtained from such a source. If the people running this site are aiming to refute atheism, then they should say so. But as we know, theologians/god botherers/faithheads or whatever we wish to call them, are rarely honest about their motives, or indeed anything else.

30. Is religion a threat to rationality and science?

Comment #167685 by Dinah on April 24, 2008 at 9:07 am

'clearmind's' mind seems about as clear as thick oxtail soup or a mud-filled ditch. I have to confess that most of the time I have no idea what he is on about. Is this a common problem, or is it just me?

31. Is religion a threat to rationality and science?

Comment #167579 by Dinah on April 24, 2008 at 7:16 am

Re Comment #167553 by black wolf

Well, I can see what you mean. I have a friend who met and married a man with a beard, but post the nuptials she persuaded him to shave it off. She took one look at him clean-shaven and immediately commanded him to grow it again!

So there may be something after all in the belief that men with beards are hiding something...

32. Is religion a threat to rationality and science?

Comment #167517 by Dinah on April 24, 2008 at 6:04 am

I think Daniel Dennett is brilliant - he sums up the arguments against religion so well. Pity about his old-testament style beard, though. Why do some men think beards are attractive? Is it a case of 'I must be a man because I can grow all this disgusting wiry stuff over my face?' Or do they find them useful for storing their left-over chips? Couldn't his wife be persuaded to shave it off while he's asleep?

33. Victims: Pope Benedict Protects Accused Pedophile Bishops

Comment #162814 by Dinah on April 17, 2008 at 1:52 pm

Re Comment #162802 by Steve Zara
Whether it is 'reasonable' or 'acceptable' is surely not the issue; the point is whether or not it is true. I am not suggesting that everyone who is forced to repress their sexuality for whatever reason will revert to rape, but in certain circumstances it will happen. One only has to think what happens in war - for example, when Berlin was overrun at the end of WW2 many sex-starved allied soldiers raped every German female they could find aged from 8 to 80 plus. Catholic priests live unnatural lives in which they are required to deny themselves any kind of sexual gratification from normal relationships and some as a result will behave in ways which we would regard as 'unreasonable' and 'unacceptable'.

34. Victims: Pope Benedict Protects Accused Pedophile Bishops

Comment #162727 by Dinah on April 17, 2008 at 11:12 am

Re Comment #162687 by Steve Zara

It would not necessarily be possible for a priest to visit a prostitute - it would depend on the circumstances - on which country he lived in for example, or whether his parish was in a town or the country. My point is that suppressed sexuality can manifest itself in peculiar, peverted ways - some men have sex with vacuum cleaners when presumably they would prefer to have sex with a woman, were one available. Just because a person is not naturally a paedophile doesn't mean they would never have sex with a child if they were desperate enough and they felt they would not be found out.

35. Victims: Pope Benedict Protects Accused Pedophile Bishops

Comment #162685 by Dinah on April 17, 2008 at 8:39 am

Any organisation which imposes celibacy on its employees is asking for trouble. I believe the original reason for requiring Catholic priests to be celibate was to make sure they had no legitimate children who could inherit their property, thus making sure the property would go to the Church. This happened in the middle ages: prior to that time, priests were allowed to marry. The sexual drive in humans is extremely powerful and repressing it can lead to neuroses and mental illness, not to mention abnormal sexual behaviour. It should be obvious that a celibate priest with no other outlet for satisfying his sexual urges may seek out young children who are powerless and unable to protest. While it is not impossible for people to live fulfilled and successful lives as celibates, whether as a result of religious convictions or for other reasons, it is very rare, and usually such people have very low sex drives. As a way of life, celibacy should always be freely chosen, never enforced.

36. Pastor attacks scientist's talk

Comment #156165 by Dinah on April 7, 2008 at 1:52 am

Oh dear, how the unctuous David enjoys winding us all up. Then he sits back, waits for the explosion, whereupon he can feign hurt feelings, express his outrage, etc. and claim the moral high ground. How I wish we could ignore him, but I suspect we won't.

37. Dawkins warns of human extinction

Comment #155430 by Dinah on April 4, 2008 at 1:29 pm

The human population is likely to rise from about 6 billion now to 9 billion by the middle of the present century. It is hard to see how the earth's finite resources could sustain this number of people indefinitely, so it seems entirely possible that humans could become extinct, or, at the very least, suffer a cataclysmic population crash. Global warming could get completely out of control rendering large parts of the planet uninhabitable, there could be nuclear wars, pandemics, droughts and starvation on a massive scale. On a more hopeful note it is also entirely possible that human ingenuity and science will find a way out provided the forces of ignorance allow them to do so.

38. Dawkins warns of human extinction

Comment #155414 by Dinah on April 4, 2008 at 1:03 pm

Artful Dodger evidently has an infantile need to worship someone, so I suggest he switches his allegiance away from God and Jesus, and to Richard Dawkins for three reasons (1) Richard Dawkins exists (or if he doesn't I've been seriously misled) and (2) Richard Dawkins, as has been pointed out elsewhere, is a thoroughly nice bloke who, unlike God or Jesus, has never threatened anyone with the pains of hell for not obeying him, and (3) Richard Dawkins knows a lot more about the origins of life than God and Jesus, who both seem woefully ignorant about the topic. There are probably a lot more reasons that I can't bring to mind at the moment.

Of course, Artful Dodger would run the risk of being labelled 'sycophantic' and 'hero-worshipping' if he were to do this, but you can't have everything, can you?

39. BBC 'too scared to allow jokes about Islam'

Comment #154246 by Dinah on April 3, 2008 at 1:36 am

There is no point in abolishing the laws of blasphemy, or succeeding in watering down the religious hatred laws if people and organisations are simply going to use self-censorship to prevent satire, jokes and criticism of religion instead. In practice this self-censorship is more likely to apply to Islam because it is Muslims who take offence at any ridiculing of their faith more readily than adherents of other faiths, and express their outrage by rioting, waving placards and setting fire to things. For some reason, they believe this type of behaviour demonstrates what a wonderful religion Islam is and why we should all practice it.

It may well be true for all I know that many Muslims - perhaps even the majority - do not approve of this type of behaviour, but unfortunately it is not the more liberal-minded, Westernised Muslims who are calling the shots at the moment.

To label someone as 'rascist' for condemning the oppression of women under Islam is ridiculous, because Muslims are not a race any more than Christians are.

40. Who wants to kill the elderly?

Comment #153489 by Dinah on April 1, 2008 at 1:59 pm

I think there is a difference between 'killing old people' and not keeping people alive who are suffering unbearably. This is a difficult moral area, but we are often more compassionate to animals in this respect than to other human beings, being encouraged to put a pet out of its misery - sometimes risking prosecution for not doing so - but forbidden on pain of prosecution to do the same for our own kind. Of course, the religious lobby who believe life is bestowed and taken away by their god will always oppose any kind of euthanasia, no matter how much suffering this means for individuals.

Lord Joffe's Bill allowing voluntary euthanasia in very limited circumstances has been continually opposed by the religious in Parliament.

Anyone worried about being kept alive against their wishes should make a Living Will. There is no guarantee its instructions will be followed, but it is better than doing nothing.

41. Beware the Believers

Comment #153446 by Dinah on April 1, 2008 at 1:28 pm

Another not-very-good poem which is nonetheless strangely compelling is Edgar Allan Poe's 'The Raven', that begins:

Once upon a midnight dreary, while I pondered, weak and weary
Over a many quaint and curious volume of forgotten lore
While I nodded, nearly napping, suddenly there came a tapping,
As of someone gently rapping, rapping at my chamber door
'Tis some visitor,' I muttered, 'tapping at my chamber door-
Only this and nothing more'...

The first ever example of rap lyrics?

Then of course there is William McGonagall of 'Tay Bridge Disaster' fame, but as far as I am aware, he was not into rap…

42. Beware the Believers

Comment #153258 by Dinah on April 1, 2008 at 9:50 am

Well I'm so Sick to the Wick of this DVD
It's making no sense, it's gone all Over TT

43. Beware the Believers

Comment #151835 by Dinah on March 29, 2008 at 2:36 pm

Having seen the film, I don't think I'll bother with the book or the tee-shirt...

44. Saudi Arabia Leader Calls for Interfaith Dialogue

Comment #150180 by Dinah on March 26, 2008 at 2:29 pm

The majority of atheists, being rational affirmers of life, would not be willing to die for the atheist cause, and probably no atheist would kill anyone for opposing atheism. Some fundamentalist religious types are prepared to die for their religion, and many more to kill those who don't subscribe to their version of the supernatural. (Suicide bombers of course both kill themselves and others in the name of religion.) Does this mean in the end the forces of unreason will always defeat the voices of reason?

45. Happy Birthday, Richard Dawkins!

Comment #150156 by Dinah on March 26, 2008 at 1:52 pm

Happy Birthday! (And a huge THANK YOU for your relentless hard work in the cause of atheism, and for having the courage to stand up to the champions of irrationality, superstition and the supernatural.)

46. Wicked untruths from the Church

Comment #150111 by Dinah on March 26, 2008 at 1:11 pm

I have no idea what the collective noun for Ancient Male Virgins in Frocks is (a Pontification perhaps?) but we've certainly been subjected to much ranting and hand-wringing from a Proliferation of them over the past week or so. As we have come to expect, it's been the usual triumph of dogma and irrationality over compassion and humanity. Evidently, a few cells in a Petrie dish with no consciousness or nervous system have more value than adult human beings in the throes of MS, Parkinson's or Motor Neurone Disease, conditions which might be alleviated if this research were allowed to go ahead.

Of course, we can be certain if any of these holier-than-thous end up with fatal conditions themselves, they will eschew any curative treatments gleaned from embryo research, preferring instead to choke to death or drown in their own secretions. 'No, no!' they will sob, pushing the proffered medicine away, 'Think how many poor little embryos went into one tablet! And besides (gasp) suffering is so ennobling! What a fine example we are setting to (gnash of teeth) healthy people, reminding them about all the ennoblement they are missing out on, not having the opportunity to suffer like us!'

47. It looks like Man crucified

Comment #148493 by Dinah on March 23, 2008 at 7:55 am

'Only someone with the brain of an Easter egg could seriously believe that the influence of religion over our lives is on the rise today'

Only someone with the brain of an Easter bunny could have failed to notice the rise and rise of Islamic fundamentalism over the last few decades.

48. EXPELLED!

Comment #147932 by Dinah on March 21, 2008 at 4:02 pm

It is hardly surprising that a bunch of ID aficionados failed to recognise Richard Dawkins, since they have devoted their lives to evading reality, and are thus particularly well-qualified in the art of not seeing what is staring them in the face.

As for the references to Nazism, etc in the film - I do not know whether the Nazis were influenced by Darwinism, but if the discovery of a scientific fact leads to unpleasant outcomes that doesn't turn the fact into fiction. Or, as Richard Dawkins far more eloquently expresses it, 'a disagreeable consequence cannot undermine the truth of a premise'.

49. Jesus saves

Comment #147198 by Dinah on March 20, 2008 at 3:06 am

Re Comment #147047 'I'd rather see that money spent on research to find out why people eat Brussel's Sprouts.'

To get the wind up? (Or down?)

50. Religion 'linked to happy life'

Comment #146324 by Dinah on March 19, 2008 at 12:43 am

Life can be sad, hard and difficult. Being unhappy at times is a natural response to some of the things which happen to us. Some Christians will not allow themselves to admit this: they think being unhappy is a sin, a kind of affront to their god. They end up living a lie, hiding behind a facade of relentless false optimism. Sometimes, and I have seen this for myself, the facade cracks and they end up being treated for depression and other psychiatric disorders.