1. [Warning: Graphic] Children's foreheads slashed in Muslim saint's name

Comment #21657 by selfishJean on February 10, 2007 at 12:00 pm

Easy to crucify a dissident. I kinda get where Squiddity is coming from. I sure hope all your critics are buying ethically produced trainers etc. not relying on South-East Asian child labour.

The circumcision argument is irrelevant as the child does not remember it in the Jewish tradition. My parents may have been late feeding me as a ten day old child but I don't hold my upset over that against them because they were well intentioned. Ok, there is no physical scar and that is a point of difference. Though removal of excess foreskin, like a head scar, is pretty minimal in terms of life chances (unless your sexual partner has strong preferences with regard to penis aesthetics). I fell off my bike as a child and don't think my forehead scar held me back. Maybe, in Shi'ite cultural terms it may actually be beneficial - I don't know.

But shouldn't we be more concerneed about the 'abuse' of childhood obesity which will result in shortened life-span and lower quality of life than a physical scar to the forehaed? Let's recognise squiddity's point about cultural relevance.

Please do not assume that because I may slightly differ with you I agree with the opposite. I do not support the practice of blood-letting of children for religious reasons. But, as Jesus said (can he be mentioned on this site, I don't know because I am a newcomer!) let him - or her - who is without sin cast the first stone.

2. The questions science cannot answer

Comment #21653 by selfishJean on February 10, 2007 at 11:17 am

This may be an odd request in such surroundings - i neither care much for "faith-heads" nor "anti-faith-heads" - but i do care for intelligent reasoning based on evidential scrutiny. So I am asking for a little help. 'Janus' (whose name, incidentally, is perfect for an agnostic!) mentioned that studies have shown that, on average, theists are less intelligent than atheists.

Could you please point me in the direction of easily accessible literature I could read on this matter?

Of course, if i was a dyed-in-the-wool atheist, in a world that has no inherent meaning I am not sure what the relevance of intelligence has to these issues. Could it be that intelligence is a byproduct of gene replication that is useful for practical survival but of no other value? So its 'practical' that I know that dehydration will kill me but that 'God does not exist' is of no ontological value?

Sorry, Richard. As vastly superior in intelligence to me as you obviously are - and your books are such a joy to read - in evolutionary terms why are you concerned with the 'God-delusion'? Jews, Christians and Muslims shag and reproduce more evolutionary proficient than the rest of us!

I do apologise if these concerns have been answered elsewhere in his body of work but I am just a novice in this area.

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

Comment #21263 by selfishJean on February 8, 2007 at 10:17 am

God, you atheists (or at least a sizeable number of their representatives on this site) have a superiority complex larger than, well, God's!Did McGrath have this kind of attitude in mind when writing that "atheism is just as intolerant as the worst that religion can offer"?

Just a minor point about one of the more frequent 'criticisms' (to give them an air of dignity) of McGrath - is belief in God really a 'simple' alternative? Isn't the 'God-delusion' actually rather complex - more so than atheism? So much so that it takes a lot more intellectual thought and commitment than a simple non-belief such as atheism?

Give McGrath a chance - he was only contributing to a newspaper article and could hardly be expected to submit a Phd thesis!