tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-47920248206653003402012-01-29T15:33:21.065-08:00Tales and thoughts from the internet's only deist naturalist theistic evolutionist ID sympathetic traditional orthodox Catholic sinner!Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.comBlogger1781100tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-74964071059482176882012-01-27T23:33:00.000-08:002012-01-27T23:56:45.999-08:00

Do you ever find it weird that abortion is phrased that way so often? "A woman's right to choose."Alright. Choose what? Why is the word 'abortion' sawed off from the very statement that's so often cited in support of it?"I support a woman's right to choose!"I no longer allow this phrase to pass on by. It's pretty fucking insulting, really. Can you imagine cutesy, civil language like this being

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com11tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-33368936012339093642012-01-24T13:11:00.000-08:002012-01-24T13:11:34.222-08:00

Since I just knocked Romney, I should mention one thing in his favor. He's given considerable amounts - around 15% - of his income to charity. Considering this comes hot on the heels of my arguing that Christian capitalists should be particularly mindful not only of how they spend their own wealth, but how they encourage others to spend theirs, it'd be low of me not to highlight this point in

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-62165655769049455362012-01-23T17:14:00.000-08:002012-01-23T17:14:44.655-08:00

Ahh, Gingrich. I question your scruples, even your record, but I can't question your style. How can I not have a little more respect for the man after a move like that? Look at the grace he delivered that blow with. It's like he somehow managed to distill several decades of pent up conservative anger at the media and unleash it all, then and there, right when he was supposed to go down in flames

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-47096061465761435232012-01-20T02:23:00.000-08:002012-01-20T02:23:00.316-08:00

Given the recent, minor exchange prompted by my distributivism post, I want to try and explain the bare handful of interested people what my positions on these things are. I'll start with the short version: I view any perspective which  treats these questions as fundamentally legislative questions to be fundamentally mistaken. And now for the long version. And I mean pretty long by this blog's

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-60674038752959162872012-01-18T20:01:00.000-08:002012-01-18T20:39:40.673-08:00

Shocking if you're completely inept and need things spelled out for you anyway. From his 'Why I'm Leaving Freethought Blogs Back to My Old One' post, let's... Actually, let's just stop for a moment and parse that sentence: why he's leaving freethought blogs back to his old one. Perhap he thunk it the thought was to be given out for free, but it be no be doing that, so buh-bye. Your atheist

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com6tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-31550014293861340452012-01-18T14:37:00.000-08:002012-01-18T14:37:11.278-08:00

GPS devices that steer you away from high-crime areas are racist! This is one of those situations where the person protesting against racism is making allegations that would prompt accusations of racism were they repeated, word for word, by someone else. An app that steers away from high crime areas? That's going to hurt a lot of minority businesses! 'High crime' and 'minority concentration'

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-38875875847492164912012-01-18T02:21:00.001-08:002012-01-18T02:25:44.909-08:00

The next time I see a comment start off with an insincere "I'm a little confused here..." or words to that effect, I'm tempted to blankly ask, "What's so confusing, you ****ing cretin? The logic is simple. Try reading it again."A large amount of internet discussion volume nowadays is composed of crappy discussion flair. Coarse language and rudeness isn't much better, but it is at least slightly.

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-89962843246823640732012-01-17T04:41:00.000-08:002012-01-17T04:41:29.903-08:00

From the wikipedia, with emphasis: Distributism favors the elimination of social security on the basis that it further alienates man by making him more dependent on the Servile State. Distributists such as Dorothy Day did not favor social security when it was introduced by the United States government. This rejection of this new program was due to the direct influence of the ideas of Hilaire

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-14504611019542573202012-01-17T03:45:00.000-08:002012-01-17T04:12:14.231-08:00

I've been glancing over some of what Codg has been putting up regarding distributism. I won't pretend that I perfectly understand it. At a glance, I frankly like it. A lot. I like the focus on the family - the traditional family, even - as the primary unit of society, the idea unit which is kept in mind when policy decisions are made. It's probably the most controversial part of it nowadays,

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com17tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-29569237049598917222012-01-11T23:00:00.000-08:002012-01-11T23:02:31.433-08:00

This controversial argument was developed by Gomer Pyle and Captain Marvel.*bzzz*"What is the Shazam Cosmological argument?"(It's crappy, but I had to get that joke somewhere, so here it is.)

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-3924476578913286332012-01-10T21:35:00.000-08:002012-01-10T21:43:42.465-08:00

Atheists angry at Tebow for praying! How shocking! Wait, no. I mean how hilarious and freaking typical. Complete, of course, with the "an atheist lectures Christians on how to be Christian with a bible quote, mangling the understanding in the process" routine.Of course, they also know for a fact that Tebow is just trying to look pious. He's "totally faking it". You couldn't make atheists look

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-16678058139601558072012-01-10T15:03:00.000-08:002012-01-10T15:03:23.430-08:00

What's missing from this article? The same things often missing from such articles: connecting the actions with science or scientists. America used Guatemalans for an STD study. Scientists are working on a cure for cancer. Corporations use animals in experiments. Scientists have developed prosthetics for dogs. Countries are engaged in research to discover how to wipe out an enemy's food supply

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-76686656472092603402012-01-09T16:32:00.000-08:002012-01-09T16:32:01.705-08:00

I give you... The Whitest Kids U Know:

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-62438805958566185002012-01-05T14:40:00.000-08:002012-01-05T16:15:36.529-08:00

I'm not a big fan of Rick Santorum. I don't dislike him, but - despite my being what most would call 'socially conservative' across the board - I've not been all that enamored with him for a while.First, because I always get a little bit leery of social conservatives who make their social conservatism their main platform. Part of that is cynicism on my part - if they don't have the detached

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com19tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-59013948722004994662011-12-31T20:04:00.000-08:002011-12-31T20:05:20.017-08:00

I mean, I said in the title. Do I need to repeat it?

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-88543424393554944712011-12-29T23:07:00.000-08:002011-12-29T23:18:04.356-08:00

Over at Reppert's blog, the local Village Idiot atheist yammers on at length about something (philosophy of intentionality) he demonstrably knows nothing about. People fight him and point out his flaws. He doesn't understand, or care to understand: he's too busy angrily denouncing all things theological, because he's certain that to reject naturalism is to embrace Christianity.Meanwhile at

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com6tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-61731572085218908462011-12-22T01:59:00.000-08:002011-12-22T01:59:04.339-08:00

Glenn Peoples writes an obit for Hitchens that goes against the grain. I like it. Stern, but not mean. Honest. I'd probably have done it with more reserve - I'm picky about my dial between 'respect and courtesy' and 'being blunt' when it comes to a situation like death. But I gotta say, I like Glenn's entry more than I dislike it.

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-28288138368753147592011-12-21T02:12:00.001-08:002011-12-21T02:26:53.128-08:00

I stumbled upon this comment over at Quodbileta:No, you fools. Hitchens wasn't a great thinker, but he was a great--I won't pussy out and say "very good" or something--writer, speaker, and general stylist of words. I say this as an orthodox Catholic who was against the war in Iraq and hostile to most of his other views. I saw him speak at the University of Tennessee in 2009, and he was both

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-48841689242614936292011-12-14T00:01:00.000-08:002011-12-14T00:01:17.799-08:00

Stop me if you've heard this bit before, or something very much like it. The problem with the New Atheists is that they are beholden to scientism. They have, understandably, a tremendous respect for the power of science - as well as reason - but their enthusiasm for science has combined with their ignorance of philosophy and metaphysics. The result is that they fail to appreciate the power and

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-38180347324440703502011-12-08T18:25:00.000-08:002011-12-08T18:29:30.712-08:00

American soldier's remains have been disposed of by dumping into a landfill.The government should be sued immediately, on the grounds that the soldiers were given an atheist-style burial without their consent.

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-81651607109113912312011-12-06T17:36:00.000-08:002011-12-06T18:18:18.564-08:00

I see Feser chimed in on the Dawkins-Craig debate fiasco. And at this point it really is a full-fledged fiasco, at least in an intellectual sense. Anyone who'd stumble on this blog doesn't need a recap of the events - but what may be necessary is a convenient distilling of what's been going on since William Lane Craig's UK tour.Here it is: Dawkins is afraid of debating Craig because all odds

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com7tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-81043457016142590642011-11-20T01:33:00.000-08:002011-11-20T01:39:54.222-08:00

Bam.And before non-Catholic Christians mention - yes, I know there's a tremendous amount of non-Catholic Christian scientists too. But I stumbled upon this one by accident and was pleasantly surprised.

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-69200867046397326872011-11-15T00:15:00.001-08:002011-11-15T00:17:37.606-08:00

A simple question.Let's say I hear about a seemingly gratuitous evil. Say, a woman senselessly stabbed to death in New York.I say, "That woman's death has inspired me to devote my life to charity." Assume I follow through on that pledge.Since there was an apparent causal link between the woman's death and my devoting my life to charity, does that mean her death was no longer seemingly gratuitous?

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com10tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-49923222347874179812011-10-28T21:11:00.000-07:002011-10-28T21:17:13.556-07:00

Herman Cain is a black man who knows his place, says MSNBC analyst.Really, I don't like any of the people running for president. Even Cain seems to be a guy who is deeply entangled with the financial forces that routinely bilk the government out of millions. But, I'll make a prediction.If Cain manages to win the GOP nomination - if Cain manages so much as to win the VP slot and take on a

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com6tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-74318490856977917682011-10-09T09:57:00.001-07:002011-10-09T10:03:42.637-07:00

I'm lately realizing that quite a number of people who maintain a hatred for metaphysics and who claim to reject metaphysical reasoning don't seem to realize that materialism and naturalism are metaphysical views.

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com10tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-43630725400752288122011-10-04T16:36:00.000-07:002011-10-04T16:39:31.400-07:00

To the late Ralph Steinman, congratulations - of sorts - are in order for his belated Nobel prize. But here's the problem, straight from the article.He never knew his life's work had been crowned with the highest accolade science can bestow,"Science" doesn't bestow anything. In this case, a committee "bestowed" the award on Ralph Steinman.There's a reason this word is treated like a person, and

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-15939390869844716362011-09-27T03:41:00.001-07:002011-09-27T03:50:28.530-07:00

Brandon over at Siris has an interesting reference regarding Martin Luther King on extremism. It helps to build a thought I've had for a while now: Ranting against "extremism", as if extremism itself were the problem, is nonsense. Especially in America, a country founded by extremists. Ones who were willing to kill over taxes, no less.And of course, there's Martin Luther King himself. You know,

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-65850163799437578862011-09-22T17:00:00.001-07:002011-09-22T17:00:37.940-07:00

L O freaking L.

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-14148039691136429402011-09-19T18:43:00.001-07:002011-09-19T18:45:04.200-07:00

What kind of a person describes their religious beliefs as their "faith tradition"? Do they also describe their spouse as "life partner"?Why are more and more people talking like corporate and government press releases in casual conversation?

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-50885070766860690202011-09-18T23:15:00.001-07:002011-09-18T23:31:50.902-07:00

So we're on to part two now. And all I can say is, "Huh."On the one hand, I liked that Vox brought up the general scope of what qualifies as God and gods, and how atheists are committed to rejecting the existence of all of the above. On the other hand, Vox goes by a dictionary definition that identifies as key that gods are 'beyond nature' (supernatural), whereas my reply is 'What is and isn't

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com6tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-17807985681677251932011-09-08T23:17:00.000-07:002011-09-08T23:23:14.359-07:00

How to prove to any individual that God exists, in 3 easy steps.Step 1: Find out something the individual believes exists.Step 2: Define God as that same thing.Voila! You're done.Ah, but wait. You're an atheist? Then here's how you prove God doesn't exist!Step 1: Find out something the individual doesn't believe exists.Step 2: Define God as that same thing.So easy and simple!And best of all, it

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com11tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-85874086484872496052011-09-02T03:00:00.001-07:002011-09-02T03:43:54.819-07:00

So, an article by John Farrell is being discussed on Catholic blogs recently? Let me guess: He's causing controversy because of his defense of Catholic theology and/or moral teaching, or his stern criticism of the Cult of Gnu's abuses of science, and he's doing so by displaying he actually is more than thinly informed about the details he's discussing? Ha! I'm kidding. He's playing Catholic

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com7tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-56843984773875224952011-08-29T20:03:00.000-07:002011-08-29T20:16:18.783-07:00

If a man walks into a room full of people, yells "Allahu Akbar!" and starts shooting, that gets classified as a religious crime. If a man walks into a room full of people, yells "Death to the capitalist pigs!" and starts shooting, that gets classified as a crime. But it's a secular crime. Somehow, it evades that distinction. You can go to the wikipedia page on secular ethics and you'll be

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-80264331476545263042011-08-28T20:46:00.000-07:002011-08-28T20:50:09.458-07:00

When a man starts to complain to me about "the patriarchy" in anything approaching a serious tone, my instinctive reaction is "Get the hell away from me, you gerbil of a person." I could explain why I think "the patriarchy" is nonsense, why men get a bad rap, why modern discussions of sex, gender, and "roles" is deluded, but I'm not trying to make a an intellectual point here. I'm just being

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-58107303967566163432011-08-21T01:52:00.000-07:002011-08-21T11:09:29.068-07:00

Here's a gimmick I keep seeing repeat over and over. In fact I'm seeing it happen over at Ed Feser's blog - Ed being a philosopher I admire greatly, and who has explained Aquinas, Aristotle, and metaphysics in a tremendously accessible way. The short of it is this: Erin MacDonald was tapped to be the little philosophical junkyard dog of Jerry Coyne, and was relied on to attack Ed's book "The

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-31418890746433522782011-08-08T03:01:00.000-07:002011-08-08T03:06:00.439-07:00

An atheist blogger can routinely mock everyone who disagrees with him as 'Jebus worshipers', deride theists as fools, and the blogger's fans will cheer him on.Refer to the blogger as a hack and a blowhard, and suddenly they tense up, accusing you of being mean-spirited.I think this is related to the atheist habit of screaming how anyone who believes in God is a child and a fool, then marveling at

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-17009915663374924492011-07-26T15:38:00.001-07:002011-07-26T15:38:38.442-07:00

Do skeptics who go to camp sleep in debunk beds?

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com13tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-91454041690292500862011-07-15T12:58:00.001-07:002011-07-15T13:09:53.805-07:00

Finished up an argument with a materialist a couple of days ago. A few things I've learned.* If a person uses a lot of :) symbols when they argue, and makes plenty of indirect insults rather than direct ones, a surprising number of theists will go on about how nice and civil and polite and smart the person is. Apparently the internet has reached a point where you can be a smug, inept, insulting

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com6tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-48767656825740238762011-06-23T12:18:00.001-07:002011-06-23T12:23:17.390-07:00

Tales from the internet.Being told by an atheist that my thoughts that there are groups of atheists intent on spreading atheism is a delusion, and that in reality atheists do not form groups or have interests in common related to atheism.Putting the Cult of Gnu aside - which is putting one hell of a thing aside - you have everything from the American Atheists to the Beyond Belief conference

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-30460530334516783112011-06-14T23:41:00.000-07:002011-06-14T23:43:26.013-07:00

Did the whole country become more strongly pro-life when I wasn't paying attention?I don't have an article to go with this. It's just a feeling I'm getting - something out there in the ether. Even a curmudgeon like myself feels the urge to actually start attending some rallies.

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-72976102583700851442011-05-28T13:16:00.000-07:002011-05-28T13:19:28.208-07:00

Found linked at Vic Reppert's blog was this piece by Bas van Fraassen on Materialism and Naturalism, saying what I've been saying for years now, but doing so better.One great quote: To identify what naturalism is, apart from something praiseworthy, I have found nigh-impossible.

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-34527604474688425532011-05-23T01:50:00.001-07:002011-05-23T02:06:38.762-07:00

If there's one objection I have to Thomism, it's not with the content so much as the approach I see Thomism offering. See, I'm a big fan of Ed Feser, and due to him, a growing fan of scholastic and classical thought. I've learned a tremendous amount by my spur-of-the-moment decision to buy The Last Superstition when it first came out, and it's done wonders for sharpening my understanding of

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-56501265368356308532011-05-18T18:16:00.000-07:002011-05-18T18:25:48.123-07:00

Woit and company give their thoughts on Stephen Hawking's musings as of late.Their short take: Hawking no longer is making much sense (on the cosmological end of things) and has basically given up intellectually. They're engaging in some fairly heavy psychoanalyzing, which I'd normally say is off limits - but Hawking sees fit to psychoanalyze everyone else, so screw it.Oddly enough, I think what

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-78941919619830551132011-05-16T12:35:00.000-07:002011-05-16T12:53:04.124-07:00

One problem I've had with the claim that there is no life after death is that it involves making a bet that even a die-hard atheist shouldn't be confident making.See, the focus is normally on particular kinds of life after death - "you die and then you're in heaven/some place". Now, I think there's actually some very suggestive evidence there, empirical and philosophical and otherwise. Now what

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-23118697946522172902011-05-11T17:49:00.000-07:002011-05-13T13:39:10.997-07:00

Just saw a New Atheist (complete with the self-description of "gnu atheist") over at Valicella's blog. The cult-like behavior practically glowed off his responses.* Constantly talking about "we". As in "what we, gnu atheists, believe". You know, because he's a representative. Because he's even conducted a single scientific poll. Not only making use of this word and imagined position, but doing so

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-10437442517156033652011-05-10T15:16:00.000-07:002011-05-10T15:21:06.819-07:00

For some reason, I never see this question asked, or at least not nearly enough:"Do you wish the God of Christianity existed?"Clearly you could guess the answer in most cases - I'm talking new atheists here - but still, I think it's important to ask the question that way. Though I also suspect most NAs would refuse to answer the question.Another question I'd like to see thrown around:"If the God

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-54100962415351315212011-05-09T17:50:00.000-07:002011-05-09T18:00:52.416-07:00

Well, damn. Well done, sir. I laughed out loud at several points, and I'm a pretty stodgy bastard when it comes to humor.It's rare to find someone who can mix anything approaching conservative positions with humor, but this was damn near flawless. And on a social issue no less.I haven't seen much of his other work, but this guy's style should be regarded as a kind of blueprint.

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-44716753324827071622011-05-04T00:14:00.000-07:002011-05-04T00:23:58.589-07:00

Paraphrased: "How come Christians never let me argue against THEIR God? Instead they always want to talk about why there's something rather than nothing, or first causes or things like that! I don't want to talk about those gods, I want to talk about theirs!"Except an atheist isn't supposed to deny only that specific God over there, but God and gods, period. And understanding those fundamental

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-30182903105943460802011-04-29T20:43:00.001-07:002011-04-29T21:25:12.500-07:00

IMP: ..And anyway, Crude, there are no compelling arguments for God's existence.Crude: Sure there are. Plenty of 'em in fact.IMP: I disagree.Crude: Not really.IMP: What?Crude: You believe in an infinite number of universes, such that all physical possibilities are realized, right?IMP: Yes.Crude: Alright. So there's an infinite number of you, all throughout these universes.IMP: Okay.Crude: Well,

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-70565810186122498232011-04-27T22:30:00.001-07:002011-04-27T22:47:37.843-07:00

So apparently racism is the advance reason Obama may have trouble during his re-election. Granted, he successfully won the presidency, but damnit, this time the racists are actually coming out to vote! Or, perhaps, the racists have made huge gains and have converted millions to their cause since 2008. Hard to say.I have trouble even getting charged up about this sort of thing anymore. I suppose

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-60135337844406663792011-04-25T20:38:00.001-07:002011-04-25T20:47:27.543-07:00

Leibniz more than any other philosopher gets the short end of the stick, doesn't he? The man was a genius. He invented binary code, and so many other things. He had all kinds of interesting philosophical ideas. An intellectual powerhouse by any measure.But some pseudonymous prick makes fun of him for one eccentric (though in my view, surprisingly defensible) belief, and that's what he's

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-90274151825906591722011-04-24T08:01:00.001-07:002011-04-24T08:01:26.112-07:00

Nothing more for now!

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-40318869370875076312011-04-21T06:43:00.000-07:002011-04-21T06:50:57.775-07:00

I admit, one aspect of criticisms of Christianity that strikes me as naive is the idea that a good God would not allow torment or pain in the world.The problem is that Christianity seems like the one major religion where a criticism like this is ridiculously out of place - what with the crucified God and all. The crucifixion, to me, highlights the very real possibility that perhaps we as humans

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com14tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-51276312670350129242011-04-17T21:44:00.001-07:002011-04-17T21:50:49.914-07:00

Physical science shows that a designer is not needed to account for design in physical nature in the same way computer science shows that a programmer is not needed to account for design in software.Put another way: The fact that I don't (and shouldn't expect to) find Will Wright somewhere in my PC when I play a game of Spore does not mean A) Will Wright plays no role in explaining Spore, B) that

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-84817283316725369812011-04-13T22:42:00.001-07:002011-04-13T22:53:03.855-07:00

Huh. Never made this connection, myself.A refinement of vitalism may be recognized in contemporary molecular histology in the proposal that some key organising and structuring features of organisms, perhaps including even life itself, are examples of emergent processes; those in which a complexity arises, out of interacting chemical processes forming interconnected feedback cycles, that cannot

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-26504887621693083802011-04-13T20:33:00.001-07:002011-04-13T20:36:35.141-07:00

Does believing that most of the problems in life could or should be solved by government constitute a form of theism?I think the instinct is to say no, that's hyperbole. And yeah, perhaps it is. On the other hand, I do wonder if it is in theory possible to worship government as a god. And if it is, then would I be an atheist with regards to that god?People can worship nature as god. Or natural

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-36479802849232809242011-04-05T20:17:00.000-07:002011-04-05T20:18:46.258-07:00

From Epictetus:What else can I do, a lame old man, but sing hymns to God? If I were a nightingale, I would do the nightingale's part; if I were a swan, I would do as a swan. But now I am a rational creature, and I ought to praise God. This is my work. I do it, nor will I desert my post, so long as I am allowed to keep it. And I ask you to join me in this same song.

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-78329571882933267782011-04-04T00:10:00.001-07:002011-04-04T00:14:35.730-07:00

So I downloaded Sun Tzu's Art of War onto my iPad, since the ebook was free.Either I'm misunderstanding something, or this is a shockingly short book. I mean we are talking SHORT. 50 pages maybe? If that?It's more like Sun Tzu's WarFAQ or something. Why did I always get the impression this book was huge?

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-79435696409964580002011-04-03T18:48:00.000-07:002011-04-03T18:56:36.042-07:00

One the one hand, theists get accused of being utterly arrogant in their belief. Thinking that they and they alone know the truth about the universe. Where's there skepticism? Where's their admitting that maybe they're wrong? (Nevermind if they do, in fact, admit as much. Better to act as if every religious believer is really the caricature numerous atheists make them out to be.)And then, right

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-13788603681374124202011-03-29T16:21:00.000-07:002011-03-29T16:28:18.699-07:00

Ever notice so many atheists inevitably tend to be people who openly hope like hell that Christianity (or Judaism, or Islam or..) isn't true? And that these same people turn around and accuse people who believe in God as being engaged in wish fulfillment?

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-51201719611117622842011-03-25T18:29:00.000-07:002011-03-25T18:31:56.201-07:00

There's some discussion recently over what the Pope thinks about evangelizing jews. I have only one short comment.If someone's mother was a jew, but they themselves are at best a cultural or 'secular' jew who is at best agnostic about God's existence, are you really a jew by the pope's standards?

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com10tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-68452997412618345422011-03-21T06:47:00.000-07:002011-03-21T07:34:32.217-07:00

Imagine for a moment you lived in a world with technology on the level of The Matrix. What I mean is that some Matrix-level technology - the ability to convincingly simulate an illusory environment - existed and was easily accessible.Should the mere existence of this technology prompt one to be skeptical that the experiences they're having at any given time are real as opposed to illusory? Or at

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-41246011412004888682011-03-20T22:24:00.000-07:002011-03-20T22:25:31.748-07:00

It can hardly be right for a child, even at that age, to cry for everything, including things which would harm him; to work himself into a tantrum against people older than himself and not required to obey him; and to try his best to strike and hurt others who know better than he does, including his own parents, when they do not give in to him and refuse to pander to whims which would only do him

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-80296598609102416572011-03-19T23:43:00.000-07:002011-03-19T23:54:00.668-07:00

Now and then I run into this sort of claim."I don't think consciousness is magical. I think it's an emergent property of neurons."Honestly, it sounds to me like..."I don't think consciousness is magical. It's just the standard effects of Neptune's mighty trident."Similarly, I'm not a big fan of..."Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."Really? Is that because both

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-54312044329926281712011-03-16T22:38:00.001-07:002011-03-16T22:50:11.326-07:00

From What's Wrong With The World:Steve Burton quotes Lawrence Auster on Darwinism: How do the Darwinians explain the prevalence of male baldness in much of the white race (the Irish being the big exception)? That a man 50,000 years ago had an accidental genetic mutation which caused him to lose his hair, and the women in his tribe were more attracted to him with his bald head than to all the

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-65650339005474739692011-03-12T02:21:00.000-08:002011-03-12T02:42:11.501-08:00

Seen recently in an argument: "Arguments for God are only convincing to theists!"My thoughts: Well... I suppose they'd have to be, wouldn't they? Anyone persuaded by an argument for God's existence would be a theist, at least from that moment on. What's expected here? An argument for God's existence that atheists, remaining atheists, find compelling?A similar problem pops up with a claim like

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-2368169756893964192011-03-09T16:41:00.001-08:002011-03-09T16:51:11.934-08:00

I hear this now and then - the claim that most people who call themselves Christian are "practical atheists". The reasoning is that people call themselves Christian, but they don't go to church very much at all and tend not to make decisions in their lives necessarily consistent with their church's teaching. Ergo, they call themselves Christian, but in practice they act like atheists.Frankly, I

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com8tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-65510403333038081342011-03-07T15:45:00.000-08:002011-03-07T15:57:01.891-08:00

Here's a question I have to every person who's ever denounced another person for burning a strawman: Have you ever actually tried burning a strawman before?It's fun!There's a reason every protest that gets out of control usually pulls out the effigies and gasoline, and I'm convinced it has little to do with making a point. Fire's fun. Setting things on fire is fun. Setting things that look human

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-59346973966900559602011-03-06T03:31:00.000-08:002011-03-06T03:37:02.981-08:00

I admit, all I can say is "You know, the vicar's got a point."

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-70532587790226043882011-03-06T02:57:00.001-08:002011-03-06T02:59:28.244-08:00

One of the lamer moves I routinely see atheists take is that desperate dive when attributing the order of the universe to a mind."Well, maybe the universe is really chaotic, but all we see is order because of how our minds work!"Okay, so... You're saying we should either embrace theism (The universe really is orderly) or radical skepticism (we can't trust what we attribute to the universe.)The

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-2334319786000383002011-03-04T18:37:00.000-08:002011-03-04T19:52:15.052-08:00

As any commenter has noticed on this blog, I'm a hardass with comments. I decided to explain some of my commenting philosophy - maybe even sticky this entry - so people understand where I'm coming from and what my standards are. Let's go with the tried and true FAQ format.What sort of comments do you weed out on Crude Ideas?Generally, posts that fit in the following categories: Spam comments,

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-7848942443546475972011-03-02T01:12:00.000-08:002011-03-02T01:37:05.999-08:00

While trying to read up on pantheism in general, I kept coming across this talk of 'scientific pantheism'. As near as I can tell it's mostly for atheists who want to say they're "spiritual".One thing I repeatedly bumped into was this sort of talk:Pantheism believes that we live on in nature where we are re-absorbed, but also in people's memories and in the achievements we leave behind. Therefore

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com11tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-10879438515553806372011-03-01T20:46:00.000-08:002011-03-01T22:19:12.410-08:00

There's an aspect to verificationism I think goes unappreciated.A short wiki summary is: Verificationism is the view that a statement or question only has meaning if there is some way to determine if the statement is true, or what the answer to the question is.For example, a claim that the world came into existence a short time ago exactly as it is today (with misleading apparent traces of a

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-43065315134096250582011-02-26T09:32:00.000-08:002011-02-26T09:47:00.593-08:00

One thing I'm always amused of in the usual religious debates: How "science" is constantly anthropomorphized, and is said to give us different - even conflicting - orders as human beings.Science shows us how reality truly is!Science has nothing to say about reality as reality, it's just useful for predictive models!Science says we should always be skeptical and accept nothing without

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-72068931396822900452011-02-19T15:43:00.001-08:002011-02-19T15:50:47.712-08:00

Vox recently ran this quote, and I admit, I love it."As for those who go in for self-indulgence and are slaves of their own bodies - people who measure everything they should seek and avoid in life by the yardstick of pleasure and pain - even if they are right (and there is no need to take issue with them here) let us tell them to preach in their own little gardens and let us ask them to keep

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-66062886657793201402011-02-15T16:49:00.001-08:002011-02-15T16:58:33.782-08:00

Apparently, belief in God remains high even among the most highly educated in the US.Somewhat surprising to me, I admit. I'm not that impressed either way, since I have a pretty negative view of higher education in general (at least in the sense of pursuing a degree, not the actual process of learning, particularly autodidactism.) But, there you go.I'm sure more interesting observations could be

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com8tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-47236971517342529132011-02-14T14:14:00.000-08:002011-02-14T14:20:36.039-08:00

If all religions are 'valid ways of approaching God', then it doesn't matter if I discriminate against every other path but my own, right? My way is as good as any of the others, thus those other paths are obviated.

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-17140802052261735792011-02-08T23:58:00.001-08:002011-02-08T23:59:57.120-08:00

I wonder if there any any Catholic organizations devoted to proselytizing in the West? Specifically targeting inactive catholics and agnostics, even.In fact, does ANYone bother targeting the 'none's in the US? Not the radically smaller 'atheist' group, but those generally 'religiously nothing' sorts.Curious.

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-24100884436615451832011-01-19T23:36:00.000-08:002011-01-20T00:08:56.313-08:00

Been reading up on (strong) emergence. Trying to figure out why this is even called 'materialism' - the impression of "because if they admit it's not materialism most of the people they want to convince will drop it like a rabid squirrel" is hard to shake.As ever, Fodor provides the convenient essential summary.Maybe the hard problem shows that not all basic laws are laws of physics. Maybe it

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-31378625219727703782011-01-03T23:06:00.001-08:002011-01-03T23:07:23.653-08:00

Maybe you are.Or maybe not. Of interest:According to Exline's findings, Protestants, African Americans, and older people tend to report less anger at God; people who do not believe in God may still harbor anger; and anger toward God is most distressing when it is frequent, intense, or chronic.So, that 'atheists are angry at God' thing actually does have some scientific evidence to back it up

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-20591646740280885372010-12-26T23:14:00.001-08:002010-12-26T23:19:00.879-08:00

Had this happen to me today."You know... pretty sure Martin Luther was in large part responsible for all the splits in the church. Major figure. How come I never hear anyone quote him? I mean, I see lots of quotes from Calvin, from Johnathan Edwards, from various popes, from other religious leaders and figures... why not Martin Luther?"*reads some Luther quotes and writings*"...Oh, THAT'S why."(

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com19tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-27718250750189619572010-12-24T03:14:00.001-08:002010-12-24T03:14:41.432-08:00

Just wanted to get that in there.

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com13tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-46839593348329561612010-12-14T14:24:00.000-08:002010-12-14T14:26:58.704-08:00

"Why don't traditional religious believers - who, as I and my fellow atheists often and loudly say, are ignorant, stupid, irrational, child-like, evil, twisted, crazy, and dangerous - feel comfortable with the idea of an atheist president? It's so bigoted."

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-36492540663331458822010-12-06T14:38:00.000-08:002010-12-06T14:42:35.292-08:00

One thing I've seen more and more online as of late."I'm an agnostic."'Oh, are you a New Atheist?'"Holy hell, no! Those guys, geez..."I have to admit, I have more patience - a lot more - with a sincere agnostic. You can have a conversation with one. And I admit, I'm tickled to see that the long-lasting contribution of the New Atheists will likely be to convince people that atheism is a hotbed of

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com12tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-5791601314609436252010-12-05T02:33:00.001-08:002010-12-05T02:56:31.380-08:00

There's something I notice about typical blog-comments advocates of "Gay Rights", Global Warming legislation and PETA members: They typically all so fucking frantic and emotional.In the Gay Rights case, merely saying you're against gay marriage or that you think homosexual acts are immoral too often quickly turns into screams about phobia and how you're the reason homosexually inclined teens

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com9tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-90380229513720758682010-12-01T01:45:00.001-08:002010-12-01T01:45:55.803-08:00

This blog is now about religion, politics, philosophy, and good comedy.

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-46320301285660675062010-11-24T01:55:00.000-08:002010-11-24T02:04:49.195-08:00

Watching all the discussion about the TSA, I think it's time to suggest a new natural law for political discussions: The Bush Uncertainty Principle.The principle states that whether or not a proposed law or act of government is just or unjust, extreme or reasonable, cannot be known if the political party or political identity of whoever is proposing it is also not known.So, if you don't know

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-18737089144211390542010-11-17T02:29:00.001-08:002010-11-17T03:01:47.054-08:00

A few years ago, I heard John Lennox on a radio program, talking with what I assume was an agnostic about his religious beliefs. At one point the interviewer asked, basically, why are only humans saved? What about fish? Trout for instance? Lennox's reply was that trout don't really seem to care about salvation. The host quickly shot back, "If I were a trout I'd want to be saved!" All I could

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-59606959339708743892010-11-10T19:49:00.000-08:002010-11-10T20:26:25.912-08:00

I just read another one of John C. Wright's stories about his atheism days. Splendid reading as ever, and I find a tremendous amount to agree with. Except for the core of his story.I have trouble accepting that John was an atheist.Now, I don't mean that John was actually Catholic and never realized it. Nor do I think he secretly believed in God-as-commonly-presented. But the atheism of John C.

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-51229395638087870562010-11-10T01:28:00.000-08:002010-11-10T07:38:17.853-08:00

Normally I keep my commenting light on deeper, more philosophical issues - there's a reason for that which I hope to blog about one day - but Edward Feser's recent posts on natural law got me thinking.See, Ed Feser reminds me of Rorschach on this topic. And I don't consider that an insult. In fact, Ed is doing a marvelous job of convincing me that his is the correct position to hold - and he's

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-52461130962451860212010-11-04T16:18:00.000-07:002010-11-04T16:29:03.892-07:00

This is a question that came to me while reading a recent entry over at the Cogitator's blog. I admit, Carlin had deep dislike for Catholicism and Christians generally. He mocked the usual image of a 'bearded man in the sky'. But I finally had to ask myself... did Carlin ever call himself an atheist?Oddly enough, the two obscure references I found to Carlin on his own beliefs said otherwise. One

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-88654666617112244202010-10-28T16:07:00.001-07:002010-10-28T16:13:22.667-07:00

Been seeing some philosophers discussing the problem of evil and theodicy lately. My response is "eh". I admit, the problem of evil hasn't struck me as a real problem for years - especially since the objection has, by even most atheist accounts, switched from a logical to an evidential problem.I realize that the PoE is thought of as one of the two main, actual problems for the theistic position.

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-36036912175194158552010-10-25T20:28:00.000-07:002010-10-25T20:44:27.680-07:00

Susan Blackmore throws in the towel on the "Religion is a virus" schtick.Blackmore, who has largely functioned as a seneschal in the service of Dan Dennett's philosophy of mind (as well as a CSISOP member), bought into and promoted this idea for... you know, I'm pretty sure it's been for years now. So it's rather noteworthy that she's throwing in the towel on this one, and in a very thorough

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com6tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-31417273554106857072010-10-21T01:01:00.000-07:002010-10-21T01:19:06.665-07:00

So, Coyne and PZ Myers are squaring off against each other. Atheist fight! I'm sorry - Gnu fight.In the left corner we have Jerry Coyne, the Shemp of the New Atheists. He would believe in God if a 900 foot tall Jesus appeared to him, or if a man claiming to be Jesus descended from the sky, turned a prominent atheist's arms into tentacles, mocked him, turned the arms back into arms, then

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com7tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-91420446996947086702010-10-18T14:32:00.001-07:002010-10-18T14:42:29.806-07:00

Incidentally, if you've noticed the more slow and obnoxious internet denizens referring to themselves as 'gnus' lately, be noted that this is apparently the latest trend of "New Atheists". I imagine it's a step up. Previously being known as a "New Atheist" largely branded a person as stupid, ill-mannered, loud and socially autistic. But being known as a gnu? They can keep all those labels, and

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-25673701813476341842010-10-16T23:58:00.000-07:002010-10-17T00:26:13.939-07:00

Pardon me, but I want to speak frankly, and briefly, on the subject of homosexuality.In fact, I'll be polite here and put the frank language past the click. If you don't like frankness, come back later. I'll be talking more about Stephen Hawking or the like.When's the last time you remember anal or oral sex coming up in a conversation about homosexuality?See, I've been arguing about this for

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com16tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-13801527023889871632010-10-14T16:04:00.001-07:002010-10-14T19:48:30.374-07:00

This is a pattern I've seen repeatedly when it comes to discussing New Atheist arguments online:1) New Atheist writes an article about religion or science, making several claims or arguments.2) The claims turn out to be inane, or the arguments horrible and muddled.3) An atheist faithful rushes in to excuse and defend their hero.4) Their "defense" doesn't involve defending what the New Atheist

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-7097684379677407382010-09-26T14:07:00.000-07:002010-09-26T14:20:14.229-07:00

I now and then complain about the claim that something can arise out of nothing. Usually I focus on the more exaggerated claims - namely that something's arising out of well and truly nothing is A) Observable or B) Has in fact been observed by scientists. There are other criticisms as well, such as equivocations on "nothing" (where "nothing" is actually "something", and therefore leaves a "

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com17tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-73230524397060564062010-09-13T12:14:00.000-07:002010-09-13T12:18:26.808-07:00

I have trouble believing this is serious.Now, don't get me wrong. I don't like Obama, and I also think this teenager sounds like kind of an ass. "It's the sort of thing teenagers do" doesn't sound like a very sincere or well-considered excuse, coming from not only a teenager, but the one whose action is in question.Maybe he threatened the president (apparently he was 'drunk' and forgot what he

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com9tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4792024820665300340.post-55331802289449406932010-09-08T07:20:00.000-07:002010-09-08T07:23:17.355-07:00

The Vatican weighs in on some goofy church's decision to burn the Koran as a publicity stunt. Looks like most of the world is rising up against the act.You know, I've expressed my sympathies for muslims in the past on this blog. And I'll go further. But as someone who still remembers the "piss Christ" 'art' fiasco, I admit this irritates me.

Crudehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.com8