1. Antony Flew reviews the Index of The God Delusion

Comment #215401 by Cthulance on July 21, 2008 at 7:41 pm

"What is important about this passage is not what Dawkins is saying about Flew but what he is showing here about Dawkins. For if he had had any interest in the truth of the matter of which he was making so much he would surely have brought himself to write me a letter of enquiry."

Translation: Dawkins didn't write me. *sniffle*

I'm so important, this proves Dawkins isn't interested in truth!

*sniffle*

2. The Return of Religion

Comment #212198 by Cthulance on July 16, 2008 at 7:49 pm

[quote]God has fled, but he is not dead. He is biding his time, waiting for us to make room for him.[/quote]

Translation: God is on the lam. Behold the lam of God!

3. Put a Little Science in Your Life

Comment #187298 by Cthulance on June 1, 2008 at 8:48 pm

This article reminds me of my own father, and how we watched Cosmos together on PBS back in its first run on television. We'd watch it together and then stay up into the wee hours of the night excitedly discussing what we'd seen. We speculated endlessly.

This truly saved me from all the mindkilling garbage I was "learning" in school at the time.

Then my father rediscovered our mutual birth religion (Mormonism) and now refuses to discuss Cosmos at all (he refers to Carl Sagan as "that damn atheist" disparagingly and with disgust).

Yet even though my father lost that spark, back in those days he ignited a spark in me. I'm grateful to my dad for being who he was then and for igniting such a lasting interest in and appreciation of science within me.

4. Borders Tags Atheist Book with 'O Come All Ye Faithless' Cards

Comment #101750 by Cthulance on December 20, 2007 at 9:40 pm

If you dare breathe a contrary view you're "bashing Christians around the head." You should just shut up and allow the Christians to bash you around the head with their fantastic nonsense all season (all year) round. They should be able to pound you endlessly with their nonsense and if you resist or speak up, that's persecution! That's bashing the majority around the head!

I'm not surprised at the unreasonable nature of this viewpoint given all the other nonsensical stuff Christians readily swallow.

5. Mitt the Mormon

Comment #94508 by Cthulance on December 5, 2007 at 9:05 pm

All this is especially interesting to me. I was raised as a Mormon, I didn't fervently believe in it until my later teens, and I went on a mission for the Mormon church to Venezuela. I wore the special underwear, I partook of the temple secrets, and the whole time I thought that I was inferior because I just didn't 'get' the mystery.

Since then I've tossed the special underwear and have withdrawn my name from the records of the Mormon church.

I simply won't vote for someone who believes in a prophet whose proclamations are superior to secular authority, regardless of my political opinions.

6. Sam Harris at AAI 07

Comment #82599 by Cthulance on October 26, 2007 at 10:38 pm

Regarding theistic claims that god(s) exist, we rightfully should call ourselves atheists because that is what we are. We don't believe the theistic claims that god(s) exist.

The term atheist is the most succinct, accurate, and to-the-point word to describe what we don't believe. After that, you can use any word you like to describe what you, as an individual, believe. Yet if you don't believe in god(s), you're an atheist, plain and simple. There's no reason to waste your energy coming up with new and innovative terms to hide that fact because the moment the believer figures out what your clever term means, they're going to say "Oh, you're an atheist!"

And they're right, and there's no reason to be ashamed of or to try and hide that fact.

I just don't get the need to redefine our position on god(s) with ever-more-nebulous terms. It seems cowardly to me.

7. Where Is Atheism When Bad Things Happen?

Comment #81535 by Cthulance on October 24, 2007 at 9:59 pm

Dinesh says, "To no one's surprise, Dawkins has not been invited to speak to the grieving Virginia Tech community. What this tells me is that if it's difficult to know where God is when bad things happen, it is even more difficult for atheism to deal with the problem of evil."

There are no atheists in foxholes--except for the fact that there are.

Atheism--it seems to me--deals just fine with the problem of evil by recognizing it as a problem created only by theism.

Theists--by far the majority in the United States--don't want to hear it. They want their comfort. So it should be no surprise that in times of tragedy when theists are seeking comfort, party bashers like Dawkins who come along blathering on about harsh reality aren't welcome.

In times of tragedy, militant theists want their militant belief in deity. So of course the likes of Dawkins and their opinions aren't welcome.

8. Debate between Christopher Hitchens and Dinesh D'Souza

Comment #81524 by Cthulance on October 24, 2007 at 9:46 pm

Well, it seems to me that Dinesh (and others) equate their invention of 'militant atheism' with atheists who speak their mind.

Of course, thinking about it that means every theist--like Dinesh himself--who speaks his or her mind is just a 'militant theist.'

Honestly, if every atheist who dares write a book arguing for atheism is militant, than so is every theist who dares write a book arguing for theism.

9. Debate between Christopher Hitchens and Dinesh D'Souza

Comment #81515 by Cthulance on October 24, 2007 at 9:22 pm

Note Dinesh's equivalance of 'militant' atheism with writing books about it.

How DARE you write a book reasoning in support of atheism? Never mind the rather large number of books in existence reasoning in support of theism. Their authors aren't militant. Not like those militant atheists.

How dare they voice their opinions and make their case?

I suppose there's no need for 'militant' aunicornism unless you exist in a culture in which the vast majority keep insisting--in the absence of either evidence or reason--that unicorns exist, and in which belief or unbelief in unicorns forms and drives everything from foreign policy to funding of domestic charities, as well as drives persecution and deliberate intimidation and silencing of those who don't believe in unicorns.

In such a hypothetical society, the moment you voice your aunicornism, you're 'militant.'

But it's a hypothetical, and so of course people who don't believe in unicorns aren't labeled as militant, even when they voice their unbelief. Even Christians (currently) don't usually believe in unicorns.

10. Eddie Tabash at AAI 07

Comment #81015 by Cthulance on October 23, 2007 at 10:44 pm

I like how he casually, confidently and repeatedly refers to himself as an atheist. There is no mealy-mouthed pseudointellectual wordplay here in an attempt to hide his stance and that's so very refreshing.