1. Our scientists must nail the creationists

Comment #247400 by Fryslan on September 14, 2008 at 11:32 am

Discussing worldviews doesn't belong in a science class, but in a philosophy class. In such a class one can also discuss religious beliefs and other metaphysical systems, such as methodological naturalism, which seems to be the arch enemy of Creationism. All very interesting to the philosophically inclined, but not science as such. I believe in discussing Creationism, but we should make sure that it is done in the right (school) forum.

2. Logical Proof of the Existence of a Divine Creator, Why Atheism is Not Logically Sound

Comment #190558 by Fryslan on June 9, 2008 at 8:53 am

Pompous, pontificating, philosophical piffle.

"Simply put, a book that claims to have been Divinely given to millions cannot take hold on a widespread level if it is not true."

Priceless.

3. Interview with Richard Dawkins

Comment #135092 by Fryslan on February 28, 2008 at 2:13 pm

Hi Teratornis,
Interesting post. That atheists are amoral is a widely held belief. Richard Dawkins and others do their best to counter that view, but many theists believe that if you have no guiding principles set down in a book of moral laws, then you must not know what is right and wrong. (nor can others know what you consider morally right or wrong)

Besides, atheism just denotes a lack of belief in certain things (God), it is not a moral philosophy.

As I see it, becoming an atheist is only a necessary first step, but not sufficient in itself. What we need is a moral philosophy which atheists can rally around and explicitly state to others (and not just some vague, unexpressed natural moral tendency). Maybe we need a "bible" for the moral philosophy of atheists.

My advice would be to check out the writings of secular Humanists regarding morality. A book I can recommend is "On Humanism" by Richard Norman.

4. Stop revisionist Christian nation House Resolution 888

Comment #113956 by Fryslan on January 21, 2008 at 4:47 am

Summer Seale said "If the enemies of Bush have the power and don't impeach him, it's because they can't."
Or it could be that they are doing it for some tactical politcal advantage.

5. Daniel Dennett Debates Dinesh D'Souza

Comment #93096 by Fryslan on December 2, 2007 at 7:37 am

D'Souza states that when accepting Pascal's wager everything should change for your life in the here and now. How true indeed. And how scary. Just look at the fanaticism of Islamic bombers who expect 72 virgins after blowing themselves up.

Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.