1. The good that comes from belief

Comment #86590 by Smythe on November 9, 2007 at 4:54 pm

On a measure of the extent to which a person holds positive human values — favouring an ethical life, justice for all and having an orientation to the common good — we also found the religiously active to be streets ahead.

Could the crux of his argument be a little more vague? I must have missed the meeting where terms like 'ethical life' and 'orientation to the common good' were universally defined. Mr. Singleton was evidently at this meeting since he has apparently measured these variables precisely across different test groups. Otherwise, he would just be fallaciously representing his own opinion as scientific truth, and nobody leading the Ethical Life of an Active Christian would do that, would they?

I can offer some clarification though. A 'street' is equal to exactly 2.4x more ethical, hope that helps.

2. Atheists aren't a bad lot

Comment #80708 by Smythe on October 22, 2007 at 6:05 pm

I live in Canada (Victoria, BC) and I have to say that seeing this article in my local newspaper really gave me hope that atheism (or more appropriately, reason in general) are seeping into not-so-small cracks in the foundations of religious beliefs.

As I read the piece, I knew that I wasn't going to hear anything new, but the thought that some of my neighbours would was comforting.

I also have a bet with a friend that in the op-ed section (or whatever you call 100-200 word reader responses) in the next two weeks will appear an unfortunate individual citing Hitler, Stalin et. al. as evidence against the morality of atheism.

3. Debate between Christopher Hitchens and Alister McGrath

Comment #80707 by Smythe on October 22, 2007 at 5:57 pm

My faith has reasons, the intellectual ones being the cosmological argument, the moral argument, the teleological argument (not in biology), and also I believe in the resurrection of Jesus. -bluejway

The moral argument, which has been endlessly refuted in every possible form to the point where newborn babies are going to innately see it as vacuous from here on out, is not an intellectual argument.

Believing that a human being who may have existed was dead for 3 days and then came back to life is possibly as far as from an intellectual argument as can possibly be made.

So after many comments and wasted bits and bytes, we come to the realization that what you consider an 'intellectual argument' simply has no basis in any form of the word 'intellectual' or 'argument'.

Restating antiquated dogma does not equate to a 'different kind of reasoning', it is the opposite of reasoning.

Oh, and I'll ignore the juxtaposition of 'My faith has reasons', suffice it to say that if you write it down, the page will burst into flames due to excessive irony.

4. Christopher Hitchens at AAI 07

Comment #80023 by Smythe on October 19, 2007 at 2:43 pm

Hitchens' challenge takes Steven Weinberg's famous statement, (Good people will do good things, evil people will do evil things, but for a good person to do an evil thing, it takes religion) and phrases it in the form of a challenge.

In an ideal world, Weinberg's statement would stand alone as an absolute knockdown argument against any religiot who seeks to equate wish-thinking with morality.

Unfortunately, religious people seem to be, on the whole (I'll be unnecessarily kind here as I'm in a good mood watching Hitch) a little 'slow'.

So, the statement of Weinberg has been rephrased as a challenge in order to FORCE the religious to realize the fallacy of their argument, and hopefully give it up once and for all.

It should amaze me that someone could come on this thread and still not get it, but I've been exposed to too many religious people to amazed by any amount of idiocy.

5. Debate between Christopher Hitchens and Alister McGrath

Comment #79154 by Smythe on October 16, 2007 at 10:32 am

If McGrath starts every sentence with 'what I would like to say is' or 'what I would want to say to that is' like he did in the debate with Prof. Dawkins, I'm going to lose it.

6. Good News: Both our Foundations are now Officially Recognized as Charities

Comment #70273 by Smythe on September 14, 2007 at 4:46 pm

Congratulations, next stop Canada! (I hope)

Soon enough all of the 'religious people donate more than atheists' people will have to find another platitude to hide behind.

7. San Diego Diocese Settles Lawsuit for $200 Million

Comment #69011 by Smythe on September 9, 2007 at 1:40 pm

I would go further than Smythe (#68742), by calling the Bishop an ignorant fucking prick, for that is what he is.

Definitely no disagreement there. His own notion of hell would be an inadequate reprisal.

8. San Diego Diocese Settles Lawsuit for $200 Million

Comment #68742 by Smythe on September 8, 2007 at 11:34 am

'Later, at a news conference, the bishop apologized to victims. "I'm very, very sorry for the suffering we have caused them," he said, "and I pray they will walk with God for a renewed life."'

These two statements in juxtaposition is more than a little alarming.