The Geek Forum
Main Forums => Entertainment => Topic started by: Agent_Tachyon on May 21, 2007, 01:35:02 PM
-
Just finished watching this, and it kicked ass. It's not flawless by any means, but extremely good nonetheless. A must see for any Dawkins fan, here's a clip:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=YjqUmuMhTsM
This struck me as particularily horrific since I'd only watched 'Blind Watchmaker' a month earlier and one of the coolest bits is about the evolution of the eye. Haggard is as hypocritical as ever (I think this was before his little "prostitute massage/meth deal) and Professor Dawkins is clearly a calmer man than I to resist losing it.
-
My god, could he find a more arrogent way to say "but please, in the process of it, don't be arrogent!"
His creepy calmness makes my skin crawl. I started having flashbacks to Tom Cruise's psychology rant...
-
Ted Haggard really is a modern-day supervillain.
-
After watching it, I did follow a related link trail of more Dawkins videos and I must say, this guy really speaks my language.
Not that I want to get into a forum holy war here, I'm sure most can agree that religion does have it's good points, in promoting morals for example. That's when it's not blown out of all proportion and used as a weak excuse for pointless violence. (Whether it's suicide bombings "in the name of Allah" or invading Iraq because "God told me to")
Another disuse of religion that's pissing me off at the moment is the whole "God hates fags" movement that's going on in the US now. That is the biggest load of biggoted bullshit I've ever heard. I'm nowhere near an expert, I haven't been a practicing catholic for over 9 years, but as far as I'm aware, homosexuality is referenced only once in the bible - "no man shall lie with another man" or words to that effect. Wheras the entire book is drowned in claims that God loves absolutelyeveryone, from Jesus, to the Romans that killed him. How - taking these two points into account - do you acertain that God hates homosexuals?
Hell, if a gay guy ends up at the pearly gates and hears "We can't let you in, you're gay." he could always use the "You made me this way!" excuse =P
Anyway, I've gone off on a tangent, this is just something that's been on my mind recently that I thought I'd vent.
-
The Bible is so loaded with contradictions that I decided to hell (literally?) with the whole damn mess years ago because I got tired of interpreting it all the time. Now I make my OWN contradictions, and they're generally a lot funnier and fewer people die over them.
-
And isn't lolz and a low bodycount the best measure of a lifestyle choice? =P
-
I've always thought so!
-
What i find amazing is that there are universities in the US that teach "creationism science" and "inteligent design", and they can give out degrees in biology or geology.
And really unbelievable is the fact that they get money from the state to do that.
-
A prime example of the 'have your cake and eat it too' syndrome.
In the face of mounting irrefutable evidence contrary to classic beliefs there comes a time when the only choice they feel they have is to apply creative translation that allows the re-transfer of credit back under gods domain.
-
What i find amazing is that there are universities in the US that teach "creationism science" and "inteligent design", and they can give out degrees in biology or geology.
And really unbelievable is the fact that they get money from the state to do that.
I don't think the major life science companies hire too many scientists from Heritage University.
-
Exactly my point, tax money wasted. And not just wasted, but spent against public interest, as the "doctors" of these universities will probably slow down the scientific progress.
-
The public's tax dollars should be used to promote what the public wants.
Teaching creationism is the will of the people.
If you don't like it, move to China.
-
The public's tax dollars should be used to promote what the public wants.
Teaching creationism is the will of the people.
If you don't like it, move to China.
For the time being, at least. Sometimes the majority will is dumb.
-
For the time being, at least. Sometimes the majority will is dumb.
"Sometimes"?!
(http://www.guildhaven.org/images/smilies/rotf.gif)
-
I'm resisting the urge to give that classic Hitler quote 'What good fortune for Governments that the people don't think'.
Fuck.
-
I don't see how that applies in this case. The current administration is the most church-friendly in decades, true, but it was voted in with nearly half the vote. So half of us wanted this kind of faith-friendly environment. It's not brainless people being led by nefarious dictators, but people of faith who want their point of view reflected in their government.
Face up to it. You live in a religious country. Why should a minority of non-believers get their way here?
-
I equate faith with believing in something for which there is no evidence. To me, this signifies the non-use of one's brain, and not thinking. Religion=not thinking. Religion is allowing someone else to do your thinking for you, whether that happens to be a televangelist, a smiling pipe-smoker, or a mouldy old book.
I think that the non-thinking (I'm being nice here, they're not brainless, just conditioned to resist the urge to think independantly) masses ARE being led by nefarious dictators of the worst kind imaginable; those who claim to hold the keys to heaven.
-
So, again, you are a contrarian in a nation of believers. Think whatever you want of them -- that is your right. But in the end they will run this country the way they see fit. There's more like them than there are like you. They are in charge.
-
I equate faith with believing in something for which there is no evidence. To me, this signifies the non-use of one's brain, and not thinking. Religion=not thinking.
I have no idea where the stereotype of the condescending, arrogant atheist comes from.
(http://img169.imageshack.us/img169/3493/educatedqh0it3.jpg)
"Clearly, this is no God and if you think otherwise, you simply are incapable of rational thought."
-
So, again, you are a contrarian in a nation of believers. Think whatever you want of them -- that is your right. But in the end they will run this country the way they see fit. There's more like them than there are like you. They are in charge.
I have no problem with them bossing one another about inside the borders they've drawn in the mud, I only pause to remark that it will eventually destroy them (whatever, the majority wanted it!). This only serves to demonstrate the shortcomings of democracy, but that's very far off topic.
Xol, I don't know how to say that less arrogantly. A religion is a substitute for critical thinking, and I say this as a logical truth. Why should a person think for themselves if they've already got the answers (re-inventing the wheel?).
There are advantages to this, for example people who aren't very good at thinking originally don't have to strain themselves, because they've got a book with answers already. It's good for the power-hungry, because they can simply convince the righteous that they've got God's back. It's good for the government, because there's no need to fund scientific research if nobody cares anymore.
My definition of "faith" seems to matches that of the dictionary, arrogant or not.
-
Well, many generations of brilliant thinkers serve to demonstrate that faith and the ability to think critically are not incompatible.
You can use logic to refute or discredit many tenets of organized religion, but the underlying questions (whether or not there is a controlling sentience, or whether or not our consciousness survives our bodies) cannot be logically proven or refuted. You can be certain one way or the other, and base your arguments on personal experiece, instinct, or an educated guess, but one argument is no more logical than another.
Compare religion to the question of whether we are alone in the universe. You can conjecture all you like, but until someone visits us, there is no proof. It is both logical and illogical to assume there are sentient extraterrestrial life forms.
-
Dude, Lacerda has already visited us...
Ooopsss.
-
I have no idea where the stereotype of the condescending, arrogant atheist comes from.
(http://img169.imageshack.us/img169/3493/educatedqh0it3.jpg)
"Clearly, this is no God and if you think otherwise, you simply are incapable of rational thought."
Well if one takes rational to mean logical, then yeah I'd say that in a lot of cases an unfounded belief in something for which there is no demonstratable reason to believe is illogical. It is a logical fallacy to believe something simply because there is no evidence to disprove it.
It is a bit douchy of Dawkins to say that Haggard (who is completely heterosexual)'s little rally reminds him of Nazi Germany, that didn't strike me as necessary. Still, Haggard is delightfully ironic when he snidely says that Dawkins shouldn't be so arrogant.
Every religion I've looked at is loaded up with things that wouldn't seem out of place in a kid's bed time story, yet are somehow granted legitimacy by virtue of the fact that they're really old and comfort people (who need authority figures on some psychological level?).
I'd say that there is nothing preventing a person who believes that they are in direct communication with an invisible, all-knowing being (who for some reason requires their servitude) from also thinking rationally about topics that their particular god hasn't said anything about, but the underlying purpose of religion is to pass on one person's (or god's, whatever) thinking to you so that you can be enlightened by it.
Hell, there are many extremely smart people who happen to believe in invisible people, but on that particular issue, and on all those touched by said invisible person, they are not making a lot of sense.
UPDATE: Here's an interesting, and relevant thought:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=GhwRHtDA0oY
It rambles a bit, but it generally made me think.
-
Right on ivan. (Sorry quote buttons don't work on my browser ).
I don't see a conflict in creationism and biology and geology. I also don't think th bible tells you to run your life all that much differently than the moral standards most people would live by anyway. That being said I really don't think most the people who go to church and say they believe in god really follow what the bible says anyway.
-
You can conjecture all you like, but until someone visits us, there is no proof.
I wonder what side of that thinking you're on. =P
-
(Sorry quote buttons don't work on my browser ).
[quote]You can fake it manually by typing or (Copy&Paste) like this here[/quote]
I don't see a conflict in creationism and biology and geology.
Neither do I, if you fix the wording to
" ... and god said, 'let there be a big bang', and god saw it and said ' Oy-Yah-Vay', that's gonna take forever to stop spinning !' " ...
well, that would at least help my re-belief along considerably.
I also don't think th bible tells you to run your life all that much differently than the moral standards most people would live by anyway.
That depends entirely on what part and how much one chooses to follow from it ... which varies so much it makes my head spin. (Anybody remember that 'Dear Dr. Laura' letter from about 6-7 years ago ?) there are some pretty whacky rules & regulations all over in there.
That being said I really don't think most the people who go to church and say they believe in god really follow what the bible says anyway.
Exactly ... But, now I'm confused as to where you're going with that in light of the other stuff you said.
-
Right on ivan. (Sorry quote buttons don't work on my browser ).
I don't see a conflict in creationism and biology and geology.
Of course you don't. If you believe in a magical creator, then everything in the world can be explained. It's much more difficult to figure out how things came about without a magical creator.
I also don't think th bible tells you to run your life all that much differently than the moral standards most people would live by anyway.
Have you read the Bible? You know, the one that endorses slavery, subjugation, war, discrimination, &c. And what about all the dietary restrictions? Or Jesus' admonition to forsake your family and follow him alone? How many of the Ten Commandments are not routinely broken? No, most people actually do not live by the Bible's moral standards.
That being said I really don't think most the people who go to church and say they believe in god really follow what the bible says anyway.
So if most people do what the Good Book says because they want to, and not because the Good Book tells them to, then maybe we can do without it. Right?
-
[quote]You can fake it manually by typing or (Copy&Paste) like this here[/quote]
Exactly ... But, now I'm confused as to where you're going with that in light of the other stuff you said.
That was a challenge for me, too. I couldn't see how his last statement could be reconciled with the one before it. But I finally realized: That post did not evolve from one point to another in a logical or reasonable manner. God created that post whole, and His ways are mysterious.
-
I wonder what side of that thinking you're on. =P
Ah-hahaha.
I'm not as clever as I thought.
-
That post did not evolve from one point to another in a logical or reasonable manner. God created that post whole, and His ways are mysterious.
bigAssHAR :lol:
-
Right on ivan. (Sorry quote buttons don't work on my browser ).
I don't see a conflict in creationism and biology and geology. I also don't think th bible tells you to run your life all that much differently than the moral standards most people would live by anyway. That being said I really don't think most the people who go to church and say they believe in god really follow what the bible says anyway.
Do you know ANYTHING about creationism at all? It's at complete odds with geology and biology at just about every level. The Bible actually does tell you to do things quite a bit differently than most people, taken as a whole (so I'm not just going by 10 commandments here, but all the fun Old Testament bits about stoning as well). I do agree with your last statement, and thank the (possibly) non-existant god for that.
-
This is (at least to me) a classic one of 'those things' that got passed around a fair time ago ... thought it was worth a re-print here for those that maybe missed it or forgot it. A number of variants existed but they all had the same spirit, this is the one I kept ....
============================================================
Dr. Laura Schlessinger is a US radio personality who dispenses advice to
people who call in to her radio show. Recently, she said that, as an
observant Orthodox Jew, homosexuality is an abomination according to
Leviticus 18:22, and cannot be condoned under any circumstance. The
following is an open letter to Dr. Laura penned by a US resident, which was posted on the Internet. It's
funny, as well as informative:
Dear Dr. Laura:
Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's Law. I
have learned a great deal from your show, and try to share that
knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend the
homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind them that Leviticus
18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination. End of debate. I do need
some advice from you, however, regarding some of the other specific laws
and how to follow them.
1. When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a
pleasing odour for the Lord - Lev.1:9. The problem is my neighbours.
They claim the odour is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?
2. I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in
Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair
price for her?
3. I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her
period of menstrual cleanliness - Lev.15:19-24. The problem is, how do I
tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offence.
4. Lev. 25:44 states that I may indeed possess slaves, both male and
female, provided they are purchased from neighbouring nations. A friend
of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you
clarify? Why can't I own Canadians?
5. I have a neighbour who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2
clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill
him myself?
6. A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an
abomination - Lev. 11:10, it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality.
I don't agree. Can you settle this?
7. Lev. 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have
a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does
my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle room here?
8. Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair
around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by
Lev.19:27. How should they die?
9. I know from Lev. 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me
unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?
10. My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev. 19:19 by planting two
different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments
made of two different kinds of thread cotton/polyesterblend). He also
tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to
all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them?
-Lev.24:10-16
Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family
affair like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev.20:14)
I know you have studied these things extensively, so I am confident you
can help. Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is eternal
and unchanging.
Your devoted disciple and adoring fan,
Jack
- actual author unknown
-
I don't think somebody who has naked pictures of herself floating around on the internet is in any position preach about morality.
-
I'd be very interested to see what a society that actually enforced all the biblical laws would look like.
-
...or someone who's been divorced more than once, has "shacked up", and has willfully conceived out of wedlock.
But she has that all covered.
A hypocrite says, 'Do what I say, not what I do,' rather than, 'Do what I say, not what I did'.
Yes, she's a big fat phony. However, I admire her ability to maintain a following and make a splendid living at it.
-
That depends entirely on what part and how much one chooses to follow from it ... which varies so much it makes my head spin. (Anybody remember that 'Dear Dr. Laura' letter from about 6-7 years ago ?) there are some pretty wacky rules & regulations all over in there.
I think most those laws were more for the people of those times than ours. Really didn't read the old testament to much mostly just the new one.
Exactly ... But, now I'm confused as to where you're going with that in light of the other stuff you said.
The two parts of my post came from two different lines of thought. My thinking on different parts of a subject are often contradictory.
The first part about people living close to what the bible says was wrong, I meant it more as following the general spirit of the bible. Witch to me is basically follow the 10 commandment, love one another, love thy enemy, and generally try to help each other out. I am not sure however after thinking about it that people actauly act that way.
-
So essentially you just picked the bits that sounded like you already and ignored the rest?
-
...or someone who's been divorced more than once, has "shacked up", and has willfully conceived out of wedlock.
But she has that all covered.
Yes, she's a big fat phony. However, I admire her ability to maintain a following and make a splendid living at it.
See, this is why I hardly ever try to give people moral advice. I've got the morals of an alleycat. :|
-
Meow!