Comments by MarkSmith

Comment #175822 by MarkSmith on May 6, 2008 at 5:58 am

Very well said, indeed. Thank you, Sam.

Comment #159463 by MarkSmith on April 12, 2008 at 8:35 am

I love it! What a pair those two make. Dawkins make Maher more funny, and Maher somehow elevates Dawkins (as if that needed to be done).

Fantastic.

3. Happy Birthday, Richard Dawkins!

Comment #150348 by MarkSmith on March 26, 2008 at 6:46 pm

Happy birthday, Professor Dawkins. Keep kicking theist ass. The rest of us live vicariously through you and are better off because of you. I'm sure I speak for a great many in thanking you for not only fighting for the importance of truth, but also in inspiring our children do the same with your courage, example, and language of science. I thank you personally for inspiring my two children whom you met at the AAI in Washington, D.C. Cheers.

4. EXPELLED!

Comment #147579 by MarkSmith on March 20, 2008 at 11:19 pm

L.O. fucking L. Can't wait to hear Richard's take on the whole affair.

5. The Price of Freedom

Comment #77226 by MarkSmith on October 8, 2007 at 7:56 pm

I am reading Ayaan's book with my daughters - we met her, and the bomb dog, at the AAI. She is a wonderful example for everyone, but had a powerful effect on my daughters.

Thank you, Ms Hirst Ali. We will support you. Mark, Cheyenne Rain, and Dakota-Skye Smith

6. Interview with Richard Dawkins

Comment #76696 by MarkSmith on October 6, 2007 at 6:34 pm

woww that avitr i rly distractg. whre am i im dizy ilikeit

7. Hirsi Ali Returns to the Netherlands after Losing Body Guards

Comment #75810 by MarkSmith on October 3, 2007 at 5:49 pm

I had tears in my eyes at her talk at the AAI. Her answers to the questions posed were inspiring.

8. The Problem with Atheism

Comment #75621 by MarkSmith on October 3, 2007 at 6:39 am

I was at the AAI Conference, and I must say that Harris started a fantastic debate amongst the crowd. Well done, Sam!

I for one am happy to take whatever label sticks, because as Ayaan Hirsi so powerfully put it: exposing religious moderates to the dissonance in their theo-logic (my spelling) works over time.

And if Hitchens has focused his intellect, "wasting it," as he bluntly puts it, on the annoying task of exposing and eliminating religious extremism and evangelism, then I am happy to join him as an anti-theist

Sam's speech was great and the debate was welcome. I don't really care what I'm called. The more voices, the better. I'm in.

9. In the name of the Father

Comment #51592 by MarkSmith on June 23, 2007 at 3:34 pm

There is much about this review that is just plain wrong.

Hitchens does indeed correctly blame dogmatism as the larger problem (Hitler, Stalin, North Korea, etc), and correctly I think, he blames religion as its major vehicle, worthy of attack all by itself. Hitchens and Sam Harris put it aptly - no society has ever suffered from too much reason.

Humans in groups do horrible things, true. But the root of the problem lies not with "us" in the religious sense (as sinners) - that label is intentionally vague as are most religious descriptions because they have no correct explanation of any concept (human nature, cosmology, disease, etc.) addressed in their holy books. Those specific descriptions would be discovered later by science. Instead, the problem of human and animal behavior in groups is much better explained in evolutionary terms, of which much has been written but rarely discussed publicly.

The big difference is that the latter actually addresses the problem, and does so in a rational way that leads to a practical discussion of ethics, which leads to workable solutions. The former, as prescribed by the bishop, leads people to the church to receive whatever interpretation that particular clergyperson has to offer, which is probably based on some combination of grossly insufficient ethics education, local politics, and bible-based fear, guilt and rationalization - Yum!

Take the bishop's quote: "Religion is rooted in our capacity to recognize and appreciate value; in our search for truth; in our recognition that some things are good in themselves". I thought it was a typo as I read it: surely he meant to use the word "Reason" or "Science". The root of religion is in a tragic evolutionary misfiring of our brains, much more elegantly explained as an evolutionary phenomenon.

I think Sam Harris was right about these moderate religionists: as long as they mislabel "Faith" as "higher path to truth" rather than calling it what it is: an ill-wrought combination of bad reasoning and wish-thinking, they will be enabling the real nut jobs who act as if their beliefs are not subject to reason.

That is my main problem with religion and with the bishop's review: their lack of understanding about the core issue makes their conclusions suspect. Until Religionists recognize that faith is not a method of attaining a greater understanding of truth, and until they begin to understand religion as an evolutionary phenomenon, they will simply be standing by (in the way, actually) while science reveals the wonders that it steadily does.

10. Christopher Hitchens on The Hour

Comment #49417 by MarkSmith on June 11, 2007 at 10:44 pm

Fantastic! Thanks.

11. Christopher Hitchens to God: Drop Dead

Comment #42086 by MarkSmith on May 17, 2007 at 3:28 pm

2. Comment #41889 by Dower on May 17, 2007 at 9:12 am
We all know that religion often leads to oppression. But instead of ditching their faith, millions of believers are doing something much more challenging and worthwhile: working on reform.

Religion is delusion. How do you reform delusion?

I think it is called "Relusion." ;-)

12. Dobson, Armageddon, and Foreign Policy

Comment #41882 by MarkSmith on May 17, 2007 at 9:01 am

That's just wonderful. I say let's give Dobson a bible and a pair of sandals and put him on a street in Baghdad. Let him and god guard the Green Zone.

13. Christopher Hitchens is Not Great

Comment #40986 by MarkSmith on May 15, 2007 at 9:33 am

After all, is anyone really surprised to learn that the historic faiths are guilty of self-contradictions, that religious fanatics are prone to violence, and that all religions have a human origin?

The answer is "yes," enough of those fanatics exist to elect a like-mindedless president; enough to create a horrible, two-thousand year old atmosphere of scientific, social, and sexual repression; enough to imprison people for victimless crimes; and to teach our children garbage in school. Our descendants will see this as barbaric, just as we now see slavery.

What an elitist, or uninformed, or just plain stupid question.

Have you imagined what life might be like without religion's unabashed support of in-group out-group hatred; its vicious suppression of science and free inquiry; its damaging of children with fear and descriptions of hell; its indoctrination of young adults just when they need to be learning critical thinking?

The list goes on and on - and you're bitching at Hitchens?

Your criticism might be valid were you reviewing a history book written in some future time when religion's transgressions have long since been halted and healed and forgotten. But they have not. If you disagree, just touch your penis - feel a tinge of guilt, right?

I greatly enjoyed the book - Hitchens reminds me a bit of Wilde. I actually had that post-read depression one sometimes gets after a wonderful story, still wanting more. As to his originality, his experience with and knowledge of Mother Teresa is just one example.

And as with the writings of Dawkins, Harris, Dennett, etc., I find new ideas in each, as I'll bet does a whole generation of readers.

Further, considering the ground covered by the three most recent books on the subject, I think Hitchens did damn well. Bravo! Our wits are all the sharper for it, and the book brings us closer to the tipping point when rational discourse becomes accepted in American public life.

Finally, I think your review would be more fitting if you were to turn around 180 degrees and give it instead to the religious community. Now there's a group in dire need of originality - still looking for meaning in a bronze age myth, unable to turn to their neighbor and say instead, "I have faith in you!". What a tragedy, like your review.

14. Apocalypse Of The Honeybees

Comment #40208 by MarkSmith on May 13, 2007 at 8:55 pm

I live part time in the Seychelles islands and have noticed that the bees and butterflies are disappearing from there also. Very sad to see.

15. Kirk Cameron Proves That God Exists

Comment #39960 by MarkSmith on May 12, 2007 at 11:46 am

Bravo! We need more of this. However unpolished the debate was, it accomplished a major goal of helping to bring debate into the streets - to regular people. And thanks to Dawkins, Dennett, Hitchens, and Harris et al for that.

I'll bet the RRS got on their laptops after the debate and researched the history and defeat of the 'argument from design'. And I'll bet that the god-squad just prayed for baby jesus to transform their embarrassment into glory.

Once again, hurray or citizen debates.

16. Lou Dobbs Interviews Christopher Hitchens

Comment #37545 by MarkSmith on May 4, 2007 at 9:21 pm

Do the rest of you breathe a giant sigh of "finally" relief when you see these interviews?

Ellen Johnson of American Atheists also did a fantastic interview on CNN with Paula Zahn several weeks ago. I must say it is therapeutic.

17. 'god is not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything' by Christopher Hitchens

Comment #36253 by MarkSmith on April 30, 2007 at 4:29 pm

I must say I got tired and didn't finish reading the review, narrow-sighted as it was.

Did the reviewer mention that reading several books on a topic solidifies the arguments and gives perspective, confidence and historical context to the reader? Something which our generation desperately needs.

18. Pundit Christopher Hitchens picks a fight in book, 'God is Not Great'

Comment #35836 by MarkSmith on April 29, 2007 at 3:04 am

My only gripe with Hitchens is that to read him one must also lug a dictionary around ;-)

Combining Dawkins the scientist, Harris the logician, and Hitchens the Oscar-Wilde-like-but-cantankerous literary genius, we atheists have a real trinity to rival and do in the mythical one. Perhaps Dennett will read superstition it last rights.

19. Dinesh D'Souza says I don't exist: an atheist at Virginia Tech

Comment #33305 by MarkSmith on April 19, 2007 at 8:23 pm

Thank you. Your eloquence at a time like this is heartwarming.

In an above comment, Logicel states he might be compelled to feel shame for D'Sousa. Well, if D'Sousa has the character to write letter of apology to you, I might also. But I think a better course of action is to inform his blog editor, or Stanford of just how horribly he reflects on them. Does anyone have an address?

20. Medicine without Evolution Make Sense?

Comment #32838 by MarkSmith on April 18, 2007 at 12:23 pm

To further the argument about the mechanic: In America, doctor's have fought to be our complete medical authority - for treatment AND prevention. And yet they miserably fail at the latter.

There may be several reasons for this, but perhaps if the medical community had a better understanding of evolution it would produce much more effective preventatives.

As an example of this authority: My doctor told me for years that vitamin supplements were only helpful in cases of extreme deficiency (I didn't believe him and ate them anyway). Then he had a heart attack, lost most of his patients and began eating wild salmon and taking vitamins & minerals daily.

A case of the "opportunity cost" model in the medical industry: I was told this month by a doctor at the famous Mayo Clinic in the States that they wouldn't schedule me to see a Mayo Clinic nutritionist for preventative consultation - they would only see me if I were grossly obese or diabetic. CNN reports that a doctor makes well over $1,000,000 over the lifetime of each diabetic patient. No wonder they wouldn't help me prevent getting the disease.

21. 'God Is Not a Moderate'

Comment #21995 by MarkSmith on February 12, 2007 at 5:45 am

I wish Richard Branson would give a $25M prize to anyone who could connect the logic gaps inside a faith-head. Harris, i think, would win it; but yikes, it seems impossible.

Hey, Sam. Nevermind the Ph.D. Write us another book. We'll call you "doctor" anyway. ;-)