This man comes up to you and says, “I am Phil, the latest prophet of God.”
And you say, “Really? How do you know that?”
He says, “I have this book that says so. Look.”
And he hands you a folded piece of paper, which you open up, and it says, … Continue reading “The Liar’s Holy Book”
This is the TL;DR summary of Cummins at work. Full details here.
That smacks of intellectual dishonesty to me. Continue reading “Denise Cummins – Would You Trust Her?”
Paul Bloom has been pushing for some time the idea that empathy can be troublesome. I don’t think Bloom says anywhere that empathy is totally bad news. The point he is making is that in many crucial examples it seems empathy overpowers our rationality and leads us to make bad decisions.
Continue reading “Paul Bloom Misrepresented”
Oh, good, another bunch of questions for atheists – as if the believers haven’t been told often enough.
10 Questions For Every Atheist – “Some Questions Atheist Cannot Truly and Honestly REALLY Answer! Which leads to some interesting conclusions…”
1. How Did You Become an Atheist? Continue reading “Ten Answers To Christian Questions”
The lack of an authoritative source, other than the texts, makes pretty much anyone a specialist on Islam, and at the very same time an ignorant fool. Don’t worry, the irony of me presenting a breakdown of Islam isn’t lost on me. Islam is a crazy world. Welcome to it. No. really, you’re welcome to it.
A question put to me has finally prompted me to write this post, because the inevitable demand for a ‘brief’ explanation of my view simply cannot be met:
On the one hand you say you understand the difference between Islam and Islamism. On the other you speak about “Islam” as if it is a violent ideology that compels its followers to violence — as if there is no difference between Islamism and Islam. I’m confused.
What follows is a convenient reference. It’s a simplistic breakdown of Islam from my point of view.
Islam is a violent ideology that compels Muslims to violence – just not all the time and against all people, and this is where we find apparent contradictions. They seem like contradictions only if you buy into the sales pitch that Islam is a religion of peace.
The inerrancy of the Quran is explicit and accepted by all Muslims that I’ve ever come across and read about – except for reformists. And some sects of Islam, like Ahmadiyya, emphasise peace more than other sects do.
[Updated 4/10/2017]
The question of what is and what is not ‘terrorism’ becomes most contentious when it’s not a Muslim doing the killing.
The reason is that there are clearly plenty of Islamic terror attacks, and far fewer for any other religion or ideology, and Muslims and other apologists for Islam don’t like it that Islamic terrorism gets so much attention. They’d like non-Islamic non-terrorist attacks to be called terrorist attacks, or they’d like the world to make less of the ‘Islamic’ in Islamic terrorism (“Nothing to do with Islam”, “Not a true Muslim”, “Terrorism has no religion”, …). And when the real world doesn’t comply, they make fake claims about ‘Islamophobia’ and ‘racism’.
Is there a lone killer, that’s crazy (crazier than run of the mill crazy ideologues) and is he unaffiliated with a particular group or acting without sanction from a particular group?
He’s a crazy lone wolf killer.
Is he doing it in the name of his ideological group in order to strike terror into the target?
He’s a lone wolf terrorist.
Continue reading “A Guide To Terrorists For Idiots”These whitewash pieces that excuse Islam from any responsibility for Islamic terrorism are two-a-penny. A regular culprit is Mehdi Hasan. But today we have a half-baked piece from Haroon Moghul: Double standards: The only difference between a Christian gunman and a Muslim terrorist is racism
Marek Sullivan wrote a piece in Counterpunch: Sam Harris’s Quantum Universe (or, How to Say One Thing While Meaning Another)
The title should be Sam Harris’s Quantum Universe (or, How to Say One Thing Harris says and have people like Marek read another)
Continue reading “Marek Sullivan Needs Help”
Some stupidity like this is doing the rounds:
1) Being an atheist is okay. Being an atheist and shaming religions and spirituality as silly and not real is not okay
2) Being a Christian is okay. Being homophobic, misogynistic, racist or otherwise hateful person in the name of Christianity is not okay
3) Being a reindeer is okay. Bullying and excluding another reindeer because it has a shiny red nose is not okay
“I am equally if not more so angry that these people should do so through some misguided and warped grasp of my faith.”
Come on, Miqdaad, this is not convincing.
Continue reading “Another Empty Claim That ISIS ‘Warp’ The Religion”
Scott Eric Kaufman’s Salon article headlines with
Sam Harris slams liberals who “followed Noam Chomsky off the edge of the world”
and sub-headlines with
He’s right to criticize Chomsky’s solipsistic view of foreign policy, but this might not be the best way to do it
Damned with faint praise.
Continue reading “Scott Eric Kaufman – Friend or Foe?”
So, in response to the Oregon shootings, this was Myers: Is atheism bankrupt?
He references Ashley Millers post, which I cover here: Ashley Miller Invites Our Atheist Self Flagellation.
We had another mass murder in America this week, and there’s no way around it: it was by a “none”, someone who hated organized religion, and who described himself as Not Religious, Not Religious, but Spiritual. If he were participating in a survey, we’d embrace him as one of us, part of our growing majority.
Well, that’s right, we might, with regard to his rejection of organised religion. He would be a contribution to the statistics of the increase in irreligion (as all we atheists are). Continue reading “Is Myers Morally and Intellectually Bankrupt?”
Ashley Miller wrote a post: Atheist tribalism poisons everything
We [atheists] need to talk about how we think that religion is the reason that bad things happen in the world.
I think we’d need to talk about that if that was what we thought. Continue reading “Ashley Miller Invites Our Atheist Self Flagellation”
TheHumanist.com is the daily online news site of the American Humanist Association.
On 28 September 2015 it ran with this post: Atheists Have an Anti-Muslim Bigotry Problem by Trav Mamone
Now I’m sure there are atheists that are bigoted towards Muslims. But the target of the post was Dawkins and Maher, who are not anti-Muslim bigots, though they are anti-Islam.
That distinction seems to be beyond the pseudo-liberals. Continue reading “Trav’s Travesty of BS in TheHumanist.com, On Dawkins”
Yes, Richard Dawkins really did tweet in support of Ahmed Mohamed (Storify link below). Dawkins tweeted that the arrest was wrong. He also tweeted many questions, questioning some of the points various other people were making.
But, heaven forbid, he was a little too fastidious in pointing out that stuffing a clock guts into a box isn’t an ‘invention’. For that he’s an anti-Muslim racist bigot, apparently. Even though he apologised for being overly sensitive to the correct use of terms (we know what he thinks about ‘Evolution is just a theory’).
Yes, Dawkins tweeted. That was enough for many of his haters. Continue reading “Dawkins Tweets Ahmed Support”
And here we go with another religious justification for torturing people, from Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby.
Of course he doesn’t like to torture sick people, or to use his religious belief to justify such torture. I thought, well, if he’s prepared to use ridiculous rhetoric to make his case, I might too. But then I thought again, Continue reading “Justin Welby Likes To Torture Sick People?”
Cardinal Vincent Nichols and Chief Rabbi Ephraim Mirvis reveal their cunning plan to bring those dreaded Muslims on side and blame everything on the atheists: In the secular age, it is crucial for people of faith to stick together. Good luck with that.
This is such a brazen plea for anti-secularism, and a worry about Islam, disguised as the reaching out of the hand of friendship. Many Muslims will see right through it, as atheists see right through the machinations of all religions. Continue reading “Cardinal Vincent Nichols and Chief Rabbi Ephraim Mirvis Have A Cunning Plan”
In a comment on the matter of atheists needing faith, Edward Silha gives one of the better responses with the following points:
There is no need to use the terms “faith” or “belief” when discussing the existence or nonexistence of a god or gods. As a scientist, I draw conclusions based on evidence and logic. That leads me to the following conclusions.
1. I cannot prove there are no gods; therefore I am not an atheist.
2. I cannot prove there is a god; therefore I am not a theist.
3. Therefore, I am an agnostic.
The trouble is that the three points are really logical, not evidential points. And this is part of the problem when discussing atheism and agnosticism: Continue reading “My Atheism – It’s not Agnosticism”
You’re with it by now, right? Lauren Nelson (Lake?) loves Richard Dawkins. She wrote a crappy post, got called out on it, then on her blog told us how we got it wrong, that she loves him but he could do better. It’s all been said, in comments, on twitter, on other blogs, … but … I don’t want to be left out!!!
So, there was this: Richard Dawkins Fails Spectacularly on Feminism and Islam – Lauren Nelson, on Friendly Atheist. Continue reading “Dawkins, How do I love thee? Let me count the ways”
Ramblings 