1. Hebrew Charter School Spurs Dispute in Florida

Comment #65960 by kcjerith on August 27, 2007 at 3:18 pm

Of course the government should not be supporting religious education, however, let me say this. The government should not be paying for any form of education. One of the reasons that the united states stinks at educating its children is because the public school system is immune from competition. letting the private sector take over would more than likely mean a massive improvement in test scores (and actual knowledge). Yes this means that religious school would be allowed to thrive, but there is nothing that can be done about that, except attempt to ban them (and good luck with that).

2. Don't Mince Words: The London Car-Bomb Plot Was Designed to Kill Women

Comment #53827 by kcjerith on July 3, 2007 at 12:31 pm

While I agree with the over tone/sentiment of the article, Hitchens kicks ass, I find one conclusion hard to believe. While I don't go to night clubs regularly I do go once in a while. Often the term "ladies night" is used to draw in large crowds of both genders. I am sure everyone in here can figure out why a guy would want to go to a club on ladies night. Of course I am nit picking, and who knows, maybe that is why that site was chosen, but I would be a bit hesitant to jump to that conclusion.

3. Bush Vetoes Measure on Stem Cell Research

Comment #51384 by kcjerith on June 22, 2007 at 2:50 pm

Again I am split on this issue, the government should stay out of research, so i support not pubic funding of science. However, I disagree with the religious reasoning of the veto. On the same hand this means the government should not be in the business of regulating such research. If people want to explore/use embryonic stem cells for research, so be it.

4. Religion and Child Abuse

Comment #47867 by kcjerith on June 5, 2007 at 8:46 pm

See, i think the gun issue is way off topic, not saying it isn't worth discussion, just that it has very little to do with religion. Since you (bizzaro) have linked the two issues (and falsely so) you made an attack against one an attack against the other, which you can see in several of the above comments. While i am tempted to debate the merits and perils of gun ownership, that would seem to be spreading my attention a bit too thin. :)

5. Religion and Child Abuse

Comment #47671 by kcjerith on June 5, 2007 at 8:45 am

MAS2007,

To be frank, I consider all taxes that are collected by the use of force to be unethical. So no, I dont think the bigot should have to pay taxes for the benefit of all.

6. Religion and Child Abuse

Comment #47567 by kcjerith on June 5, 2007 at 1:49 am

I agree that if we have to public school, and I would claim we do not, that they should be secular. In the USA their is strong constitutional reasons for this. I do think it is shame that people who are not religious should be forced to fund bible/religious schools, but on the same hand what makes it ok to force religious people to fund secular schools? I think the key is getting the government out of the business of education. Let the crazy religious (now that is a redundant term!)people fund their own schools.

7. Religion and Child Abuse

Comment #47548 by kcjerith on June 4, 2007 at 11:47 pm

After i thought about it for a minute, i know that the government trying to prevent religious education is pointless. First, it would be a massive undertaking. Can you imagine how big a department (or making current ones larger) you would need to try to accomplish such a goal. I can also just imagine the "reason police" who's job it would be to determine if the children's belief systems are rational. I have a feeling it would almost be comical, like a monty python skit. And, trying to punish people for not thinking or teaching a certain way seems scary to me.

Maybe it wold be best (ok best is the wrong word) to let parents teach their kids what they want. their religious values/way(s) of thinking will have to compete in an open intellectual market place. It is there that peoples minds will be changed. Again, i despise the notion of bring children up in a religious manner, but i am not sure there any other sane answers.

8. Religion and Child Abuse

Comment #47545 by kcjerith on June 4, 2007 at 11:39 pm

This is an issue i am a bit torn on. Yes, I think a religious up bringing is horrible. But i am not sure what one can do. Ban religious teaching in the home? To me this would turn Christians into martyrs, as well as being unproductive. I also dislike the idea of the government interfering with parents and their children. this of course echoes the point the Bizarro Dawkins makes (though i feel a bit odd being in agreement with him). I do support gun ownership, though i am not sure what it has to do with this topic.

9. Observer Diary 27th May 2007

Comment #45474 by kcjerith on May 28, 2007 at 1:21 am

In terms of security, all i would want the government to do is just make sure known criminals/terrorist/etc don't come in. Besides for that I don't see a point of a visa (maybe to establish your citizenship?) Other wise I would be just as happy to let each airliner decide their own security. This would cause a variety of different security measures, and the consumer could choose which one they liked.

Also, it was government regulation that allowed, at least partially, for the 911 attacks to occur. For years the airline companies wanted to have someone armed on the flight, and the government said no. The government very rarely makes us safer.

10. Teachers rebel over atheism promotion

Comment #45000 by kcjerith on May 25, 2007 at 6:47 pm

I in would also like to see a camp that was focused on just being, you know, a camp. Yes, learning about freethinkers is important, but if the schools did their jobs properly such knowledge could be gained during the school year. Of course I am not saying such camps are bad idea, and could be educational as well as fun. I also support as many options to parents as possible
I do understand that they are needed at the very least to respond the all the religious camps out their. I am not sure, but then again I don't have kids.

Of course i would also say that the government should stay out of education, but that is a different matter all together

11. 'The Evolution of Homer' Intro

Comment #28769 by kcjerith on March 30, 2007 at 5:44 pm

You know I love the first 7-8 seasons (give or take) of Simpsons, but the last several years (more like 6 or 7) have been hit and miss at times, not to say they aren't good, but they have to seem to have lost there bite. Maybe because they are a show that has been on so long that it is hard to explore new plot lines. Maybe it is because family guy, south park and the shows on adult swim (Go team Venture!) has made them seem tame.

12. Stephen Hawking Says Universe Created from Nothing

Comment #28345 by kcjerith on March 28, 2007 at 8:48 pm

A correction, or maybe a clarification, just wanting to be accurate.

Ok, my old algebra text book says Gauss formulated the fundamental Theorem of Algebra, however Wikipedia says he just offered several proofs of it. However he still boast a long list of achievements no matter what.

13. Stephen Hawking Says Universe Created from Nothing

Comment #28343 by kcjerith on March 28, 2007 at 8:41 pm

While I love hawking I remember seeing a program on discover (i think)and a survey taken of his fellow physicist Hawking is not even consider to be in the top 20 of his profession. Of course I suppose that could mean

I think labeling the top ten "smartest" people is a bit subjective and feels a bit like public masturbation, however having said that let me throw some names out there

Descartes-no, not for his work in philosophy, but for his work in mathematics.

Karl Friedrich Gauss- mathematician, who at the age of 22 formulated the fundamental Theorem of Algebra

Carl Sagan-Maybe, maybe not, but he least deserves some attention (in my opinion, for what it is worth :) ).

Locke-though Kant is probably a better chocie.

Robert Nozick- Wrote, Anarchy, State, and Utopia. Perhaps one of the most brilliant books every written on the subject of philosophy.

Murray Rothbard- Another brilliant modern philosophy.


Just thought I would throw these names out, of course they tend to reflect my values/likes (though not always, i stink at math!) I think these people have merit.

A little depressing our list lacks women, have to think on that front a little, not like there aren't enough good choices out there.

14. The Case for Teaching The Bible

Comment #27775 by kcjerith on March 26, 2007 at 4:20 pm

"I just can't imagine a class where honest inquiry, like "hey, wait, this part contradicts that part" would be tolarated by the believers."

I have taken Civ I, which is a basic humanities/history ( I have no idea if they call it that every where else) class at KU. Almost always people come down rather hard on the bible, and rightfully so. Yes the believers in the class got pissy, but oh well, though we had a wonderful professor so maybe this would not be every ones experience. Also the Time article refers to high schools, but i would like to think class discussions could be critical of the bible.

15. Why creationism is wrong and evolution is right

Comment #26831 by kcjerith on March 21, 2007 at 9:35 pm

What! we sprang into being after some guys head exploded when he hit the ceiling! None of my college (or high school) text books make mention of such an important discovery. I want the people on the board of education heads to roll!

Really, this is what the creationist movement allows for, how freaking stupid

16. Research links some scriptures to hostile acts

Comment #23810 by kcjerith on March 2, 2007 at 10:26 pm

In all fairness, this study does not prove anything, a correlation only suggest a relationship between two variables, not that they cause one another. For example, there is a positive correlation between ice cream sales and the amount of electricity used. Of course one does not cause the other, rather they are both caused by a third variable, increase in temperature.

I do think their is a causal relationship between religion and violence. However, this type of research does not prove it.

17. Atheists come in last

Comment #22849 by kcjerith on February 23, 2007 at 3:31 pm

Oh and just because the "new covenant" occurred doesn't mean all of the old rules are out, didn't jesus (or what ever fictitious person the bible claims) that he was here not to destroy the old laws but to fulfill them. or something like that. Of course you might respond that he meant something else. This brings us to the problem, that Dawkins and others have brought up, we can cherry pick the bible to suit whatever needs or motives one desires be it political, as in the case of Tolstoy, or personal.

18. Atheists come in last

Comment #22847 by kcjerith on February 23, 2007 at 3:28 pm

Bizarro Dawkins, it depends on who you ask, in terms of politics and the bible. If you asked the Russian writer Tolstoy he would claim, and make a strong case, that the Constitution is in direct conflict with the bible. Why? Because when jesus says don't judge and Tolstoy argues that means there should be no courts at all. Tolstoy was an anarchist because he thought that is what Jesus was advocating. I believe the book was called My Confession, My Religion. Of course this isn't the exact point you where talking about in your last post, but one can claim that the Constitution and bible are at odds.

19. 12 Year Old Girl Prodigy Paints Pictures of God

Comment #18750 by kcjerith on January 22, 2007 at 6:43 pm

StephenH, the only reason I mention skin color is that since she is a white girl (and probably raised by a white family) that her "visions" are likely to reflect her envrionment.

20. Unscientific American: US Almost Last in Understanding Evolution

Comment #18749 by kcjerith on January 22, 2007 at 6:40 pm

Sorry about spelling in last post, am a bit tired.

21. Unscientific American: US Almost Last in Understanding Evolution

Comment #18728 by kcjerith on January 22, 2007 at 4:52 pm

Penn made an intresting point on Bill maher a few months ago. he said (I am paraphrasing) that it doesn't matter what the majority of the population thinks, who cares if they believe or don't. What is improtant is that all of the top biologist, geologist...etc believe in evolution. I am not sure I agree with Penn assesment, but he makes a valid point. All most all (over 99%) of US scincetist believe in evoultion, so who cares what grandma done the street thinks? intresting point. Of course I can think of a few resaons why it does matter, since grandma gets to vote she can control funing. There are other resaons why this should be upsetting, but I am not sure I would push the panic button yet

22. 12 Year Old Girl Prodigy Paints Pictures of God

Comment #18725 by kcjerith on January 22, 2007 at 4:45 pm

ok watched the video, first, i was a wrong, I did see a black women (though not sure if that is supposed to be god or what). However, yet again, nothing she painting has any hint of the "supernatural" to it. She is clearly gifted and she is an active imgaination.
On a side note, though her parents were (are? not sure if the kid got the to convert) athiest, yet they talked about god? How odd, I mean even if you are athiest you think you might bring this concept up with your kid, you know, since the majority of the world is reiligous. Or was that just reporter b.s.?

Ivar, while I can't disagree with you, I would be hestiant to draw to many psy conculsions based on what little info was giving. Though I bet you are on the right track

23. 12 Year Old Girl Prodigy Paints Pictures of God

Comment #18724 by kcjerith on January 22, 2007 at 4:38 pm

Wow, how shocking, her painting of god is a white male (of course i haven't looked at other paintings of hers)! I wonder where she could have ever found such an image? of course she is gifted, but it is very conveinant for her picture of god to be white.

24. 'God Is Not a Moderate'

Comment #17984 by kcjerith on January 17, 2007 at 8:37 pm

Dam, Sam is on top of it, he seemed to trounce Mr. Sullivan's arguements. I really like the last part when he says 'I'm not sure what you mean by "God,"' The word god (while i am sure there are some basic concepts that are near unverisal) is very vague, and one should always make the believer define what the hell you are discussing. Of course the believer will not be to happy we he gets caught in the quagmire of trying to define such a term, but then again that is part of the point of making someone define "god" (which is proabably why Mr. Harris asked it in the first place).

25. Judge: Men can seek damages from church

Comment #17206 by kcjerith on January 12, 2007 at 12:05 am

On an unrelated not: This might make a good ancestors tale,or just be an interesting little tidbit of news

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070111/sc_nm/flower_stench_dc

Yea, I know, I snagged it off yahoo, but it still looks interesting. Also, I did post this on another string, but it was at the end of it and don't think anyone was responding to that article anymore.

26. Homophobia, not injustice, is what really fires the faiths

Comment #17198 by kcjerith on January 11, 2007 at 5:24 pm

On an unrelated not: This might make a good ancestors tale,or just be an interesting little tidbit of news

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070111/sc_nm/flower_stench_dc

Yea, I know, I snagged it off yahoo, but it still looks interesting.

27. Homophobia, not injustice, is what really fires the faiths

Comment #17099 by kcjerith on January 10, 2007 at 8:21 pm

Blackford, I am not sure denying a business the right to incorparate is such an ethical idea. if the government is the one who is deciding who can incoprate (which is a whole other issue) than everyone should have the right. Running a business is a right, not a privleage. The government shouldn't get to dictate the terms of a business most circumstances, unless, for example a business strats commiting acts of fruad.

Let the religious nuts have their buinesses. The anwser to the problem is caprtilism. If they start a buisnees and everyone knows they are bigots, then people don't have to shop there. if enough bigots keep the place running, so what? don't shop there. Just like in free market place of ideas, the economic market can help weed out idiots. There bigotry is wrong, but treating them as second class citziens and deny them a basic human right is won't help.

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

Comment #15921 by kcjerith on January 3, 2007 at 9:14 pm

I finf it interesting (and rather sad) that his predictions come in two types. One, politcal, such as Bush winning the election (by a landslide) SS and so on. The second type of predictions are rather morbid. They always involve mass death. what a douche bag.

29. Left Behind: Eternal Forces on The Daily Show

Comment #15516 by kcjerith on January 1, 2007 at 12:05 am

Happy New Year, just got home and I am a little drunk! Just as a side note, from what i have seen, go to G4 tv (just google it) to check it out, this game sucks, bad graphics and crappy controls. Even though Their message is silly, I might have played it for the hell of it, but no, game sucks. Have a good one, be safe!

30. I love the commercialisation of Christmas

Comment #14288 by kcjerith on December 22, 2006 at 12:19 am

Also, just to add a few more failings of marx's ideas, he classic divison of society falls apart in the modern world. There is not just the bouseguise and proleteriat (sorry about spelling, but it later, i swear i smarter than my speeling :)!. today there are wide wage of middle mangement that do not feat neatly into this system. another point, marx was quite sure that the road to socalism was inevitable, and that captilism was just a phase. Again not true, captilsim never collasped under its own "flaws"

I will say this, marx is an improtant writer, if you take a modern socialogy class, of the paradigms is one based largly on marx. It is similar (sort of) like the "holy book" you need to understand it to understand history and culture.

31. I love the commercialisation of Christmas

Comment #14239 by kcjerith on December 21, 2006 at 3:30 pm

Jiten, no the reason freedom is limited in any non-capitalist is not because of the USSR, though i think is a good example, it is because one is required for the other, if the state controls the means of production, labor, mangement, etc. then it can control the output of ideas. It can control what is or not to be researched, it can force for a subject to be taught in a certain way.

A free market lets people do as they wish as long as they not intiate the use of force. Remember, Jinten, all non-capitalist use force to acomplish there goals. Such use of force is an ersion of freedom

32. I love the commercialisation of Christmas

Comment #14226 by kcjerith on December 21, 2006 at 2:30 pm

wow, right on target Edutheria! I think it is improtant to note the economic freedom and freedom of ideas go hand in hand, if you can limit one you can limit the other.

Also, Yorker, yes the wage you listed is low, but you are using american money and trying to compare it to another currency, that crappy wage buys a lot more where the worker lives than you expect, and that worker agreed to voluntaryly work for that wage, if he/she is forced to work than that is a different issue, and has nothing to do with caplitalism. Lastly is you force comapines to pay more then they will likely leave, and the worker will be out of work. Buy the shirt! help your fellow human being out :)

33. The God Delusion? Part 1

Comment #6846 by kcjerith on November 15, 2006 at 8:38 pm

Is this really Chopa? I thought he would haave something new to say or add, instead of the same old wishful thinking arugments.

34. The God Delusion? Part 1

Comment #6845 by kcjerith on November 15, 2006 at 8:36 pm

on to another arugment,

"I have seen medical cures that science can't explain, some seemingly triggered by faith. The same is true of millions of other people."

Again if Mr. Chopa had actually read Dawkins book he would notice that Dawkins take on this subject. Basically every single study, that wasn't riddled with errors, has shown that prayer has no effect on sickness.

Again, I ask even if Chopa has seen such things how does this prove god did it? No causal relationship can be established, so saying god did something is meaningless.

Of course everyone on here has already made note about what Einstein really believed. But let us assume that Einstein did believe in god, so what? It doesn't make it true. Just because someone believes something, no matter how brillant they are, it does not make it true. What if an idiot believed in god, (oh wait..) doesn't that, by Chopa logic, mean that god doesn't exist. The intelligence of the believer has nothing to do with the truth value of the statment. If something is false it is false, if something is true it is true.

35. The God Delusion? Part 1

Comment #6844 by kcjerith on November 15, 2006 at 8:27 pm

All of Mr. Chopa's arugments are rather weak, and i am not sure he has even bother to read Dawkins book.

1st. "Is science the only route to knowledge? Obviously not. I know that my mother loved me all her life, as I love my own children. I feel genius in great works of art. None of this knowledge is validated by science.

Actually, with the advancements science is making we are gaining a better understanding about the biological basis for are our emtions, but even if we were not making advancements and that we have no idea how emtions, or works of art come about it still does not make god any more likely to exist.

In fact, how does "god" explain any of those things, but what means does god cuase genuis or will? How do we measure, how big is it (bigger or smaller than a breadbox?) science is based on understanding causal relationships. Asserting the word "god" into an argument expalins nothing, and certianly doesn't validate his existance. If it were up to Mr. Chopa we would no longer need to explain the human brain/cognitve workings, why? Because there is no need to, god did it!