1. Darwin or Design

Comment #56860 by freestateofmind on July 17, 2007 at 2:34 pm

You guys are too much. After reading scifishows attempt to redefine "dogmatic," your posts were a breath of comic relief.
I always point out to those "god causes natural catastrophes because of the gays" folks that the Christian god supposedly destroyed only two cities because of its homosexuals, yet destroyed dozens of other cities filled with heterosexuals. Then they get all quiet and stuff.

2. Unorthodox Atheist

Comment #54115 by freestateofmind on July 5, 2007 at 12:16 pm

Hey Reed,
I am glad you finally got your book back. I heard you on the Dogma Free America podcast a few weeks back and was outraged at the idiocy and childishness exhibited by your friend's father and the school system.
I get that same kinda attitude here in the Buybull Belt. It seems their mentality is: "Well, Christianity is special and different from other religions...therefore its ok if we promote it and squash anything and anyone who may dissent from this good religion." I keep thinking that for somewhat educated adults they sure don't know much about their religion or the sickening contents its "holy" book contains.
Keep blogging. I enjoy reading your posts.
Let me plug that podcast again: www.dogmafreeamerica.com

3. An Inquisition in science's name

Comment #51118 by freestateofmind on June 21, 2007 at 2:31 pm

Through the months I have read the plethora of "criticisms" from theists and other supernaturalists. One word keeps popping in my mind as I read these critiques of RD, Harris, Dennett and Hitchens...the L word. No, not that L word, but L for LAME. Every single criticism is lame and screams out, "You nontheists are irritating us with these books against religion. You are voicing what we are scared to admit and don't want to be reminded about."

4. Dawkins at the Hay Festival

Comment #46153 by freestateofmind on May 30, 2007 at 11:49 am

I think the book and its title are great. HOWEVER, in order to not "disrespect" that untouchable thing called religion, perhaps Richard's follow up book could be entitled "The God Confusion."

5. Richard Dawkins to appear in Second Life

Comment #44173 by freestateofmind on May 23, 2007 at 2:22 pm

I read recently that there have been a lot of christian bible thumpers appearing in Second Life attempting to spread their supernatualism. I am sure this is Dawkin's attempt to add some rationality to the virtual world of Second Life.

6. The Damned

Comment #36862 by freestateofmind on May 2, 2007 at 2:32 pm

Hey guys,
Just "digged" it. Everyone please do so. It takes a few seconds...but hey...its part of our job to promote reason!

7. Gay hate church to picket VT gun rampage funerals

Comment #33712 by freestateofmind on April 21, 2007 at 10:16 am

If the Christian bible teaches to turn the other cheek, must believers also turn around and let someone shoot them twice?

8. God and His Gays

Comment #28031 by freestateofmind on March 27, 2007 at 4:19 pm

Surely DavidJMH is joking!!! I just love it when folks throw the old "homosexuality is the cause of a nation's downfall" card. Absolutely amazing. Let's investigate.
Homosexuality existed in Rome for many centuries while they prospered. Yet Rome fell LESS than century after adopting Chrisitianity. Hmm. Now...tell me which of the two caused the downfall of that empire.

9. God and His Gays

Comment #27568 by freestateofmind on March 25, 2007 at 10:13 am

Lord_Satorious you made some good comments. I agree. Most theists don't even stop to think that even if it were a choice, that would make their argument against it even more ludicrous! Who would they be deriding someones personal choice. Its like those folks who like tall women over petite women. Or blondes over brunettes. But, I doubt they will ever see it that way.

10. God and His Gays

Comment #27535 by freestateofmind on March 25, 2007 at 7:40 am

I remember thinking as a kid that surely a god doesn't exist if he, she, or it "forms" every baby in its mother's womb. That would mean the god purposely created down syndrome babies, autistic babies. con-joined babies, and all other babies with mental and physical disabilities--even to those mothers who were in perfect health and didn't expose the unborn baby to any known dangers. So the theists response of "well, God is justly punishing the child for the sins of the parents" doesn't wash either. That only adds to the cruelness of that god. The verse describing the OT god doing this to newborns (even to multiple generations down the line) should be enough for anyone to be utterly repulsed at such a god.

I think that most straight people don't realize they are using faulty logic and what I call "personal preference projection." Thats when you are describing something to someone else or vice versa, and you project your personal preference onto the other person (or group). Say for instance I and a friend are talking about food. He mentions he loves turnip greens. I immediately go "YUCK!" and can't imagine how in the world this guy can like turnip greens. Same thing when talking to a straight person about non-heterosexual relationships. The straight person goes "yuck, I can't imagine liking someone of the same sex..." and therefore thinks its silly or sinful for any one else to do so.
I still can't imagine anyone eating turnip greens. See what I mean.

11. Saving believers: Former Christian finds calling to preach the good news of atheism

Comment #26701 by freestateofmind on March 21, 2007 at 7:54 am

Also they have created a counter apologetics "wiki" at http://wiki.ironchariots.org/ I am sure they would like more input and content.

12. Saving believers: Former Christian finds calling to preach the good news of atheism

Comment #26700 by freestateofmind on March 21, 2007 at 7:52 am

Hey guys. I have downloaded and listened to the NON PROPHETS podcast for about 6 months now. It is always interesting. Check them out at http://www.nonprophetsradio.com/

13. Is Your Baby Gay? What If You Could Know? What If You Could Do Something About It?

Comment #26284 by freestateofmind on March 18, 2007 at 10:01 am

You know...I can imagine a few centuries from now where geneticists have refined the techniques so that "designer" babies will be no more controversial than what babies wallpaper motif will be.

I bet it will start with small things like getting to choose the gene(s) for left or right handedness, eye color. etc.

Then perhaps the more serious traits. Introverted or Extroverted personality, IQ , skin tone, religiosity, and sexual orientation.

At first the affluent will do so. Then much more so on a broader scale when prices on the procedure drop.

Reminds me of the bittersweet movie "Gattaca" a few years ago.

14. Is Your Baby Gay? What If You Could Know? What If You Could Do Something About It?

Comment #26192 by freestateofmind on March 17, 2007 at 2:59 pm

Mark1958 you do make a good point. But, it seems the answer is to combat the discrimination. It would be like, "Honey, the doctor said our baby was going to be dark skinned, so maybe we should alter his genes to make him a little more light skinned so he will fit in."
I think we should go after the "discrimination" gene myself.

15. Is Your Baby Gay? What If You Could Know? What If You Could Do Something About It?

Comment #26172 by freestateofmind on March 17, 2007 at 12:58 pm

Kudos to you guys. If only the millions of delusioned religionists could think ----even for a nanosecond---with the rationality and logic of some of this sites readers! There would be an end to bigotry and hatred. Thanks guys. You certainly do give some of us hope.

16. Is Your Baby Gay? What If You Could Know? What If You Could Do Something About It?

Comment #26141 by freestateofmind on March 17, 2007 at 7:17 am

Makes me also wonder if Mohler is going to condone screening for "gayness" in other animal embryos as well.
Surely he knows that NON-heterosexual activity has been observed and documented in over 400 different animal species.
Oh wait. What am I saying. That would mean he would actually have to do some research into human and non-human sexuality. And that would be expecting way too much.

17. Is Your Baby Gay? What If You Could Know? What If You Could Do Something About It?

Comment #26134 by freestateofmind on March 17, 2007 at 6:29 am

Oh I can't wait. Maybe in the future we could also check to see if there is a gene(s) that may code for the potential to believe in religious or superstitious myth! Surely we should CORRECT that aberration Mr. Mohler.

As a NON-heterosexual, I certainly do not remember sitting down at the kitchen table one night to decide if I wanted to be straight or gay. And that is another point: If it is a choice for some folks (certainly has NOT been proven), that makes the theists case even more absurd. Who the heck are they (or anyone else) to tell anyone they can't be that way!!!

Their pompousness of attitude is what's most disgusting. I don't like you or who you are attracted to, so therefore I am going to change you to be more like me. It's like the Borg from StarTrek. We are theists...Resistance is futile...You will be assimilated. Captain Dawkins beam us up..there be religionists down here!

18. Why Children Love Their Security Blankets

Comment #24784 by freestateofmind on March 8, 2007 at 2:33 pm

Good article. It took me about 10 long years to let go of my security blanket. I kept looking for "reasons" to keep it. Then I actually studied and investigated it for myself. Boy, I was really deluding myself as Darwin's Gentle Rottweiler points out in his book.

19. The questions science cannot answer

Comment #21655 by freestateofmind on February 10, 2007 at 11:51 am

It's the same old tactic used by theists. If anyone talks sanely or cogently about religion, that person is instantly labeled "mean" or "grumpy."

They simply villify you. The church is very proficient at this. As is the media. Shame on you.

I wish there were a million Dawkins out there. Think of the progress that could be made. Dawkins is Darwins Gentle Bulldog. I have never seen him act undignified, unlike MOST of the religionists that so easily demonize him.

20. Ancient boy's skeleton sparks evolution debate

Comment #21167 by freestateofmind on February 7, 2007 at 8:53 pm

It's settled: Intelligent Design Trumps Evolution. At least that's what Mr. Pat Boone has to say. He writes for that far right news mag NewsMax. Pat, stick to your singing.

Here is the link:http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2007/1/30/92330.shtml

21. God and gorillas

Comment #20282 by freestateofmind on February 1, 2007 at 1:35 pm

Duff, I think you are CORRECT. Notice the line she states about talking to religionists, "So what do you do if a person is infected with religion? You'd better start talking rationally to that person." AS IF you can talk rationally to a religionist. Thats what Dennett and Dawkins are trying to get across.

22. Gentle Rottweiler

Comment #17418 by freestateofmind on January 13, 2007 at 2:06 pm

2. Comment #17275 by captain underpants on January 12, 2007 at 3:44 pm

At one point RD says "I could be very wrong about this. But ..." Can you imagine a creationist saying that?

GOOD POINT Captain! That's what makes them so irrational.

23. Pat Robertson: God told me of 'mass killing' in 2007

Comment #16108 by freestateofmind on January 4, 2007 at 4:01 pm

Robertson's pompousness is sickening. He seems to think the Hebrew god speaks only to him. Since 9/11, OF COURSE its been likely EVERY YEAR that the US would suffer a terrorist attack--whether nuclear or biological. Mr. Robertson, what inflated ego you have. Someone grab me an Alka-Seltzer.