Skip to Main Content (access key 1)
Skip to Search (access key 2)
Skip to Search GO (access key 3)
Skip to comments (access key 4)
Skip to navigation (access key 5)
Skip to top of page (access key 6)

Comments by Sally Luxmoore


51. Dumb and Dumber: Are Americans Hostile to Knowledge?

Comment #127842 by Sally Luxmoore on February 15, 2008 at 4:36 pm

109. Comment #127831 by tooltroll on February 15, 2008 at 4:28 pm


And there was me thinking you were related to Fungus the Bogeyman.

You do seem to be imbued with pessimism. Remember it's not all that long ago in nearly all countries that there was no universal education. There will always be some people who show little benefit, but there is a definite improvement in the greater good.

Cheer up! I'll ask the FSM to lean down a noodly appendage in your direction.

52. Dumb and Dumber: Are Americans Hostile to Knowledge?

Comment #127819 by Sally Luxmoore on February 15, 2008 at 4:19 pm

So -Tooltroll -

I suppose we can take it, then, that your green-ness is not envy ?

Which, in your view is the best system?

53. Map reveals extent of human damage to oceans

Comment #127750 by Sally Luxmoore on February 15, 2008 at 3:01 pm

-- Population control-- ?

Someone should have a word with the Vatican.

54. Map reveals extent of human damage to oceans

Comment #127477 by Sally Luxmoore on February 15, 2008 at 10:35 am

It would be easier to see what the situation is in the oceans if these people had defined their terms properly. It doesn't sound very scientific, even to a lay-person like me.
I'm not sure what this means.
We all know about oils slicks, pollution from ballast tanks, plastic bottles floating even to remote regions, run off from polluted land, etc but I don't really feel any the wiser from having read this 'report'.

55. Dumb and Dumber: Are Americans Hostile to Knowledge?

Comment #127466 by Sally Luxmoore on February 15, 2008 at 10:21 am

Al - Rawandi

That made me laugh out loud.

I did a PGCE (teacher training) some years ago and my then tutor said that his aim was to put The Sun newspaper out of business. This is a paper that requires a reading age of 9 and (I think I'm right in saying this) it out sells all the 'intelligent' newspapers put together, by far.

There's no danger of it losing its readership in the near future.

Who was it who said you can never lose money by underestimating the intelligence of the British population?

56. Dumb and Dumber: Are Americans Hostile to Knowledge?

Comment #127454 by Sally Luxmoore on February 15, 2008 at 10:01 am

Before I say this, I freely acknowledge that we have plenty of ignorant people here in England.

BUT - When I went to America for the first time, in 1977, I was asked:
-whether people in England spoke English
-whereabouts in France England was
and - whether we had cars in England.

Being gobsmacked and also reluctant to be rude to people who were being very friendly to me, I failed to make the witty replies that perhaps I should have done.

57. Debate between Richard Dawkins and Madeline Bunting

Comment #127231 by Sally Luxmoore on February 15, 2008 at 4:32 am

gcdavis:

I think I heard RD agree that there is more than one kind of truth and to acknowledge emotional truth. What on earth is emotional truth


Maybe it should be as simple as believing that we should be truthful about our emotions, to ourselves as well as to others - not 'living a lie', for example.
However, I suspect she meant a more woolly version - that feeling that something must be out there, therefore it is and therefore it must be respected - which is another thing entirely.
This was the problem with Ms B's debating style. If she had allowed Richard time to define his terms, it would have been clearer to her that her 'truth' was not at all the objective truth that he meant.

58. Debate between Richard Dawkins and Madeline Bunting

Comment #127025 by Sally Luxmoore on February 14, 2008 at 5:27 pm

Hi Goldy

the Great Vowel Shift and Shakespeare


It was earlier than that. More The Great Vowel Shift and Caxton. You can thank that juxtaposition for the difficulties in English spelling that we still struggle with nowadays.

I was really meaning a time when books were too expensive for most households to have more than just the one that would get them into heaven.

Of course nursery rhymes and folk tales existed then too (and mystery plays) but they were part of a verbal tradition, not written down till later.

But as you say, we are diverging from Ms Bunting and her foggy thoughts.

59. Debate between Richard Dawkins and Madeline Bunting

Comment #127008 by Sally Luxmoore on February 14, 2008 at 4:36 pm

Comment #127002 by He'sAVeryNaughtyBoy

I wonder if this is related to peoples unwillingness to accept that the brain is capable of explaining conciousness by itself.


I think that's definitely a factor. I have an ongoing debate about religion with a Christian friend who said at one point in exasperation,
" There is always a scientific way of explaining anything; reducing life, the universe and everything to 'nothing buttery' ; nothing but a huge mass of chemicals. ....are your children of no importance? Is your love for them an illusion, merely a chemical occurrence?"
-to which my response was, " you could say that everything in our heads is an illusion" and, "I would not use the word 'merely'. The fact that everything that occurs in our brains is electrical or chemical is absolutely amazing and rather wonderful. I do not feel in the least diminished by that fact",
-but I know I have not convinced him.

This is what Richard was dealing with in Unweaving The Rainbow.

60. Debate between Richard Dawkins and Madeline Bunting

Comment #126997 by Sally Luxmoore on February 14, 2008 at 3:52 pm

Goldy (Hello again)

couldn't this be a chicken/egg scenario? After all, it had to be understandable to those hearing it to make sense, sa maybe the Bible (in English) owes us, the people.


My view is that for a long time it was the ONLY book available. For generations, many children learnt to read on the family bible. Even sewing was 'improving quotations from - you guessed it. Every Sunday it was read to you from the pulpit. There was little else for most people.

It was common currency then in the way that it is not now. Quotations would not have seemed erudite, just familiar.

61. Debate between Richard Dawkins and Madeline Bunting

Comment #126993 by Sally Luxmoore on February 14, 2008 at 3:45 pm

Goldy, do you mean Melvyn Bragg?
(Great name, eh?)

62. Debate between Richard Dawkins and Madeline Bunting

Comment #126989 by Sally Luxmoore on February 14, 2008 at 3:40 pm

Gustav

I'm far from convinced about her hypothesis of where fundamentalism comes from


I'm inclined to agree, but for different (perhaps more simplistic) reasons. I think at the moment fundamentalism in Islam is growing simply because it is being taught, particularly by the Wahabi Madrassas that Saudi Arabia is funding all over the muslim world. If you read Ayaan Hirsi Ali's autobiography, she explains very clearly that no questioning of the Koran is ever allowed. It is presented as absolute truth to which the only permissible response is submission.
There is often no other kind of education allowed, so these people are not exposed to anything like our tradition of questioning and democratic compromise.
I am in favour of Arabic / Urdu /Farsi /Pashtun etc versions of the God Delusion being available on the internet...

63. Debate between Richard Dawkins and Madeline Bunting

Comment #126974 by Sally Luxmoore on February 14, 2008 at 3:25 pm

Comment #126968 by Jiten --You can shove your Milton.


That's sad. There's room for both!

I've always been interested in science, but my first degree was in English and my second (bit of a perpetual student) is in law.

I've also read all Richard's books and am also interested in astronomy, geology, plate tectonics, paleontology and all sorts of other things.

There's no need to restrict yourself !

64. Debate between Richard Dawkins and Madeline Bunting

Comment #126969 by Sally Luxmoore on February 14, 2008 at 3:20 pm

Dear Teapot,

Leaving the bible on your bookshelf won't protect you from 'contamination'. It will reach out and affect your life rather like the noodly tendrils of our own dear FSM.
You are probably already infected ....

65. Debate between Richard Dawkins and Madeline Bunting

Comment #126964 by Sally Luxmoore on February 14, 2008 at 3:08 pm

Comment #126955 by ericcolumba on February 14, 2008 at 2:53 pm

I wish Richard would stop using hitchens arguement that you cant appreciate literature if you don't understand the bible.


It isn't just Hitchen's argument, it's that of anyone educated in English Literature. Try understanding any of the following without any knowledge of the Bible: Chaucer, Langland, Bunyan, Shakespeare, Milton, John Donne, Gerard Manley Hopkins, the metaphysical poets, the list goes on and on...

There are 30-ish pages in my (rather old) copy of 'The Oxford Dictionary of Quotations' that are devoted to the Bible.

It is virtually certain that you yourself have quoted the Bible in everyday speech whether you knew it or not, and the book titles on your shelves are very likely to include biblical quotations.

Like it or not, it is our history and part of our culture.

66. Debate between Richard Dawkins and Madeline Bunting

Comment #126935 by Sally Luxmoore on February 14, 2008 at 2:19 pm

So, does she believe in the virgin birth or not? She NEVER answered the question.
She may call herself a catholic, but the Carbolic Church would not recognise her weird wishy washy views as theirs.

Irritating the way she interrupted all the time.

Yet again, I admire Richard's patience at putting up with someone who treats her own illogicality as liberal intelligence.

67. Pleas for condemned Saudi 'witch'

Comment #126857 by Sally Luxmoore on February 14, 2008 at 11:10 am

We should ask Bush to call his friend...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s24Fxiwfc5Y&feature=related

68. Pleas for condemned Saudi 'witch'

Comment #126849 by Sally Luxmoore on February 14, 2008 at 10:54 am

Elphinabout

Obviously not - Look at him!

69. Pleas for condemned Saudi 'witch'

Comment #126843 by Sally Luxmoore on February 14, 2008 at 10:46 am

'Saudi' & 'justice' .. ?
Two words that you would not expect to see in the same sentence.

70. Murder plot against Danish cartoonist

Comment #126822 by Sally Luxmoore on February 14, 2008 at 9:17 am

Re: Comment #126220 by MelM

Thank you SO much for the link you provided to Christopher Hitchen's speech.

I had not come across it before, but have now listened to it FIVE times, so impressed am I by it.

With the cartoons, the important thing is not just our freedom of speech, but that of the muslims who oppose us. They do have the right to oppose us.
The difficult juggling act is to decide when something tips over into incitement to commit a crime or (more difficult still and also more unlikely) incitement to racial hatred. Muslims are NOT a racial group. They know this and yet they choose to seek the protection of our race hatred laws on any occasion when they face criticism. It is sheer hypocrisy.

Incidentally, I still think we should remind them of their own history and their own artistic depictions of Mohammed. The namby pamby British press and the BBC should be able to summon up the courage to publish some of those, even if they won't publish the cartoons.

71. Murder plot against Danish cartoonist

Comment #126193 by Sally Luxmoore on February 12, 2008 at 3:19 pm

Hello again. I'm on a roll with this theme, sorry !

http://www.zombietime.com/mohammed_image_archive/islamic_mo_full/

Scroll down.
These are fascinating and again most are rather beautiful, until you find women being depicted. At first there are the good women, collecting flowers in paradise (sounds very boring), but then:

eg: "Mohammed, along with Buraq and Gabriel, visit Hell, and see a demon punishing "shameless women" who had exposed their hair to strangers. For this crime of inciting lust in men, the women are strung up by their hair and burned for eternity. Persian, 15th century."
Or: " Next, Mohammed sees women strung up by hooks thrust through their tongues by a green demon. Their crimes were to "mock" their husbands and to leave their homes without permission. Persian, 15th century."
Or:" Further on, Mohammed sees a red demon that is torturing women by hanging them up by hooks through their breasts, as they are engulfed in flames. The women are being punished for giving birth to illegitimate children whom they falsely claimed were fathered by their husbands. Persian, 15th century."

They just can't get away from hatred / fear of women

72. Murder plot against Danish cartoonist

Comment #126189 by Sally Luxmoore on February 12, 2008 at 3:04 pm

Wikipedia again...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Mohammed_kaaba_1315.jpg#file

This is actually rather a beautiful illustration. I bet the Bodleian library has others like it and there must be many more around the world.

73. Murder plot against Danish cartoonist

Comment #126180 by Sally Luxmoore on February 12, 2008 at 2:46 pm

According to Wikipedia (the oracle),

thousands of illustrations of Muhammad have appeared in books by and for Muslims.


Why don't people look these out and publish them. It would be harder for 'the muslim world' to go bananas over their own books !

74. Sentenced to death: Afghan who dared to read about women's rights

Comment #125437 by Sally Luxmoore on February 11, 2008 at 11:08 am

Ah. they re-sent it:

Dear Friend,

Please find below a copy of the AI press statement regarding Perwiz Kambakhsh. I am sorry, but I forgot to enclose it in my previous email to you.

Thank you,

Afghanistan Team
International Secretariat
Amnesty International
London

AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL
PUBLIC STATEMENT


Date 29 January 2008
AI Index: ASA 11/001/2008




Prisoner of Conscience sentenced to death for downloading and distributing materials from the internet



Amnesty International condemns the decision to sentence to death journalist Perwiz Kambakhsh who had been convicted of downloading and distributing written materials that examined the role of women in the Islamic faith by the primary court in Mazar-i Sharif, northern Afghanistan.

“Amnesty International is gravely concerned about the combination of human rights violations which Perwiz Kambakhsh has reportedly suffered: ill-treatment to enforce confession, lack of access to a lawyer, a closed, unfair trial resulting in the death penalty â€" all for acts that may not have taken place, and at any rate should not have been the subject of prosecution,” Catherine Baber director of Amnesty International’s Asia-Pacific programme said.

According to information received by Amnesty International, Perwiz Kambakhsh was sentenced to death on Tuesday 22 January 2008 following proceedings that manifestly failed to meet international fair trial standards. Such standards are provided, in the International Covent on Civil and Political Rights, to which Afghanistan is a state party and in the 1984 Safeguards Guaranteeing Protection of the Rights of Those Facing the Death Penalty adopted by the UN Economic and Social Council and endorsed by the UN General Assembly.

Amnesty International opposes the death penalty in all cases as a violation of the right to life and the right not to be subjected to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

This sentence comes despite the recent UN General Assembly’s adoption of a resolution calling for a worldwide moratorium on executions on 18 December 2007 and at a time when a total of 135 countries have abolished the death penalty in law or practice.

“Amnesty International condemns the death sentence against Perwiz Kambakhsh and urges President Karzai to use his power to ensure that the sentence is commuted and that Perwiz Kambahksh, a prisoner of conscience, is unconditionally released,” said Catherine Baber.

In line with the recent adoption of the UN General Assembly resolution calling for a worldwide moratorium on executions in December Amnesty International calls on the Afghanistan government to re-introduce a moratorium on executions as a first step towards the total abolition of the death penalty in Afghanistan.
Public Document

****************************************

International Secretariat, Amnesty International, 1 Easton St., London WC1X 0DW, UK

www.amnesty.org

Working to protect human rights worldwide

75. Sentenced to death: Afghan who dared to read about women's rights

Comment #125423 by Sally Luxmoore on February 11, 2008 at 10:47 am

I have just now received an email from Amnesty regarding this case. I thought people might be interested.

Dear Friend,

Thank you for your email and interest in the Perwiz Kambakhsh's case. We are aware of this case and at the moment Afghan team in AI is monitoring the situation closely. We have also released recently a Public Statement, condemning the death sentence handed down to Kambakhsh. Here is the link to the AI public statement of 29 January 2008: http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/info/ASA11/001/2008.

I have also pasted below a copy this document as the AI website has recently been experiencing technical problems.

Please note, we will shortly be issuing an Urgent Action on this case. Given the international attention and concern that this case has generated, there is hope that Kambakhsh will be released. He is currently appealing his case which may take up to 6 months: 2 months for the rest of the appeal, and 4 months for the Supreme Court appeal.

Thank you again for you support and concern.

Best wishes,

Afghanistan Team
International Secretariat
Amnesty International
London
Working to protect human rights worldwide


Unfortunately I can't get the link to work, nor was there anything pasted below the email. They need some IT help!

76. Sprinting down the evolutionary highway

Comment #124996 by Sally Luxmoore on February 10, 2008 at 4:04 pm

An interesting sideline on this subject:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7237663.stm

Re muslims marrying cousins and also (as usual) reacting like wronged victims when the drawbacks of this habit are pointed out.

77. Sharia fiasco

Comment #124995 by Sally Luxmoore on February 10, 2008 at 3:50 pm

Notsobad.

Thank you for those links. I hadn't heard of George Carlin or Bill Maher before, but enjoyed them very much.
I love the refreshing feeling of religious taboos being broken.
I genuinely think that we can help to advance rationalist views via satire and humour. The religious types get to see themselves as others see them and those on the fence lose their inhibitions about admitting their scepticism. The more the merrier!
So while I'm on the subject, why not take another look at Marcus Brigstocke on this site -

http://richarddawkins.net/article,1469,Religion-is-Hard,Marcus-Brigstocke (elsewhere on this site)

78. The challenge of finding peace in Lourdes

Comment #124513 by Sally Luxmoore on February 9, 2008 at 4:38 pm

Oh dear, poor doctor:

It is a constant balancing act between faith and science for me


It must be a bit like schizophrenia. Just choose science !

in this day and age, everyone needs proof to believe


How inconvenient for him !

I've been there myself, as a 15 year -old, with my French penfriend and her family. Although I didn't know the word at the time, the place is really a homage to kitsch. It's huge, overwhelming and amazingly tacky. Oh, and the walking sticks were still there. (We are talking a little while ago.)

79. Sharia law in UK is 'unavoidable'

Comment #124156 by Sally Luxmoore on February 8, 2008 at 2:00 pm

I'm sick of the comments by Christians on all the discussions saying:

'Our law is based upon the Ten Commandments'

Umm, is it me or is this completely deluded? I don't remember much in law about coveting or having other gods etc. Our laws seem to be more influenced by Paine, Locke, Mill and the like.


And the little matter of centuries of common law, slow development of the feudal system, Magna Carta, etc. Not much religion there; the Lord of the manor was much more bothered about his own interests than god's.
Even nowadays I don't see parliament checking the Bible before adding to the statute book.

80. Sharia law in UK is 'unavoidable'

Comment #124071 by Sally Luxmoore on February 8, 2008 at 9:26 am

I think that David Blunket (Former Home Secretary) has made a very apt comment:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7234422.stm

"[The archbishop] should have understood the difference between civil society - tribunals that seek to arbitrate or to mediate - and the civil law under which we all work."

I think a lot of commentators have failed to get that point too. An out of court settlement can be arranged by anyone, but that does not affect the law at all.

81. Sharia law in UK is 'unavoidable'

Comment #124002 by Sally Luxmoore on February 8, 2008 at 6:30 am

Thought this might amuse people. These comments are extracted from the Daily Telegraph blog page. This is the paper normally thought of as the Tory party at prayer...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?view=BLOGDETAIL&grid=F11&blog=yourview&xml=/news/2008/02/07/view07c.xml
Remember all these comments are filtered, so these are just those judged polite enough for public consumption! I think it shows what a varied vocabulary for insult we have.
-- an atrocious fool; Fruitcake in a Frock, stark, raving mad; an idiot out of touch with reality; deluded; a classic example of someone educated beyond their intelligence; needs his head examined; potty; illogical, woolly-headed; a bit loopy; a moonbat; deluded old fart; brainless ramblings; superstitious obscurantist; shambolic; old duffer; totally lost the plot; completely and utterly wrong; a complete wet; must be mad; an utter disgrace; does not inhabit planet Earth any more; twit; Arch Druid of the Church of England; unbelievable nonsense; a menace; has lost the plot; soft in the head; should be ashamed of himself; unfit to lead; no longer 'fit for purpose'; arrant nonsense; one of the silliest people in public life; stupid and inflammatory; a disgrace; out of his mind; Welsh (!!); asinine; buffoon; not only a fool, but a dangerous fool; plainly wrong, etc etc --. It just goes on and on.

82. Sharia law in UK is 'unavoidable'

Comment #123670 by Sally Luxmoore on February 7, 2008 at 1:42 pm

Look what is also in the Times!

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/system/topicRoot/Richard_Dawkins/

83. Sharia law in UK is 'unavoidable'

Comment #123665 by Sally Luxmoore on February 7, 2008 at 1:27 pm

The Telegraph: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/02/07/nwilliams207.xml

84. Sharia law in UK is 'unavoidable'

Comment #123664 by Sally Luxmoore on February 7, 2008 at 1:25 pm

The Times: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/

85. Sharia law in UK is 'unavoidable'

Comment #123662 by Sally Luxmoore on February 7, 2008 at 1:23 pm

Sorry, link didn't work and I can't delete this !

86. Sharia law in UK is 'unavoidable'

Comment #123608 by Sally Luxmoore on February 7, 2008 at 11:56 am

Quetzalcoatl. (took me an age to spell that...)

Oh dear. Methinks you're correct.

I keep forgetting that these religious types just KNOW that they're right...

87. Sharia law in UK is 'unavoidable'

Comment #123605 by Sally Luxmoore on February 7, 2008 at 11:50 am

Noodly.

I should have mentioned... Great name.

(I too have been touched by the Noodly appendage.)

88. Sharia law in UK is 'unavoidable'

Comment #123603 by Sally Luxmoore on February 7, 2008 at 11:48 am

Noodly.

Doesn't he know what happened to King Canute ?

89. Sharia law in UK is 'unavoidable'

Comment #123593 by Sally Luxmoore on February 7, 2008 at 11:29 am

I rather suspect that Rowan Williams is fundamentally a decent and caring man (and far from stupid)


There is a kind of intelligence (think absent-minded professor stereotypes) that is quite incapable of common sense.
This appears to be the brand that Dr Williams is endowed with.
He is a bit of an innocent and frequently makes comments that backfire because of his inability to imagine their practical consequences.
Has anyone checked to see whether he's managed to put on a matching pair of socks?
He's just unsuitable for this post.

90. Sharia law in UK is 'unavoidable'

Comment #123560 by Sally Luxmoore on February 7, 2008 at 10:52 am

Szymanowski.

It seems such a monumentally stupid thing to say that I suspect RW isn't being sincere.


No, just monumentally stupid.

He has a record of coming out with daft comments like this.

91. Scientists Say Mummies' Lice Show Pre-Columbian Origins

Comment #123557 by Sally Luxmoore on February 7, 2008 at 10:48 am

Mmm. Lovely !
Sorry to be so unscientific. Just a gut reaction...

92. Sharia law in UK is 'unavoidable'

Comment #123555 by Sally Luxmoore on February 7, 2008 at 10:44 am

Proof that there is such a thing as being so open-minded that your brains drop out !
... And to think that he sits in the House of Lords.
Maybe this will help towards the eventual disestablishment of the Church of England. We can but hope.

93. Ad 'likely to offend gay people'

Comment #123116 by Sally Luxmoore on February 6, 2008 at 1:21 pm

action1976... Can't get into it...

94. Ad 'likely to offend gay people'

Comment #123106 by Sally Luxmoore on February 6, 2008 at 1:10 pm

Steve Zara.

Good link. I agree; Al Gore seems to be one of the good guys.

It is surely just plain common sense that EVERYBODY has the right to fall in love, form relationships and have a stake in the next generation, as well as equal rights.

Not controversial in the least, unless of course you've had your mind poisoned by a holy book.

95. Ad 'likely to offend gay people'

Comment #123086 by Sally Luxmoore on February 6, 2008 at 12:50 pm

Action1976, I have just looked at the youtube link that you put up.
Are you SURE that this is not a joke ? It's full of so much unintentional humour - it's almost Monty Python-esque!
It reminds me of the really low-quality locally made advertisements that we used to get in our local cinema.
I love the way that -God saw to it that his wife got the best breast cancer treatment available... in Argentina- So nothing to do with generous contributions (from the gullible and simple-minded) swelling the coffers, then?

96. The New Atheist Movement

Comment #123049 by Sally Luxmoore on February 6, 2008 at 12:11 pm

This is actually a good thing.
It proves they're under threat and are scared.
All they're really doing is providing free publicity for all the books that they disapprove of !
The more they squeal, the better.

97. Admitting that you have no religion is not politically correct

Comment #122615 by Sally Luxmoore on February 5, 2008 at 4:14 pm

Here is the text of an email I have just sent to the clubs coordinator:

Dear Sir or Madam,



I write from England concerning the proposed new freethought group at your Wilfrid Laurier University and the decision of the campus clubs department not to allow the official formation of that group. My source is: http://richarddawkins.net/articleComments,2218,Admitting-that-you-have-no-religion-is-not-politically-correct,PZ-Myers-Pharyngula,page2#122593 .



I am greatly troubled that a university in a nation that supposedly believes in free speech should take such an attitude and that you should have given such a shamefully weak reason for your refusal: -due to the need to respect and tolerate the views of others, the Campus Clubs department is unable to approve a club of this nature at this time-.



There are several comments to be made on this point.



1.Holding an opposing viewpoint does not indicate lack of respect or intolerance; it is a necessary part of all debate in a free society.
2.Using this logic, the religious groups should be banned too, so as not to show disrespect or intolerance to freethinkers.
3.A certain nervousness about (or even fear of) freethinkers is implied. The easiest way to dispel such anxieties is to allow the group and see for yourselves that the members are ordinary, normal people, though maybe just a little more intelligent and original than the common herd.
4.A sneaking suspicion arises that you think the faith groups perhaps are not strong enough to stand up to any opposition? If they stand on such weak ground they deserve to fall!
5.You are a university, for goodness sake. Don’t you value thought and debate in your students?
6.Maybe this is the most telling point, though it is also the most shameful possibility… Do you have religious sponsors whose funding you are afraid to lose? Would you want the students to suspect this?


Do you really want the outside world to be thinking all these things?



Do the decent thing, please!



Yours Faithfully,

Sally Luxmoore,

BA (Hons) Oxon, PGCE, LLB.

Kingston upon-Thames, England.

98. Blasphemy

Comment #122520 by Sally Luxmoore on February 5, 2008 at 11:44 am

Excellent letter.

Is Amnesty International involved? If so, we could all send letters / postcards via Amnesty to Sayed Parwiz Kambakhsh, which serves the dual purpose of letting him know he is not alone and also makes the Afghan authorities (uncomfortably) aware that the world is watching.

99. Sprinting down the evolutionary highway

Comment #121975 by Sally Luxmoore on February 4, 2008 at 12:41 pm

Epinephrine.

Wow. (Whooshing sound as a lot of that went over my head)
I will dig that out and give it a go. I think I should also do some digging in my copy of 'The Ancestor's Tale' as well.

100. Sprinting down the evolutionary highway

Comment #121958 by Sally Luxmoore on February 4, 2008 at 12:09 pm

;D

I got carried away by my tendency to go for the humour first...
My daughter has recently graduated with a degree in zoology and was very interested in your comments about which sex is heterozygous for the sex chromosomes.
I don't think either of us realised that it's the other way around in fish and birds. That's an interesting divergence. Which way around is the 'oldest' way?

More Pages: Previous | 1 2 3 | Next