1. Biology teacher fired for referring to Bible

Comment #26564 by FitzChivalry on March 20, 2007 at 1:17 pm

It's nice to see a move in the right direction for once. It makes a pleasant change.

2. Guinness 'Evolution' Ad

Comment #22400 by FitzChivalry on February 16, 2007 at 10:05 am

The latest guinness ad is better. Unrelated, but better.

http://www.guinnesshands.com

3. World's oldest rocks show how Earth may have dodged frozen fate of Mars

Comment #20901 by FitzChivalry on February 7, 2007 at 2:03 am

FSM>IPU
He would so win a battle against IPU. He has the pirates on His side. What does IPU have? Nothing!

4. Do stop behaving as if you are God, Professor Dawkins

Comment #20900 by FitzChivalry on February 7, 2007 at 1:55 am

"Dawkins simply presents us with another dogmatic fundamentalism." That's so radically different to basing your beliefs on a 2000 year old book comprised of even older superstitions and legends.

"How many people do you know who started to believe in Santa Claus in adulthood?" I would be more inclined to believe in Saint Nicholas, given that he actually existed, and the story of Santa Claus evolved out of this. Indeed, it is a good example of how mundane events get inflated as they are re-told, which must be how much of the Bible was invented.

It seems rather hypocritical to accuse Dawkins of dealing in absolutes when there are so many dogmatic preachers who do just that. But then, the Church is well known for that trait.

5. World's oldest rocks show how Earth may have dodged frozen fate of Mars

Comment #20779 by FitzChivalry on February 6, 2007 at 1:28 pm

Do you fools know nothing? It's a classic example of the Flying Spaghetti Monster extending his noodly appendage and altering the results. As the only deity to provide a reason for the evidence against him, it's practically our duty to worship him.

May you be touched by his noodly appendage.

6. Taking the fight to Islam

Comment #20637 by FitzChivalry on February 5, 2007 at 10:13 am

I think words like islamophobic, christianophobic, etc. are used out of context. A phobia is an irrational fear; I certainly feel that fear of religeous extremists is justified. If you are of the opinion that their practices are abhorrent, you should not be labeled as a phobic.

Ayaan Hirsi Ali has been one of the few people with enough guts to stand up and criticise Islam. It is terrible that the price for expressing her opinions is a life spent in hiding under armed guard.

7. 'Friends of God' Documentary

Comment #20284 by FitzChivalry on February 1, 2007 at 1:46 pm

"I believe that the bible is literally true."
Because believing in a sky wizzard who is three entities at once, knows everyones thoughts, can walk on water, end is immortal is soooo much more reasonable than to know that dinosaurs existed millions of years ago. (Talking of which, what does the holy spirit do nowadays? He impregnated Mary, and then what?)

Living my life by scripture written by comitee 400 years or so after the events it describes "happened" is much more rational than relying on what I can see with my own eyes.

(Too much sarcasm, perhaps?)

8. The Bright Revolution

Comment #19543 by FitzChivalry on January 28, 2007 at 6:54 am

The trouble with the word "Atheist" is that it is defined by that which it denies.
While "Bright" might seem arrogant, the connotations will dissapear with usage. For example, whenever someone exclaims "Oh cool!" people don't reach for their coats. Nor do people think "Oh, gay? You must be really cheerful, then." As the word propogates memetically, a new set of ideas will attatch to it.

The stigma that is attatched to the word "Atheist", whilst irrational, will be hard to shift. Indeed, the theists are not renowned for rationality. Using a new term like "bright" or "Godfrey" allows an opportunity to explain your philosophical stanting, without people thinking "Ah, atheist. You mean amoral sinners condemned to hell."

As for whether people should apply labels to themselves, our peers do it for us anyway, so surely it would be preferable to choose yourself how people identify you? Maybe you don't agree with the views of others under the label of "Bright", but as can be seen in this discussion, atheists disagree too. Just look at the church for an example of how the views of people in the same organisation can differ wildly. Anyhow, what I'm trying to say is that people will or won't call themselves brights, the choice is theirs, just like we choose to deny the supernatural.

I may have to get a T-shirt with Godfrey written on it now. And while I'm here, I deny the existence and omnipotency of the Holy Spirit.