801. Hamas 'Mickey Mouse' calls for Muslim domination on kids' show

Comment #39090 by Logicel on May 10, 2007 at 1:07 am

A spokeswoman from Walt Disney Co.'s headquarters in Burbank, Calif., did not immediately return messages asking for comment about the use of the Disney-like character.
______

That is because they are checking with their cadre of lawyers if it is feasible to sue Hamas for copyright infringement.

802. Sam Harris in conversation with Oliver McTernan

Comment #38763 by Logicel on May 9, 2007 at 6:02 am

I read the transcript. Since McTernan works with people of different faiths, supposedly he regards that as an edge to which Harris must defer. I was really pining to see McTernan present some useful handle on how to deal with supporters of religious superstitions coming from his experience. But alas, just the same tired saw of respecting what I deem is respectable--belief in belief with no evidence, and if you do not, then you are sowing division, and you will never reduce religious fanaticism.

803. Review of The God Delusion

Comment #38760 by Logicel on May 9, 2007 at 5:51 am

Russell Blackford, Thanks for the explanation of how the online article was formated regarding the odd placement of the last paragraph--sometimes I am unable to deduce the obvious.

804. Better God-fearing than sneering

Comment #38717 by Logicel on May 9, 2007 at 3:11 am

MarcusA wrote, At the risk of sounding sexist - Female religious apologists seem to write the worst rubbish.
_______

The males can dish the nonsense out equally well unfortunately, and the majority of Religion apologists who have had their articles posted at this site are of the male persuasion. For me, no Religion apologist can surmount the accomplished climbing of the improbable mountain of polished inanity as Alvin Plantinga. That monumental hike done by Plantinga will ensure that all the other apologists, regardless of gender, will be sliding down said mount on their fannies, exhausted and bewildered by their less than stellar efforts.

805. Better God-fearing than sneering

Comment #38716 by Logicel on May 9, 2007 at 2:56 am

RichardHarty wrote, I think if we stopped treating religion as a science and more like an art, it might prove far more useful. If we stopped using religion as the end of discussion and instead used it as creative discussion and exploration it could be a vehicle for transformation and growth. And maybe the comfort could be far more meaningful if it didn't have all the strings attached.
________

I agree, and RD certainly referred to the literary impact of holy books in TGD. The trouble is, though, like Carl Sagan's widow, Anne Druyan, I support reclaiming 'spirituality' and even a concept of a 'soul', that is, a union of the body and mind, I have been well disabused of using terminology like spirituality/soul, because as other posters have pointed out, the Religious wingnuts OWN these terms.

Religion, could be a historical art form, but at present it is not, and the supporters of religious superstitions are not willing to embrace this approach. So, we will continue to challenge their notion that belief without evidence is good, and we will continue to discover ways of presenting the embracing of reality in positive approaches. Eventually, if we succeed, religion maybe then could contribute to our mental/emotional wellness. In other words, when the practice of believing in supernatural beliefs ends and becomes history, 'Religion' can become an approach which is truly benign.

806. Better God-fearing than sneering

Comment #38711 by Logicel on May 9, 2007 at 2:21 am

CloudedHills wrote, Lint from the recesses of a journalist's deadline-fearing mind.
_______

Beautifully crafted sentence. Thanks so much, my creative self adored that!

807. Christopher Hitchens and Al Sharpton: A Debate God Is Not Great

Comment #38703 by Logicel on May 9, 2007 at 2:03 am

Harlon57 wrote, Ridiculous. This is why war is left to men, not wimps.

and

Face it. You don't have the stomach for war.

That's why it is left for serious men to execute.

No pussy's allowed.

______

Wow, a really heavyweight (ha), bullying 'stone' thrower is in our midst.

My version is:

Face it. You don't have the mind for peace.

808. Christopher Hitchens and Al Sharpton: A Debate God Is Not Great

Comment #38700 by Logicel on May 9, 2007 at 1:56 am

Romin_Devourin wrote, You simply don't have the stones to own it, ...
_________

Being a female, and thus not owning 'stones', I suppose it is easier for me to not encourage the enforcement of ideas that have no evidence of being positive in their results, like the internment of believers of religious superstitions. Where's the evidence, bud, that such internment would make the world a better place? Happily, possessing 'stones', does not mean that all males are as dense as you.

809. Christopher Hitchens and Al Sharpton: A Debate God Is Not Great

Comment #38698 by Logicel on May 9, 2007 at 1:52 am

Atticus_of_Amber, nice post, thanks.

810. Those fanatical atheists

Comment #38573 by Logicel on May 8, 2007 at 4:27 pm

tolerance wrote, I suppose we are all foolish in some way?
______

You are very wise.

811. The New Atheists loathe religion far too much to plausibly challenge it

Comment #38568 by Logicel on May 8, 2007 at 4:15 pm

newatheist, welcome into the fold!

And thanks for jogging my memory, right, pet ownership has the same benefits as believing in religious superstitions. Imagine one can get the same benefit but by hanging out with a REAL companion.

812. Those fanatical atheists

Comment #38559 by Logicel on May 8, 2007 at 3:50 pm

dsquare wrote, It means that to be alive is to have a void,...
_________

Here is my version: It means that to be alive is to be alive. The more I accept that I am a highly successfully evolved primate, the happier I feel. The more I embrace reality, the more I am satisfied.

As any good evolutionist will tell you--humans are guided by emotions...passions...by the reptilian brain stem...by instincts...the neocortex is just window dressing..a butter dispensing appendage created by genes in order to effectuate their spread---
__________

What nonsense. Read some info on neuroscience. Humans are capable of both emotions and rationality--we need them both to function. Atheists are as emotional as theists, if they were not they would not be motivated to reason, without emotion we would be limp, immobile creatures.

Theists use faulty reasoning and are gullible in terms of accepting beliefs without any evidence. Theists are not capable of purer, more satisfying emotions than atheists just because they believe without proof or evidence. And atheists, just because they will not believe without evidence, are not unfeeling robots. Get a grip.

How about Choice? Fine--we can agree on Choice. Many of these people you snidely deride, then, have made the Choice. OK...and you've made yours'. Fine. Now please--shut will you?
________

No, we will not shut up. We will continue to criticize religious beliefs because they have no evidence, and therefore can lead to very dangerous outcomes. If you cannot handle criticism of your religious beliefs, then stick some cotton in your ears or stop reading criticism. Continue to believe without evidence, and we will continue to criticize your doing that--however we will not do anything else except to unrelentingly criticize the formerly pampered, protected notion that belief in belief is good. You can continue to believe without evidence to your heart's content.

813. Review of The God Delusion

Comment #38523 by Logicel on May 8, 2007 at 1:45 pm

Good job in summarizing what RD accomplishes very well in TGD. However, I found the last paragraph to be awkwardly placed as the ending paragraph. I even checked the original site to see if by accident the ending was not lopped off.

814. Those fanatical atheists

Comment #38449 by Logicel on May 8, 2007 at 6:07 am

BaronOchs, I enjoyed that Whitman poem tremendously, thanks!

815. Those fanatical atheists

Comment #38448 by Logicel on May 8, 2007 at 6:06 am

Boondoggle wrote, I would just encourage the author and others to look at both sides of the argument.
_____

And I would encourage you to recognize the fact that they have. They examined the evidence probably more thoroughly than you have and concluded rightly that the evidence has come up short for religious superstitions.

816. The New Atheists loathe religion far too much to plausibly challenge it

Comment #38439 by Logicel on May 8, 2007 at 5:25 am

As an poster recommended, I double posted one of my posts in this thread at the Guardian's site. It took about 2 minutes to register and a poster is not allow to comment immediately after the first comment--10 minutes has passed and I still cannot post a new comment (EDIT: It takes 30 minutes before you can post another comment, all that does is encourage huge long comments--what a bunch of media dolts!).

If the Guardian thinks that approach is going to tame down discussion, well, let me put it bluntly, then that viewpoint is as much f*cktarded asshattery as it is their exclaiming that COMMENTING IS FREE. Oh, thank you, Guardian for your selfless action of allowing us to generate content for you. Mainstream media adapting to the Net? Where, I want to see it!

817. The New Atheists loathe religion far too much to plausibly challenge it

Comment #38430 by Logicel on May 8, 2007 at 4:44 am

Atheists accept that theists sincerely believe in their beliefs despite lack of evidence, and that their beliefs are real to them. Bizarro Bunting could not go even that far in trusting that atheists know their own mind.

818. The New Atheists loathe religion far too much to plausibly challenge it

Comment #38427 by Logicel on May 8, 2007 at 4:39 am

I agree with BaronOchs regarding the nature of Bunting's demand regardless if it is a facetious or sincere request for proof--that it is insulting in its implication we do not know our own minds and that if we did, we would lie anyway.

819. The New Atheists loathe religion far too much to plausibly challenge it

Comment #38411 by Logicel on May 8, 2007 at 3:32 am

knox wrote, To kill people for believing something!
_______

You making it sound whimsical with your using something. In addition, you are not focusing on the aspects of the discussion in this thread which are clearly indicating that it is a very thorny question. Further more, no one is advocating that the new atheists who are in essence a herd of independent 'cats', band together and use this vague 'killing people for believing in something' as the strictly enforceable cannon of their 'movement'.

You do more damage in encouraging a sane discussion on thorny topics with your approach. Discussing ideas are not the same thing as endorsing them. I have found these discussions invaluable, and I appreciate their frankness.

820. The New Atheists loathe religion far too much to plausibly challenge it

Comment #38399 by Logicel on May 8, 2007 at 2:19 am

phil rimmer wrote: It should also address the mixed blessing of this in a modern society, and the need for society to, ipso facto, demand proof for any individual's assertions. Etc. Etc.
_______

As relevo pointed out (93. Comment #38361 by relevo) and so many other posters before him, governments in general/society do not tend to encourage critical thinking. Obviously, it is not just the particular form of sloppy or non-thinking of which supporters of religious superstitions do, but in general, us humans shy away from emphasing that critical thinking--the teaching, learning, practicing, and applying it--is crucial for humanity in order to progress. Criticizing religion and its silly notion that believing without evidence is good is just a part of the more encompassing struggle of identifying concrete ways of encouraging critical thinking.

Our frontal lobes, which handle critical thinking, long term planning, etc. need to be 'pampered'. In the fight/flight reaction, the blood flows from the frontal lobes into the motor cortex to facilitate the flight/fight response. We do not feel this blood ebbing from our thinking region in our brains though we do feel the heart pounding, rapid breathing, etc. In performance psychology, emphasis is placed on maintaining calm in the face of stress, knowing how to compensate for the thinking center becoming less aware because of reduced blood flow. Already, elite members of our society use this tool via mediation/biofeedback.

As far as having family members who are not interested in listening to the challenging of their religious superstitions, I would suggest to focus on using critical thinking with them in other non-religious spheres of their lives, because that is the skill once developed will aid supporters of religious superstitions to start to turn the potency of critical thinking themselves onto the once taboo topic of their own religious superstitions. You, yourself, in doing this, will increase your own critical thinking skills.

And as others have mentioned, how do you qualitatively measure the positive effect that these hot-selling atheism books are having? How do you measure the viral effects of web-based discussions, videos, audios, blogging, etc.? Don't reduce arbitrarily the number of chickens before they start hatching and laying eggs which results in more chickens, more eggs, etc. Also, yet again, as others have stated, the religious side often 'pump' up the sales of their books.

821. My response to the GOP evolution question

Comment #38394 by Logicel on May 8, 2007 at 1:13 am

I selected an avatar from the list this site provides, and only the word avatar appears in the upper left corner of my comments (I have now deleted that). How can I make the actual avatar appear?

822. Richard Dawkins on Canada AM

Comment #38292 by Logicel on May 7, 2007 at 12:40 pm

not working for me either.

823. The New Atheists loathe religion far too much to plausibly challenge it

Comment #38290 by Logicel on May 7, 2007 at 12:38 pm

We are getting our butts kicked.
_____

Good, cigarette smoking is not good for us.

824. Those fanatical atheists

Comment #38282 by Logicel on May 7, 2007 at 12:10 pm

I dutifully clicked on the above url, and I found the mention of god and praying in every one of the posts that I browsed. I lost interest.

825. The New Atheists loathe religion far too much to plausibly challenge it

Comment #38258 by Logicel on May 7, 2007 at 10:35 am

Carter Maxwell, Sorry, as I would love to help out a fellow atheist, but the full bottle that was untouched during the reading of TGD was quickly absorbed into my body by osmosis by my just looking at the front cover of the Koran.

826. The New Atheists loathe religion far too much to plausibly challenge it

Comment #38256 by Logicel on May 7, 2007 at 10:29 am

Carter Maxwell, if that is the case, then her facetiousness along with that annoyingly barricaded demand of with proof is still out of place in an article entirely lacking in humor.

827. The New Atheists loathe religion far too much to plausibly challenge it

Comment #38245 by Logicel on May 7, 2007 at 10:11 am

great stuff, MorituriMax, I am tempted to email the following:

I read the Bible while imbibing an entire bottle of 100% proof whiskey so as to be able to bear the horror of the many violent passages. I then read The God Delusion, and lo and behold, it was not necessary to imbibe in the same manner as it was during the reading of the Bible.

I am forwarding a scan of the 100% proof label from the empty whiskey bottle as evidence of my conversion.

828. The New Atheists loathe religion far too much to plausibly challenge it

Comment #38238 by Logicel on May 7, 2007 at 9:46 am

Why not, "Anyone who has experienced such a conversion, please email me with proof?" Why was Ms Bunting compelled to relegate with proof to its own pathetic little parenthetical island? Was it an afterthought? A literary burp akin to indigestion following eating a bit of undercooked potato (a la Dickens)?

829. The New Atheists loathe religion far too much to plausibly challenge it

Comment #38237 by Logicel on May 7, 2007 at 9:42 am

Anyone who has experienced such a conversion, please email me (with proof).
________

I suggest that Bizarro Dawkins donate his user ID so Ms Bunting can bask in the alliterative splendor of Bizarro Bunting. The above quote is such a lame little bit of foolishness, that it is supplying a steady supply of chuckles today for me.

830. The New Atheists loathe religion far too much to plausibly challenge it

Comment #38235 by Logicel on May 7, 2007 at 9:37 am

Tukka wrote, ... perhaps even surpassing the efficacy of religion itself in these areas.
_______

Nice post. But the above bit is a bit cocky and prideful, don't you think? How can anything be better than religion which is supreme and proven effective in promoting peace and well being? Why look for an improvement, when what we got at present is so mind boggling replete in it success? (:-)))

831. The New Atheists loathe religion far too much to plausibly challenge it

Comment #38226 by Logicel on May 7, 2007 at 9:15 am

Robert Maynard, I agree with all your points. Perhaps discoveries in neuroscience will eventually help us, along with other measures, in being able to accurately identify those whose brains are unable to function in a manner which promotes humanity. But, it seems that it will always be a delicate proposition, to not to tempt tyranny/eugenics.

However, the challenging nature of such a prospect must not in itself deter efforts in finding a solution. With advances in science, from increasing our longevity, to replacing worn body parts, genetic engineering, all of these developments are and will be challenging to regulate and promote well for the benefit of humanity. But then again, that it how it always has been. The rapid increase in science and technology, however, is happening on a much steeper incline than ever before in our human history.

832. The New Atheists loathe religion far too much to plausibly challenge it

Comment #38223 by Logicel on May 7, 2007 at 9:01 am

Apart from an ongoing anxiety about Islam, the British are pretty phlegmatic about religion. Church attendance continues its steady decline and the Christian evangelical boom has never taken off.

and

Does religion still have an important role in human wellbeing?
______

I think what is even more a pressing question, Ms Bunting, is the following: Should the craft of making horse harnesses, which was reputed to increase the happiness of the harness maker, be allowed to continue to decline just because it was replaced by auto manufacturing?

833. The New Atheists loathe religion far too much to plausibly challenge it

Comment #38217 by Logicel on May 7, 2007 at 8:44 am

Meanwhile, critics in America argue that the polarisation of the debate in the US is setting the cause of non-deism back rather than advancing it.
______

Well, that does it again, Ms Bunting, if critics are saying that the cause of non-deism is putting it back rather than advancing it, then that is the truth.

834. The New Atheists loathe religion far too much to plausibly challenge it

Comment #38214 by Logicel on May 7, 2007 at 8:40 am

As one New York commentator put it, we're familiar with religious intolerance, now we have to recognise irreligious intolerance.
_____

For such an erudite word crafter like Ms Bunting, it is a bit off putting to witness her conflating irreligious intolerance with criticism of religion.

835. The New Atheists loathe religion far too much to plausibly challenge it

Comment #38212 by Logicel on May 7, 2007 at 8:30 am

...but one suspects that they are going to do very little to challenge the appeal of a phenomenon they loathe too much to understand.
________

OK, Ms Bunting, you have convinced me the errors of my loud atheistic ways. I trust your crystal ball much more than the reality of books on atheism going like hot cakes. I agree with you that such heated sales are because the buyers crave to support these writers in their retirement, not because they crave the knowledge contained within these cantankerous writings.

836. The New Atheists loathe religion far too much to plausibly challenge it

Comment #38208 by Logicel on May 7, 2007 at 8:15 am

I agree, Brian, it does make the blood run cold. Why not say, ".... be ethical to imprison people for believing them". And even that change is a bit redolent of tyranny.

837. The New Atheists loathe religion far too much to plausibly challenge it

Comment #38202 by Logicel on May 7, 2007 at 8:05 am

22. Comment #38193 by BaronOchs on May 7, 2007 at 7:42 am / By proof, I wonder what she means? A scanned copy of a receipt for TGD? Three photos of yourself, first with a Bible, then The God Delusion, then nothing, and ..a smile?



Be careful she doesn't drop the envelope and get them in the wrong order.

___________

Hilarious!

838. The New Atheists loathe religion far too much to plausibly challenge it

Comment #38200 by Logicel on May 7, 2007 at 7:58 am

Corylus wrote, I don't understand. How can you "loathe something far too much to plausibly challenge it?"
_________

The recognition and focusing on disgust is used in therapy to change behavior. So in loathing theism, atheists can drum up enough disgust to fuel a sustained confrontation against religious superstitions, effecting change and keeping religion separate from the public sphere. Theists, themselves, are not loathed, but their ridiculous and potentially dangerous concept that belief without any evidence is good, is what is loathed.

So, I agree, Corylus, that this author is ignorant of how powerful a motivator disgust can be.

839. Unholy row at clergy soccer game

Comment #38189 by Logicel on May 7, 2007 at 7:34 am

Since I don't understand Norwegian all I could do was to focus on what seemed to be very happy and friendly people, judging from their facial expressions.

840. Those fanatical atheists

Comment #38171 by Logicel on May 7, 2007 at 7:04 am

Fantastic content from the title to the last word, penned in an exhilaratingly entertaining style. I cannot pay any better compliment to this author than my saying that I wish I had wrote this article instead of him.

841. The torture of the grave Islam and the afterlife

Comment #38161 by Logicel on May 7, 2007 at 6:28 am

BaronOchs, I agree with your all points.

You wrote, If people want to practice a delusional faith in a free society they should be able to do so without having treatment "applied" to them against their will.

My point is that as there is similarity in the indoctrination aspect of both mainstream religions and classic cults, that perhaps what has been learned from deprograming members of the classic cults, like Moonies, could be 'applied' in advancing a way of assisting recovering supporters of religious superstitions to deal with their anger and sense of loss of an all loving though a bit nutty sky daddy. I did not mean that this 'application' be forcibly done, as it has been for the members of the classic cults (and I do not agree with forced therapy even in the case with classic cults). I suppose my not clearly explaining what I meant by 'apply' motivated your describing my comment as being a bit 'sinister'?

842. The torture of the grave Islam and the afterlife

Comment #38143 by Logicel on May 7, 2007 at 5:41 am

BaronOchs, Please delineate the vast differences between mainstream religions and cults--when you have the time of course.

843. Atheists go on the political offensive in God-fearing US

Comment #38141 by Logicel on May 7, 2007 at 5:38 am

And those churches then house therapists that assist in helping former supporters of religious superstitions to not only embrace reality but to flourish within it, so the religious scourge can never return?

844. Atheists go on the political offensive in God-fearing US

Comment #38139 by Logicel on May 7, 2007 at 5:34 am

Biz wrote, I must admit that reading this article makes my stomach turn. But then I have to remember the fact that everywhere I have traveled in this country, there is a church within 10 minutes.
_______

Fantastic. Really. Anxiety resulting from the realization that 'loud' atheists are making progress, including the political kind. Just imagine the ton of Pepto-BIZmol little ole Biz will have to down if all those churches become empty and remain so?

845. The torture of the grave Islam and the afterlife

Comment #38136 by Logicel on May 7, 2007 at 5:10 am

Hylo wrote: But regardless of how they acquired the beliefs, it doesn't change the fact that what they believe is so far beyond the pale that they could rightly be considered in need of psychological care, especially if the beliefs they hold can lead them to kill themselves and others.
______

As all religions are cults, and there has been therapy designed to deprogram followers of cults, then perhaps, this kind of therapy can/will be applied to supporters of religious superstitions.

846. The torture of the grave Islam and the afterlife

Comment #38135 by Logicel on May 7, 2007 at 5:07 am

Cremation, which the Hindus do, must be considered anathema to the muslims--it would take all the potency out of the scare tactics of 'coffin torture.'

847. The torture of the grave Islam and the afterlife

Comment #38133 by Logicel on May 7, 2007 at 5:05 am

bitbutter wrote: I think the suggestion here is that the victims of the bomb would go to paradise anyway, and that idea is consoling for their relatives. Presumably you get to skip the trail in the grave if your body is badly damaged enough when you die.
______

What a way to ramp up the violence in a society, to make violence perfectly feasible, because its destructive effects, the destruction of human bodies, will ensure the escaping of 'coffin torture.'

848. Christians and Atheists to Debate Existence of God in First-Ever 'NIGHTLINE FACE OFF'

Comment #37907 by Logicel on May 6, 2007 at 8:00 am

BTW, OsakaGuy was at the debate between the Chiquita boys and the RRS. So be sure to check out his summary via:


http://www.richarddawkins.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=14055

849. Christians and Atheists to Debate Existence of God in First-Ever 'NIGHTLINE FACE OFF'

Comment #37878 by Logicel on May 6, 2007 at 4:52 am

Here is some sneak preview info and transcripts of the debate:


http://www.rationalresponders.com/forum/the_rational_response_squad_radio_show/the_rational_response_squad/6587

850. The moment a teenage girl was stoned to death for loving the wrong boy

Comment #37869 by Logicel on May 6, 2007 at 4:15 am

When I was a very young woman, with that strange brew of denial--idealism, immaturity, and self-centeredness--coursing through my veins, I had vehemently stated that I could never act in a 'non or in-human' way. NEVER. A wonderful atheist, a few years older than I, with whom I was living, said, "BOLLOCKS", and went on to assist, by discussing the reality of what being human means, in my maturing somewhat.

You can play semantics all you desire, but these depraved humans are humans, their depravity do not make them any less human. Not considering them human, will only retard our progress in learning how to understand, prevent, and control the awful depravities we are all capable of committing. We need to study our own kind to improve our own kind--as a personal God is a delusion, and it just us humans on this planet.