  |
|
| |
|
|
|
 Sam Harris Strikes BackPosted on May 29, 2007
By Sam Harris Editor’s Note: The following is Sam Harris’ response to Chris Hedges’ essay, “I Don’t Believe in Atheists.” Last week the two Truthdig contributors battled one another over the issues of religion and politics during a live debate in Los Angeles. While they both agree on the dangers posed by religious fundamentalism in America, their views on religion in general differ greatly, as you will soon read. Click here for full debate coverage. I am hopeful that the editors at Truthdig will eventually post the unedited video/audio of my debate with Chris Hedges to the website. Once these files are available, readers will be able to judge for themselves which of us made more sense on the subject of religion. I would, however, like to offer a few remarks in the meantime. As I mentioned briefly during the live event, Hedges misrepresented my views on several topics in his opening remarks. Rather than do a little fact-checking after the debate, he chose to make these distortions indelible in his essay, “I Don’t Believe in Atheists.” I have long had an article on my website entitled “Response to Controversy” which addresses many of the spurious points Hedges raises, and I have made a few additions since we met at Royce Hall. The article can be found here. Beyond putting out these small fires, I would like to briefly address the main claims that Hedges makes in his essay: Real religion has nothing to do with superstition, irrational beliefs, or tribalism. God is not an anthropomorphic deity; He is just “the name we give to our belief that life has meaning.” It should be immediately clear to all readers that Hedges is simply dodging the fact that millions (probably billions) of people practice religion in the naïve, anthropomorphic, and superstitious forms he would rather not defend. By saying that faith is really something other than the irrational belief in magic books, virgin births, the power of prayer, etc., Hedges ignores how pervasive the problem of religious irrationality is. As many readers will recognize, this is one of the sins of religious “moderation” that I discuss in “The End of Faith”—and I really could not have hoped to find a more lumbering, bellicose, and sanctimonious perpetrator of this obscurantism than Chris Hedges. According to recent polls, 53 percent of Americans think that the universe is less than 10,000 years old and 59 percent believe that Jesus will one day return to Earth wielding magic powers—and yet, religious moderates like Hedges invariably accuse me of “caricaturing” Christianity whenever I criticize these beliefs. Hedges appears to be playing a highly disingenuous game of hide-the-ball with the articles of faith, and it is a game that keeps the world safe for religious lunacy; it also prevents a truly rational approach to spirituality from emerging in our discourse. Monotheism has been historically indispensable in laying the ground for individualism and the modern concept of human rights. While this point is surely debatable (and probably false), even if true, it would not (even slightly) suggest that the biblical God exists. Nor would the historical usefulness of monotheism suggest that monotheism is a benign force in the 21st century. In my opening remarks in our debate, I addressed the notion that religion is (or has been) useful. Nothing that Hedges said subsequently (or wrote in his essay) indicates he understood what I was talking about. There is a difference between the irrational and the non-rational—and the latter is the basis of our spirituality. I have no problem acknowledging that there is a distinction between rational thought and other features of our subjectivity that are “non-rational.” The taste of chocolate is non-rational (without being irrational), as is almost every other sensory or emotional experience. We can, however, rationally discuss what we know about chocolate—its chemical composition, where it comes from, how we cultivate it, etc.—and we might one day fully elucidate the underlying neurology of taste. The same rational mode of discourse could, in principle, accommodate our “spiritual” experiences and our ethical intuitions as well. One of the greatest impediments to our making progress on this front, however, is the fact that people like Hedges continue to demand that a special strain of irrationality called “religion” remain sheltered from criticism.
Finally, many of the comments posted in response to Hedges’ essay have used the fine art of selective quotation to make me appear to hold positions which I do not hold. Hedges, in part, is responsible for this, having led by example. I advise readers who might be alarmed by these quotations to read my books or the articles on my website. Here is an example of such selective quotation, so that readers can appreciate how the trick is done. A reader going by the name of “Tentaculata” has posted the following passage from “The End of Faith” (p. 194):
Readers are thereby encouraged to believe that I support the torture of the innocent relatives of suspected terrorists. But the very next sentence in my book reads: “Admittedly, this would be a ghastly result to have reached by logical argument, and we will want to find some way of escaping it.” And the endnote to this sentence reads: “It seems to me that we can stop this inquisitorial slide by recourse to the ‘perfect weapon’ argument presented in chapter 4. There is a difference, after all, between intending to inflict suffering on an innocent person and inflicting it by accident. To include a suspected terrorist’s family among the instruments of torture would be a flagrant violation of this principle.” While I stand by everything I have written in “The End of Faith,” and I encourage readers to consult my “Response to Controversy” article on my website, I cannot be expected to parry every malicious sampling of my text. It is unfortunate that Truthdig has become a forum for attacks of this sort. Previous item: Squinting at the Election Next item: New York Theater Review: 'The Year of Magical Thinking' Elsewhere: . CommentsAre you a Truthdig member yet? Login now, or register with Truthdig. |
Snapshots of Life and Death in Baghdad
Email
Print
Share
Del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Ma.gnolia
Newsvine
Reddit
StumbleUpon
Yahoo
Jump to Comments
By Jim H., February 18 at 7:45 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
---------------EVOLUTION IS A FACT!
Report this---------NATURAL SELECTION IS A THEOORY!
Evolution is an observable fact. We can see it, measure it and record it.
A theory is something that explains why facts are what they are.
Natural Selection is a theory that explains the FACT of evolution.
We can debate whether the theory is right or not, but we can’t
debate the facts. Facts are facts. It is undeniably a fact that life
forms on this earth have changed and continue to change over
generations. That is the fact of evolution.
Scientists have seen it in our lifetime from bugs to birds.
And most creationists do not deny species do change.
By Jim H., February 18 at 7:29 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
An Enslaving Force
Report thisFew people realize the extent of the reach, influence and overwhelming power of religion. Nor do many people have any idea as to the enormity of the Vatican’s financial resources!
Very likely, the Vatican is the wealthiest entity by a factor of 100 that the world has ever seen. And its tax-free status, weekly and “willed” donations of millions, when added to income from all its many worldwide investments, positions those who control that fabulous bottomless pool of wealth as the world’s most influential lobbyist or purchaser!
This may be one of the reasons the Pledge of Allegiance was plagiarized and altered from “one nation indivisible” to the bigoted “one nation (divided) under God.” And why 100 senators disgraced our country and themselves by reciting the religious pledge on the steps of the senate and before television beamed to the entire world!
The time has come to discredit the outrageous assertions by the Ponzi-racketeering charlatans who promote the plague-like disease religion that survives by warping the minds of innocent children and fools, robbing them of their candy and toy money, and enslaving them to a life as shills who help perpetuate the criminal religion schemes.
“Secular humanists,” “non-believers” and other sane and rational people know that no proof survives the fairytales of a magician named Jesus or his magic miracles, nor is there any proof whatsoever that there is or ever was a supreme creator God. Yet this and other lies are used to perpetuate their rotten scheme religion.
People who live in the “real” world refuse to accept silly lies, fairy tales and farce as fact, whether it be about “Santa Claus” “The Tooth Fairy,” “Donald Duck,” a “Jesus” or a “Creator God.” Nor should they be lumped with or considered analogous with a gang of thieving, lying, mind-warping pedophiles who use a how-to manual of pornography, pillorying, stoning to death and other forms of outright bigotry for their weekly stimulus to more proselytizing.
The senators who said that fallacious rendition of our once great Pledge of Allegiance shall be remembered as the promoters of a criminal enterprise and the abettors or cohorts of a bunch of thieving slavers who invade every phase of society with their lying assertions that “our country was founded as a Christian nation.
With their plagiarism of our once great Pledge of Allegiance, their repeated attempts to force their “Godism” on all schoolchildren and their ever increasing use of all forms of media and gimmicks to mesmerize, indoctrinate and bludgeon the American people with their outrageous, endless efforts to dominate us all with a theocratic form of government renders them criminals!
And the likes of George W. Bush and his ilk by giving millions of dollars to faith-based groups is bidding them “Godspeed!”
By mejdrich, February 18 at 4:12 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
I know this is an old link, but claiming Hitler wasn’t christian is just plain idiotic.
He was baptized, raised, and died a practicing Roman Catholic. It’s true he killed christians, but Hitler seemed to be in the business of killing everyone.
The idea that Hitler was an atheist is purely a myth. There was a circle of neo-pagans (not atheists) surrounding Hitler, and the man himself remained christian, even using Jesus as an inspiration for his Nazism. Check out “Positive Christianity” for details.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positive_Christianity
Report thisBy Jim, August 18, 2007 at 3:16 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Re: 95770 & 95764
Report thisj.hud
This imbercile BARGES IN here with his DELUSIONAL RELIGIOUS FANATICISM!
What is his point!
Who in this TWENTY FIRST CENTURY GIVES A RATS ASS ABOUT HITLER?
But! j.hud, you asshole! As I have said in a prior post the facts are there for any LITERATE PERSON to discover!
Have a LITERATE person read my last post to you!
The VERY SITE ‘YOU’ CITE SAYS: http://www.geocities.com/chiniquy/Hitler.html “---Hitler was born and raised in a Catholic family.” IDIOT! AND HE WAS NEVER EX-COMMUNICATED!
And, there are many, many sites that point to ‘MANY’ ‘GODIST’ IDIOTS LIKE YOU!, who, for some unknown reason want to RAKE UP, AND alter the facts of history, which is impossible!
You are obviously a DEMENTED PERSON, or you would not be pursueing this fruitless, and ‘now’ a pointless historical fact!
Only a SICK religious fanatic, helplessly delusioned by indoctrination into that infectious plague-like brain destroying disease of the criminal ponzi-like racketeering religious charlatans ‘GODISM’ that is used to enslave, corrupt, and convert innocent children, and fools like you, would have any interest in one of the so many “CHRISTIANS” who have wreaked havoc upon humanity ever since the dawn of that “CANCER’ OF THE MIND"------------ “CHRISTIANITY”!
GO BACK IN YOUR HOLE! ASSHOLE!
http://www.liberalslikechrist.org/Catholic/HitlersFait h.html
“Catholics today imagine that their church must have repudiated Hitler---”
“But try as they may to rewritehistory, the fact is that after Adolf Hitler came to power in 1933, neither the pope in Rome as leader of the church worldwide, nor the bishops as leaders of the church in Germany, ever denied Hitler himself, nor any of the many, many, other Roman Catholic leaders of the Third Reich public access to the sacraments nor membership in the
ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH."(!)
“Nor was “the Nazi Bible”, Hitler’s Mein Kampf, ever placed on the “Index” of books which Catholics were forbidden to read. Nor were Catholics discouraged publicly or privately from serving in Hitler’s administration.”
By j.hud, August 18, 2007 at 9:20 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Re. Jim. H
That link may not have worked. Here it is again:
http://www.geocities.com/chiniquy/Hitler.html
Happy perusing.
Report thisBy j.hud, August 18, 2007 at 7:27 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Jim H.
I think I would have to agree with another member about leaving you alone to yourself with your incoherency. I advise you to peruse this link:
http://www.geocities.com/chiniquy/hitler…
I suppose that you will then begin to plagiarise by using all of Hitlers allegations against Christianity to bolster your own arguments.
Thank you for the amusement you have provided. Henceforth you will only be amusing yourself.
Report thisBy Jim H., August 17, 2007 at 5:03 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Re: 95683
Report thisj.hud
j. hud, (OBVIOUSLY A RELIGIOUSLY DELUDED IDIOT!) SAYS:"---Hitler was not Christian."(?) (WRONG!) (THIS IS A LIE!)
In this, the twenty first century, the “Computer Age” there is no excuse for this lie!
j.hud Makes a “BOLD”, ASININE CONTEMPTIOUS PEDANTIC ATTEMPT TO INSULT HIS MENTAL SUPERIORS!
Any ‘LITERATE’ person using Google, or many other Search Engines, can easily discern the ‘FACT’ that Adolph Hitler was “CHRISTENED” A CATHOLIC! “CHRISTIAN”!, and remained a CATHOLIC “CHRISTIAN”! until he died!
He made many speeches confirming this, also, easily available to a ‘LITERATE’ PERSON!
Further, Hitler’s NAZI PARTY was aided by the Italian, “CHRISTIAN”, MUSSOLINI, the “CHRISTIAN” VATICAN, and the “CHRISTIAN” POPE; in his endeavor to KILL all JEWS, and accede to World dominationn.
“CHRISTIANS”, and others killed were ‘mere’ “COLLATERAL DAMAGE”!
Much as your sadistic buddy in the White House views the two hundred thousand or more women and children he slaughtered in his efforts to “control the flow of “cheap Iraq crude oil”.
About the “Mein Kampf” “Bible”?
Hitler wasn’t the first, nor, the last to realize the other “Bible” is a pornogaphic How-to Manual for pillagers, rapists, sodomizers, slaughterers, an other debauchers of innocent children and fools, and like many others before and since, he justifyably believed any alternative would be an improvement!
By j.hud, August 17, 2007 at 12:37 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Jim H.
Unless you haven’t studied history properly, you must be aware that Hitler was NOT Christian.
Report thisWhat was written on the Nazi banner was just a slogan to heighten the ‘grandeur’ of the Nazi regime.
Why else do you think he went off killing Christians and insisting that his own book , ‘Mein Kampfe’ be the ‘bible’ of his country?
Do the background research if you please, and then make bold statements.
By Jim H., July 25, 2007 at 12:09 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
MENSA’s GOALS
Report thisIn response to my recent query about Mensa’s interest or actions relating to Religion,
Kymberley Wilson Membership Secretary, Mensa, Australia
replied:
“ Mensa, as an organisation has no official position on religion, politics or any other subject” (?)
----------------------------------------------------------
I say: in view of Mensa’s stated aims included in “Mensa’s goals” “---to identify and foster human intelligence for the benefit of humanity;(?) (Subject?)(and) to encourage research in the nature, characteristics, and uses of intelligence;(?) (Subject?)
ERGO:
How can Mensa ‘reasonably’ ignore the destructive influences to “human intelligence” caused by the World wide propagation of such horrendous lies and absurdly false assertions that perpetuate the delusional mental imbalance of the religiously indoctrinated which is effected by criminal charlatans Fallwell, Baker, Haggard, the Pope, and their ilk, who enslave the masses in their ceasless efforts to replace Democracy with the Theocratic domination of the entire World!
Certainly denial, or aloofness to this, the most serious threat to “human intelligence” on the face of the earth, is an outright contradiction of your “Mensa’s goals” wherein they say: “---to identify and foster human intelligence for the benefit of humanity;(?)(and) to encourage research in the nature, characteristics, and uses of intelligence;(?)
How does Mensa, the epitome of intelligensia of the world, live with the knowledge they, by there ignorance, or ignoring this, the most destructive force to the “intelligence” of “humanity”, are thereby living a lie of cold hearted, unconcerned negation!
If the intellectual, or intelligent elites of the world, will not make any effort to prevent the destruction of humanity’s intelligence, by their: “research in the nature, characteristics, and uses of (false) intelligence”, we, and they, are all doomed to the servitude of criminal charlatan imberciles who shall soon control the entire earth!
-----------------------------------------
Mass/energy never disappear
Ever were ever here!
J.H. 5/8/07
With nothing to ‘create’, a “so-called “Creator-God” is an impossible superfluous nonentity!
By DSA, July 11, 2007 at 5:25 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Greetings Everyone!
Thanks for your input on the subject of Faith!
As we are currently experiencing great dangers and conflicts largely due to Faith, it is mandatory that the free thinkers speak up and make their voices heard.
Reasoning does not seem to be a concern of the devout. All they generally expect is just to believe what they say and join their path… It does not matter how destructive the consequences can be…
In reality, all I experienced in this life was just the constant interactions with mankind. The rest I see… is our beautiful planet with its abundant natural resources and beauty.
While I’m here, I would love to enjoy every moment of this human experience as a free soul, a free spirit. I do not wish to be burdened with Faith while this life of mine lasts…
When it is time to leave, I will leave it with immense gratitude for the privileges I have enjoyed. What happens next is to be seen… or may never be seen…
In-the-meantime, I end this note with love & best wishes to all,
DSA
Report thisBy Jim H., July 11, 2007 at 3:46 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
7/11 at 3:39 pm
COPY
NOTE: This was first sent to several MENSA email addresses including “National, International, Australia.
--------------------------------------------
TO MENSA;
RE: “Mensa’s goals”
“Mensa has three stated purposes: to identify and foster human intelligence for the benefit of humanity; to encourage research in the nature, characteristics, and uses of intelligence;?) and to promote stimulating intellectual and social opportunities for its members.”
-------------------------------------------------
Hello You-all; With the above stated aims in mind,
Report thisWhat, if anything is MENSA and their Members doing to enlighten the world about the EVILS caused by the propagation of the criminal ponzi-like racketeering scheme ‘Religion’, that indoctrinates, and enslaves innocent childrlen and fools and converts them to shills to proslytize and spread their infectious plalgue-like disease that causes delusional thinking, and an absurd child-like fairytale conception of the world that is a constant threat to those of us who live in the ‘real’ world and are ceaselessly threatened by their illogical TAX-FREE AND (faith-based!) GOVERNMENT-FUNDED, BIGOTRY?
By Jim H., July 9, 2007 at 9:45 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Re: 83666
DSA
Thank you for your good ‘thoughts’ about Sam Harris!
At:http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20070529_sam_harris_ fights_back/
He ‘too’, like Rushdie, has taunted a gigantic man-eating octopus, and must take many precautions to prevent a repeat of the Madalyn Murray O’Hair debacle that the “Religious “faithful” fanatics do a dance of joy over!
Although I too am thankful for “The End of Faith”, I believe no one has come within a ‘light year’ of pointing to, or discussing the ‘epic’ proportions of the ever broadening destructive criminal influence, evil intentions, designs and calamitous results of the Religious “Faith” Organization’s unwavering pursuit of total Theocratic domination our once Democratic, USA, and the entire World!
How many people can even imagine: any ‘one’ organization of any kind, that can, and does accumulate, free from taxes, every day, more money, including donations of taxpayers hard earned funds that are contributed to them by G. W. Bush’s “Faith"-based" operations, than any other company, business, or other type of honest enterprise in the world, accumulates in one month?
And, how many people can even imagine: the amount of influence all this ill gotten wealth is able to purchase?
Through the use of all type “Holding Companies” and many other similar methods of hiding ownership, the Religious Organizations own, or control a major portion of all Media, including newspapers, radio stations, publishing houses, television stations, and, many Congressmen, and Senators, plus G. W. Bush, and Dick Chaney!
These same Religious “Faith” Organizations have repeatedly caused our ‘bigoted’ Congress, and ‘bigoted’ US Supreme Court, to deny, and violate many parts of our US Constitution, and The Bill Of Rights!
These same Religious “Faith” Organizations have repeatedly supported, and influenced the installation of G.W. Bush a ‘bigot’, and Military Deserter, into the White House!
These same Religious “Faith” Organizations continually object to, and repeatedly violate the Constitutional Law: “Separation of Church and State!
These same Religious “Faith” Organizations repeatedly deny “woman’s rights”!
These same Religious “Faith” Organizations use the “Pulpit” to electioneer and promote religious bigot candidates for elective office, and use big bushels of their money lucre to help this happen!
These same Religious “Faith” Organizations also use bundles of money to pay lobbyists, and influence all Congressional actions that are destructive of our Democratic way of life and detrimental to all US citizens!
These same Religious “Faith” Organizations fight against any and all means of limiting family size, including medicines that prevent childbirth, because without innocent children to brainwash, mesmerize, brand, and indoctrinate into their fantasy world of ‘Godism’ their Religious Organizations would soon ‘dry up’ and go out of business!
Of course this is but a mere minute insight into the monstrous behemoth the ‘Ponzi-like’ racketeering Religious “Faith” Organizations embody and represent, and the perpetual horrific infectious plague-like disease they are ever more widely spreading every hour of every day through the means of newspapers, radio, and television, and even door-to-door-proselytising!
And, if we secularists, the rational ‘ones’, don’t soon confront this war on sanity and reason, before long, if it is not already too late, we will be surrounded, smothered and inundated by the horrible putrid dung these Religious “Faith” Organizations are everyday filling the airwaves, and earthly environment with!
Report thisCiao, Jim
By Jim H., July 8, 2007 at 4:17 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Re: 83666
DSA
Thank you for your good ‘thoughts’ about Sam Harris!
He too, like Rushdie, has taunted a gigantic man-eating octopus, and must take many precautions to prevent a repeat of the Madalyn Murray O’Hair debacle that the “Religious “faithful” fanatics do a dance of joy over!
Although I too am thankful for “The End of Faith”, I believe no one has come within a ‘light year’ of pointing to, or discussing the ‘epic’ proportions of the ever broadening destructive criminal influence, evil intentions, designs and calamitous results of the Religious “Faith” Organization’s unwavering pursuit of total Theocratic domination our once Democratic, USA, and the entire World!
How many people can even imagine: any ‘one’ organization of any kind, that can, and does accumulate, free from taxes, every day, more money, including donations of taxpayers hard earned funds that are contributed to them by G. W. Bush’s “Faith"-based" operations, than any other company, business, or other type of honest enterprise in the world, accumulates in one month?
And, how many people can even imagine: the amount of influence all this ill gotten wealth is able to purchase?
Through the use of all type “Holding Companies” and many other similar methods of hiding ownership, the Religious Organizations own, or control a major portion of all Media, including newspapers, radio stations, publishing houses, television stations, and, many Congressmen, and Senators, plus G. W. Bush, and Dick Chaney!
These same Religious “Faith” Organizations have repeatedly caused our ‘bigoted’ Congress, and ‘bigoted’ US Supreme Court, to deny, and violate many parts of our US Constitution, and The Bill Of Rights!
These same Religious “Faith” Organizations have repeatedly supported, and influenced the installation of G.W. Bush a ‘bigot’, and Military Deserter, into the White House!
These same Religious “Faith” Organizations continually object to, and repeatedly violate the Constitutional Law: “Separation of Church and State!
These same Religious “Faith” Organizations repeatedly deny “woman’s rights”!
These same Religious “Faith” Organizations use the “Pulpit” to electioneer and promote religious bigot candidates for elective office, and use big bushels of their money lucre to help this happen!
These same Religious “Faith” Organizations also use bundles of money to pay lobbyists, and influence all Congressional actions that are destructive of our Democratic way of life and detrimental to all US citizens!
These same Religious “Faith” Organizations fight against any and all means of limiting family size, including medicines that prevent childbirth, because without innocent children to brainwash, mesmerize, brand, and indoctrinate into their fantasy world of ‘Godism’ their Religious Organizations would soon ‘dry up’ and go out of business!
Of course this is but a mere minute insight into the monstrous behemoth the ‘Ponzi-like’ racketeering Religious “Faith” Organizations embody and represent, and the perpetual horrific infectious plague-like disease they are ever more widely spreading every hour of every day through the means of newspapers, radio, and television, and even door-to-door-proselytising!
And, if we secularists, the rational ‘ones’, don’t soon confront this war on sanity and reason, before long, if it is not already too late, we will be surrounded, smothered and inundated by the horrible putrid dung these Religious “Faith” Organizations are everyday filling the airwaves, and earthly environment with!
Report thisCiao, Jim
By DSA, July 3, 2007 at 4:22 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Greetings Everyone!
Thanks Sam for highlighting the destructive forces on this earth!
The faithful are proving your point…
How can anyone believe in such suicidal, primitive concepts?
Hope our human race will wake up soon and see the light!
With love & best wishes to all,
DSA
Report thisBy Ted Swart, June 25, 2007 at 5:35 pm #
BlueBoy1938 #80977
Methinks the treatment the RCs meted out to Galileo was understandable but not justified. And what was totally unjustified was the inordinate amount of time it took the church to apologize for their behaviour.
I note that the previous Pope ruled that it was perfectly in order for Catholics to accept the occurrence of evolution— without him endorsing any particular theory of evolution. In fact he spoke quite correctly in terms of theories (plural) of evolution.I am not sure the current Pope is equally sensible.
Report thisThe trouble with these so-called creation science museums is that they reject the occurrence of evolution by using pseudo-scientific mumbo jumbo and totally ignore the mass of evidence which attests to its occurrence. I see from one of today’s news items that scientists have some real hope that they may be able to piece together the Neanderthal genome.
By Jim H., June 24, 2007 at 6:00 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Re: 80947
Rev. Ted Swart
You say: “--- amenable to being coaxed into---” (?)
What is it you want to, or need to? “coax” someone into?
I say: Are those the words of someone holding a “Doctorate”?
You sound like you are “proselytizing”!
People do not need coaxing to read interesting sensible words of intelligent people!
“Coaxers” are PHONIES, con men, promoters, salesmen, or “Fundamentalist” religious ‘godists’, “Evangelists”, and other proselytizers, including sexual predators!
Intelligent people, saying intelligent things (like me) do not have to “coax” people into something!
About “Canning”? Perhaps if you knew ‘he’ was an ordained Minister, you would be more suspect of his reasoning, or his ability to reason? Religious ‘Godists” of all kinds find it impossible to cope with, or avail themselves of ‘critical thinking of any kind, but when it comes to their brainwashed views of their make-believe, fairytales idolatry, they go bizerk, and do, or say things no rational person would ever do, or say!
However, I am flattered that Canning admits to reading several of my postings! At least ‘he’ found ‘something’ therein to repeatedly draw him back thereto!
And although he calls my words “irrational”, don’t take it seriously, because, as I have already said, or implied, he is a Fanatical Godist and takes offense at anyone who shows a bit of rationality when discussing the many reasons for OUTLAWING RELIGION, and locking up all the criminal charlatans who promote that ‘ponzi-like racketeering scheme that brainwashes, indoctrinates, mesmerizes and enslaves innocent and fools like Canning, converts them to shills and sometimes rapes them in return for granting them forgiveness for having “sinned”, whatever ‘that’ means!
Report thisBy Blueboy1938, June 24, 2007 at 3:17 pm #
From the point of view of the Catholic Church at the time, it made perfect sense to “throttle” Galileo Galilei’s incipient advocacy of a “sun centered solar system.” It conflicted with the church’s view that God’s creation was perfect and immutable and ran afoul of dogma of the time. Galileo himself professed to be a devout Christian and Catholic. After all, the Church was under siege from the time Martin Luther nailed the “95 Theses” to the door of the Wittenberg castle church in 1546 and feeling a bit defensive towards divergent opinion. Scientific thought and faith are not mutually exclusive, as attested by Albert Einstein as well. All sorts of mischief stem from the mistaken application of religious ideas, unfortunately. If the so-called “creationism” continues to make inroads into the benighted pockets of hillbilly education, an ignorant theocracy can’t be far behind. Vigilance against that possibility must be uppermost.
Report thisBy Jim H., June 24, 2007 at 2:23 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Re: 80930
Rev. Ernest Canning
Don’t cry all over your Alb! Or the Altar!
I say: Thank you for reading some of my postings!
You say: “--- pages and pages of irrational(?) rants---"(?)
I say: Don’t you mean “---pages and pages of ‘IRREVERANT RANTS’?
But, even though you have some trouble reading and comprehending the brilliant sagacity of my brief sojourns through the slimy ‘dungeons’ of the fanatical religious minds of those felonious criminal charlatans who brainwash innocent children and fools ‘like you’; that I have so often undertaken, to help bring you, and others of your sick ilk, out of your entranced insanity and into the REAL WORLD, I thank you for taking the trouble of trying to understand it all.
You say: “---carrying on a civil dialogue---"(?)
I say: Surely, even ‘you’ know ‘your’ ilk is not capable of “---carrying on a civil dialogue---” with anyone who does not accept your absurd parroting of the farcical religious ‘Godism’!
And, regarding my “absence”, perhaps you are ‘married’ to this ‘muddle of smears’ or, your life is so otherwise boring, that this, is your only means for ‘jolly’ contentment!
But, strange as it may seem to you, besides having numerous other things I must to attend to on a daily basis, I do at times find the idiotic simplicity of you ‘fundamental religious ‘godist’ bigots’ and ‘hypocrites’ tiresome, boring, and otherwise fatiguing, (the ‘repeats’ are intended to stress the point!). And I realize that
when people are not allowed to be critical of their idiotic notions under pain of “mortal sin”, whatever that is, which they believe might even send them to “Hell”. whatever that is; I am suddenly aware I am trying to reason with the cancer ridden minds of the insane, and that they are better left to their own deserts, or some treatment in the asylum they are patients in!
The fact that you read my “---irrational rants---” is proof that I am not “--- talking to (myself) himself---”!
Report thisBy Jim H., June 24, 2007 at 1:20 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Re: 80928
nahida
You say:"---impose(?) their atheistic ideology---” (?)
I say: “atheism” IS NOT AN IDEOLOGY! AND, ATHEISTS DO NOT “IMPOSE”!
ATHEISTS REJECT LIES ARE TRUTHS! AND, CALL THEM LIES! THAT IS NOT IDEOLOGY!
YOU TOO, NEED A dictionary! SEE HERE BELOW!
DICTIONARY:
atheism
Disbelief in or denial of the existence of God or gods.
I say: “Disbelieving” in, or the “denial” of something, does not entail “IDEOLOGY”!
And ,only a FOOL would assert, or imply such!
I say: ‘You’, mezmerized RELIGIOUS ROBOTIC IDIOTS in an effort at PEDANTISM, combine together ALL who do not believe in make-believe fairytales, OR RELIGIONS LIES, AND BRAND THEM “Atheists” when ‘they’ simply do not accept as true, lies about things that cannot be proven true; which Religion, happens to be included in, and ‘you’ asininely, refer to this as an “ideology”! Honest truth seekers, and non-believers are not believers in an “ideology”! They merely point out the farce, and evils of accepting absurd assertions as anything other than what they really are; namely, the lies of Criminal charlatans who endlessly ‘PREY’ upon innocent children and fools, and wreak havoc on the rest of World Society!
The branding indoctrination of obsessive robotic religious ‘Godism’ fanatical imberciles, results in the worst sort of bigotry, often causing them to slaughter any who refuse to accept their warped views of the world we live in. And, it is difficult to imagine that anyone could exceed their rabid zealousness to defend their insane conception of life! And, of course, any criticism of their insane ideas, is bound to be met with every sort of lying effort to “discredit the messenger’’ in an attempt to draw observers away from the total inaneness of their own naive and chilldish acceptance of unfounded lies about un-proven assertions, as truth!
With respect to ‘nahida’s apparent infatuation with “Islam”? I find this to be exceptionally strange!
Isn’t it a fact that Muslim ‘women’ are treated like dirt by male Muslims? Aren’t Muslim women required to wear a special costume including a veil over their face? And, aren’t Muslim women forbidden to educate themselves? And, aren’t Muslim forbidden to drive an automobile? And, aren’t Muslim women forbidden to hold a job! And, aren’t Muslim women sometimes murdered by their own family, with full ‘legal’ immunity?
How much intelligence can someone have, lest they are MASOCHISTS, to cause them to WILLINGLY become part of, or, align themselves with, a group of who immediately subjugate them and reduce them in stature to that of a slave, or bonded serf? Need I say more!
You say: “---stop blaming religion(?) and faith for the ills of our world.(?)
I say you’re nuts! RELIGION ‘IS’ RESPONSIBLE FOR MOST ALL THE “ILLS OF THE WORLD”!
I say: Wake up!
Religion is cancer of the mind! Insanity!
You must live in a closet!
Religion is the cause of endless wars in the Middle East, and Ireland! And the cause of the present Iraqi conflict, that has resulted in more than two hundred thousand slaughtered, and ‘mangled’, and millions of homeless and displaced persons! And, Hitler’s Christianity, with the help of the Italian Mussolini, and the Pope in the Vatican was responsible for World War two!
You writelike the religious idiot ‘you’ in fact, are!
Report thisBy Ted Swart, June 24, 2007 at 10:18 am #
Ernest Canning #80930
Thanks Ernest. I am relatively new to TruthDig and I fell into the trap of imagining Jim H to be amenable to being coaxed into a more sensible mode of operation. This is clearly not the case.
Report thisBy Ted Swart, June 24, 2007 at 10:09 am #
BlueBoy1938 #80895
Nice to hear from you BlueBoy. An interesting run down on American history and its idiosyncratic relationship to religion. The US has come a long way (backwards!) since the founding fathers. All the presidential candidates—whether Democrat and Republican are going around loudly proclaiming the important role that religion plays in their lives.
So, when you say “Would we be better off if everyone were atheists?” a partial answer might be: We would surely be much better off if not all US presidential candidates felt it necessary to loudly proclaim that they are not atheists/agnostics/free thinkers.
It is obvious that if all humans became atheists this would not result in paradise. Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot and many others surely attest to the fact that being atheist is no magic antidote to nastiness. I think all rigidly dogmatic systems tend to be corrupt and destructive. And I would go so far as to say that unless atheism is at least tinged with agnosticism it is at risk of being just as dogmatic as religions tends to be.
It is actually a very interesting question as to whether or not having more knowledge tends to make us better people. On balance I would have to say it is much healthier to accept the findings of scientific enquiry rather than to reject what we learn in this manner. It was lunacy on the part of the Catholic Church to persecute Galileo. And the unscientific so-called Creation Science Museums which have been springing up all over the place (even here in Canada) are nothing other than a disgrace.
Report thisBy cann4ing, June 24, 2007 at 9:18 am #
Ted, I long ago learned that there is no possibility whatsoever of carrying on a civil dialogue with Jim H. If you go back to the 3/26/07 Chris Hedges post, “A world where lies are true,” you will find pages and pages of irrational rants by Jim H.
From his lengthy absence, I thought perhaps Jim H had taken the advice of some other Truthdiggers and checked himself in for some extensive psychiatric therapy. But now he’s back, and apparently off his medication.
The best means for dealing with him appears to be to ignore his rants altogether. After a time, he will likely tire of talking to himself and again go away!
Report thisBy nahida, June 24, 2007 at 9:15 am #
Fanaticism and extremism are not exclusive to followers of religion.
Atheists; (as demonstrated quite eloquently and explicitly by some posters here- without having to mention names) can excel as being zealous, obsessive and fanatics, with their behaviour and attitude.
I have actually seen that they can surpass religious zealots by their fervent desire to impose their atheistic ideology upon all, and by their craving to “convert” the rest of the world and force them to follow their “beliefs”.
Having said that I guess it’s only fair that other open-minded atheist should acknowledge this fact and stop blaming religion and faith for the ills of our world.
The blame falls fairly and squarely upon our own shoulders as human beings when we cease to tolerate anything that is different.
Report thisBy Ted Swart, June 24, 2007 at 8:44 am #
Jim H #80795
Okay Jim. You win. I admit defeat in my attempts to hold a meaningful interaction with you. I make a valid point about it being very questionable to suggest that someone with a mental age of 3—even if bigoted-- can be regarded as a hypocrite. And you go off on a tangent about the meaning of the word hypocrisy. It is not the meaning (or meanings) of the word hypocritical on which we differ but rather your whole attitude to the meaning of words. You speak of THE dictionary definition of words as if there is only one dictionary and one rigid meaning which attaches to a given word. The wisdom which attaches to the notion of lying loose to life seems to have escaped you entirely.
I tried to list some of the things on which we do agree—insofar as I can discern them from what you have said—and your reaction is simply to cry: BULLSHIT! Are you not capable of operating without using expletives and gratuitous insults? To suggest that I cannot read is quite simply silly. Ever since I can remember I have always loved dictionaries.
My Oxford English reference dictionary defines an agnostic as follows:
A person who believes that nothing is known, or can be known, of the existence or nature of God or of anything beyond material phenomena. 2 A person who is uncertain or non-committal about a certain thing.
That is what I would call a sensibly nuanced definition and despite what you say agnostic is the best word at my disposal to categorise where I am at.
Rest assured I will no longer attempt to interact with you. It is not because much of what you say is wrong or untrue but simply because your method of interacting is far too abrasive. You don’t seem to care whether you are interacting with an agnostic or a Muslim or . . . You tend to writeus all off as idiots even when we agree with you.
Report thisBy Blueboy1938, June 24, 2007 at 7:51 am #
Interestingly, “bigot” is said to have come from a Middle French term for a “religious hypocrite.” It may have come from an old insult the French used in referring to the Normans as “Visigoths,” who were in turn referred to in Medieval Latin as “bigoths.” Unfortunately, bigotry is all too often a component of religious fervor. Apparently, it isn’t sufficient for some individuals and groups to realize their own epiphany, they have to shove it down the throats of others. The original thirteen colonies had a variety of religious outlooks. The Puritans in Massachusetts imposed laws that required religious observance of all in the colony, within the Puritan communion, of course. Roger Williams struck out for Rhode Island to set up a tolerant refuge for those persecuted in other places. Remarkably, he founded the American Babtist church, which has become one of the most socially and religiously intolerant denominations in the United States. In mainly Calvinist New Amsterdam, the Quakers were persecuted. Pennsylvania, the “Quaker State,” was the only other tolerant colony besides Rhode Island. Maryland was initially set up as a refuge for Catholics, flirted with an “Act of Tolerance,” and was thrust back into an Anglican intolerance that had given rise to so much of the religious migration to the “New World.” Virginia was Anglican from the start, and Virginians were the first permanent settlers of the Carolinas. Huguenots fled persecution in France into what became South Carolina. Georgia practiced religious tolerance, except towards Catholics. So what eventually became the United States was founded largely by those escaping religious persecution, but who, with notable and partial exceptions, by and large practiced intolerance of other religions. The U. S. Constitution attempted to do away with the strife that brought by providing for freedom of religion, or rather the separation of church and state. That has been interpreted to also apply to those who practice no religion. Unfortunately, even atheists can look bigoted when they go after religious symbols “in the public square,” as it’s so quaintly put. The fact of the matter is that, where religion is concerned, laissez-faire doesn’t work, as everyone goes for the jugular over religious differences. Almost all of the current world conflicts are based at least in part on religious animosities. Would it be better if everyone were atheists? Probably not, as human beings would undoubtedly find something else to fight over.
Report thisBy Jim H., June 23, 2007 at 8:55 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Re: 80795
Ted Swart
Again I must say: “YOU CANNOT READ!”
And that includes a DICTIONARY!
Or are ‘you’ WRITING YOUR OWN DICTIONARY?
You say: “--- you must surely realize that imbecile moronic bigots cannot possibly be hypocrites.(?)
Read this! (below ) Or better yet, have someone read it to you!
Dictionary
hypocrisy
The practice of professing beliefs, feelings, or virtues that one does not hold or possess; falseness.
An act or instance of such falseness.
You say: “---bigots with adequate intelligence are not necessarily hypocrites---"(?)
I had said"---when ‘they’ pretend “Peace"-ful co-existance”, ‘this’ makes them the worst kind of “HYPOCRITES”!
Why don’t you have someone you trust read ALL my emails to you? You keep re-definig words and denying the efficacy of my very careful verbiage and statements that you either DO NOT READ! OR CANNOT COMPREHEND! How much did you pay for those DIPLOMAE? You were cheated!
You Say:"---definition of the word agnostic---the difference between do not (currently) know and cannot---” “I am a DO NOT kind of agnostic.”
DICTIONARY
agnostic
One who believes that it is impossible to know whether there is a God.
One who is skeptical about the existence of God but does not profess true atheism.
One who is doubtful or noncommittal about something.
I had said: “As for “Agnostic”, the ‘definition’ seems clear enough? One who cannot decide whether to believe in a “Divine” “First Cause”, or whether there ever was a beginning?
I say: Isn’t the definition ‘above’ simple enough even for “you” to understand?
I quote “One who is skeptical about the existence of God”
You say: “I am a DO NOT kind of agnostic.”
Therefore, isn’t it correct to say: because ‘you’ “DO NOT”, you are unable to, or, “cannot ‘decide’ whether to believe in a “Divine” “First Cause, or whether there ever was a beginning”?
Stop trying to change the definitions of DICTIONARY words! Or go dry up!
If you don’t know what you believe or don’t believe, how would you expect someone else to?
And I don’t give a damn!
You talk about differences? First, you don’t know what ‘you’ believe!
Second, you apparently have not the least conception of how serious the ‘Godism’ problem is!
Therefore, you do not realize the THEOCRATS have taken over our US Government, President, Vice President, both houses of Congress, the US Supreme Court, and ‘they’ are in control of ALL the media, Press, Radio, Television, magazine and book Publishing! ‘They’ have infiltrated many of our Public Schools, are denying women medicines, and their rights under the US Constitution. And, there are so many other aatrocities the Religious “Fundamentalists” are guilty of, and inflicting upon American Citizens thet to list all, I would have to skip meals, and sleep, and I am too tired now, to go any further!
Because you are totally numb regarding, all the above, and you have the ‘gall’ to include me in your simplistic attitude regarding ‘this’ asinine determination, ergo: “We both feel that the scriptures of all formal faiths---are not exactly lofty(?) and that all of them need to be taken with a huge grain of salt.(?)
I say: BULLSHIT
You say:"--- a level headed civil discussion--- (?)
I say: that is impossible, because, you can’t read properly! ‘You’ make up your own definition of words, you, blame ‘me’ for a statement ‘you’ made, and lie about things I have written!
Your HEAD is not LEVEL! You need help! Go say a prayer!
Report thisBy Ted Swart, June 23, 2007 at 6:40 pm #
Jim H #80535
Well now Jim if you thought about it a little you must surely realize that imbecile moronic bigots cannot possibly by hypocrites. They simply do not have adequate intelligence to qualify for the epithet. It is only those bigots who have an adequate level of intelligence who can qualify as hypocrites . And even bigots with adequate intelligence are not necessarily hypocrites if they are consistent about sticking to their bigotry.
I fail to understand why you keep harping on the definition of the word agnostic since its meaning is not fixed in accordance with some international gold standard. And if you are unable to understand the difference between do not (currently) know and cannot (your word) decide on the truth about life, the universe and everything there is not much further which I can do. The word “cannot” implies “unable to” whereas “do not” is simply an open admission of ignorance and if you are unable to see this difference there is not much I can do to help you. As I have said before I am a DO NOT kind of agnostic.
There are many things on which you and I agree:
Neither of us believes in a creator God or first cause.
Neither of us believes in heaven and hell and the abominable notion of eternal punishment
We both believe that many people – acting in the name of religion – have caused and continue to cause great harm and suffering to mankind.
We both feel that the scriptures of all formal faiths are contaminated with sentiments which are not exactly lofty and that all of them need to be taken with a huge grain of salt.
We both believe in the occurrence of evolution.
And so on and so on.
The difference between you and me is that I am very sceptical about the wisdom of behaving like a bull in a china shop. You seem to enjoy throwing around aggressive and not very helpful phrases. I am not even sure if you are interested in a level headed civil discussion
There seems to be very little more that I can do to move closer to a common mind in my interaction with you unless you have some bright ideas which currently elude me.
Report thisBy cann4ing, June 23, 2007 at 4:51 pm #
Nahida, is there anything the Zionists have not stolen from the Palestinian people?
Report thisBy nahida, June 23, 2007 at 4:07 pm #
Jewish colonizers uproot Palestinian trees, replant them in illegal Israeli colony
http://sabbah.biz/mt/archives/2007/06/22/jewish-coloni zers-uproot-palestinian-trees-replant-them-in-illegal-israe li-colony/
Report thisBy Logician, June 23, 2007 at 1:49 pm #
Thank you, Mr Harris.
After achieving atheism in my 46th year after years of historical studies, I had to admit I had not found anyone in the ‘popular’ press who voiced what had become so apparent to me.
And then I read “End Of Faith.” While I despair at the internecine squabblings I have encountered in differing atheist groups, at least with your books I find a voice to which I can harken.
Do not despair at the level of discourse on this site. Two stories will illustrate why:
1) Mory comes home from work early. Hearing loud noises coming from his bedroom, he runs into it and finds his wife in bed with his best friend. As Mory begins to boil, his best friend jumps out of bed and says, “Mory, relax, what are you going to believe, me or your eyes?”
2) Two cows are standing in a pasture. The first cow says to the second one, “You realize, of course, that while Pi is normally truncated to five places, it does go on into infinity?” The second cow looks at the first and says, “Moo.”
Those who have ears to hear will hear you, Mr. Harris, and those who do not; well, Darwin told us what the evolutionary process will do with them.
Take the comments you read on this site as a good indicator of what truth and rationality have to overcome.
In the meantime, I salute you, Mr. Harris, as a man who states what is all too obvious but too few are brave enough to enunciate.
We each speak only for ourselves; that is the beauty of freedom. For myself, Mr. Harris, I stand with you and am proud to be named as a freethinker with you.
Excelsior!
Report thisBy encode, June 23, 2007 at 1:46 pm #
While I enjoyed the Harris and Hedges’ debate, I am not sure it met its goals. The former cleverly dissects fundamentalist orientation of any faith while the latter subjectively, ethically, and passionately defended the motivation of a segment of faith; a subset of the argument.
Report thisBy Jim H., June 22, 2007 at 2:17 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Re: 80506
Ted Swart
I repeat: Imbercile MORONIC BIGOTS!, ‘are’ “HYPOCRITES’!
‘This’ takes in all those who believe in some makebelieve fairytale character, or some redefinition of a “first cause” “Creator God”; and consider ‘theirs’ the only ‘factual’ explanation, while in so doing, relogating all others to something akin to blasphemy and heresy, which ‘I say’ makes them “MORONIC BIGOTS’, a threat to all others, and, when they pretend “Peace"-ful co-existance”, ‘I say’ this makes them the worst kind of “HYPOCRITES”!
All the stories: “Bibles” “Qurans” and related supporting writings emerged from the accumulated twisted conglomerations of memorized ‘fairytales’, intertwined with charlatans lies, and altered truths, passed onto, repeatedly embellished, and conveyed orally by otherwise early illiterate ‘diviners’ and forerunners of the later Middle age troubadours, that became the “Books” once the ‘science’ of printing developed!
And, for some people of ‘today’s world, to accept any parts of those farcical pornographic how-to handbooks for mayhem and murder as something to guide one, or live by, certainly, all the foregoing evidence herein being borne out, suports the belief ‘they are imberciles, and morons!
As for “Agnostic”, the ‘definition’ seems clear enough? One who cannot decide whether to believe in a “Divine” “first Cause”, or whether there ever was a beginning? When, if fact, there is absoutely to reason to cojure up a BEGINNING, because, any truly intelligent person, including some who have Doctorates, know: “beginning” is a relative term used for describing things we comprehend and know did not exist prior to the initial onset! But, if you say “beginning”, there is always a “beginning” except where there is none!
And that is “THE UNIVERSE”! (NATUURE)
For those who find this difficult to understand I suggest you stare at a (printed) circle, and find IT’s “BEGINNING”!
Mass/energy never disappear
Ever were ever here!
J.H. 5/8/07
Without something to ‘create! a “so-called “Creator-God”
is an impossibel superfluous nonentity!
THE ORIGIN OF NATURE
Report thisBeginning is never found but keep an ear to the ground
Accept the word of a friend there’s no beginning or end
Natures origin for instance is ceaselessness Existence
JH 8/29/06
By nahida, June 22, 2007 at 12:55 pm #
Dear Ted,
As for my perception of God’s sense of humour, I must admit that I have infinite affection to this concept
, and I have no doubt that God has the Most Fantastic wit and sense of humour 
But then again talking about God and faith -as I said many times before- is so very subjective.
It’s like talking about love and trying to convey it to some one who’s never been in love, the immensity, the vastness, the all-embracing, the majestic feelings, the inner delight, the joy, the ecstasy that surpasses all human vocabulary and the bliss that extends beyond any recognisable horizon; all this cannot be verbally articulated, logically explained, scientifically measured, or even passionately shared.
Bliss and beyond
A state of delight
Blissful pleasure
Contentment
Tranquillity
Enchantment and joy
If people knew how it feels
They would’ve embraced
With bouncy heart
And open arms
No privilege
No adversity
No gain
No loss
No health
No pain
No achievement
No catastrophe
No triumph
No defeat
Can Annihilate
Or nullify
Passionately… with a heartfelt desire
I want to share
***********************
Intertwined!
How could one be spiritual
Without being saturated in love?
It’s impossible
How would one experience love
Without being spiritual to the core?
It’s not possible
When you love
You are bursting with curiosity
Teeming with awe
You see splendour all around
In the most unlikely places
And the most unnoticeable things
This beautiful feeling
Immeasurable
Irrational
Majestic
Real
Mysterious
Overwhelming
Defying all laws
Challenging all notions
Transcending all boundaries
Refusing to be defined
Making life worthwhile living
Gives you a glimpse into the unknown
The more deeply you look at the visible
The closer you become to seeing the invisible
As you board the boat of love
You embrace your spiritual-self
Embarking on a magical journey
Floating… following your destiny
Spirituality and love are inseparable… intertwined
Report thisBy Ted Swart, June 22, 2007 at 12:06 pm #
Jim H #80479
This seems to be getting us nowhere.
You say:
“I say: Imbercile MORONIC BIGOTS!, ‘are’ “HYPOCRITES’!”
Such intemperate language unbecomes you. Am I in your scheme of things an “Imbecile MORONIC BIGOT” or is Nahida so classified by you?
An imbecile is someone with a mental age of about 3 and a moron is someone with a mental age of about 8. Since I have two doctorates in science and mathematics & have an IQ of about 140 and I know Nahida has a degree in mathematics it is hard to know where you are coming from. As for bigotry what am I or Nahida supposed to be bigoted about?
Incidentally, Nahida tells us in one of her posts that her father was secular and her embrace of the Muslim faith was not the result of childhood indoctrination (as you imply in one of your posts) but a personal choice.
For the most part your discourse is not only unnecessarily inemperate but rambles on in a manner which is hard to follow. You must surely recognize from what I have said that I don’t believe in a “first cause” any more than you do. I know you say that my description of my own beliefs is an oxymoron and all I can say to that is: suit yourself. At least I have tried to explain where I am at.
Am not at all sure that our interaction is leading anywhere but perhaps if you attempted to explain in a few short sentences where you are coming from it might help.
Report thisBy Ted Swart, June 22, 2007 at 11:27 am #
Nahida #s 79958 and 80006
Nice to see your sense of humour coming to the fore.
In your long list of attributes of God(Allah) which you included in one of your posts I did not notice anything about God having a sense of humour. When I am quietly sitting musing about things I have sometimes speculated about what the attributes of God would need too be—assuming he/she/it really exists—and I have to confess that having a sense of humour and being a bit disgruntled at times feature prominently on my list. Years ago now, at the Quaker Selly Oak Colleges I had some long and interesting conversations with a very ardent young Muslim. He could never quite figure out how I could even suggest such aspects of God’s nature.
Anyway to change the topic slightly, I really had a good laugh about the list of ten commandments which the Roman Catholic Church has invented for drivers. One of the commandments reads:
“ 6. Charitably convince the young and not so young not to drive when they are not in a fitting condition to do so.”
Apart form the awkward use of three “not"s this commandment exhibits an inexcusable confusion about the meaning of words fit and fitting in the English language. The phrase should be; . . not in a fit condition . . Presumably it means not driving under the influence of alcohol, marijuana or other drugs.
Having a fitting means trying on a dress or other item of clothing—made by a tailor—so as to be sure it fits properly. For the Catholic Church to make such a blunder simply caused my mirth to burst forth and it provided my daily medicinal dose of laughter.
I am sorry that your homeland Palestine is going through an unusually rough time at the moment. My own former home country is also in a terrible state.
Report thisBy Jim H., June 22, 2007 at 11:07 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Re: 80453
Ted Swart
You say: “---they, ("Christians, Muslims and Jews") are illogical but it does not mean they are necessarily hypocrites.
I say: Another oxymoron?
I say: Imbercile MORONIC BIGOTS!, ‘are’ “HYPOCRITES’! The fact that they give any credence to, ‘read’ and ‘view’ as though there life depended on “scriptures”, (farcical makebelieve fairytales) shows them to be “hypocritic” bigots, and, asinine fools that, because they are off balance mentally with reference to every day reality, and constantly waver back and forth between relying on a farcical character, and relying on there own mixed up idea of the real world, they are a threat to all intelligent people!
You say: “I was in no way trying to exclude Christians and Jews---"(?)
I say: You said: (79822) Quote: “Nahida does not believe that aheists and agnostics need “TO BE ELIMINTED” (!) Isn’t this “---trying to exclude Christians ans Jewes---” (?)
I say: When you ‘quote’ the written ‘words’ of someone in their defense, you ought to at least ‘know what they say’!, and, be cognizant of their gross BIGOTRY!
You say: “---specific mention of atheists and agnostics---originated with your own post! (?)
I say: THIS IS A LIE! And, ‘this’ is exactly ‘why’ I say “YOU CANNOT READ”!
I Say: ‘I’ was quoting Nahida! And, ‘YOU’! if you were able to read, and understand the language, you would SURELY know that!
You say: (finally) “--- my own current beliefs is in no way oxymoronic.(?)
I say: The ‘explanation’ that follows the above statement (including ‘your’ dictionary interpretation) completely, and totally contradicts ‘it’! And supports my assertion of “oxymoron”! You cannot have it both ways, even if you want to redefine “God” or ‘other ‘first cause’ which there never, never was!
Mass/energy never disappear
Ever were ever here!
J.H. 5/8/07
Without something to ‘create! a “so-called “Creator-God”,
impetus, or “first cause’
are impossibel superfluous nonentitys!
THE ORIGIN OF NATURE
Report thisBeginning is never found but keep an ear to the ground
Accept the word of a friend there’s no beginning or end
Natures origin for instance is ceaselessness Existence
The worst form of child abuse is warping of the mind!
JH 8/29/06
By Ted Swart, June 22, 2007 at 9:09 am #
Jim H:
No more comments from me on double posting. Obviously just s a glitch in the system.
You still fling around gratuitously derogatory remarks about my not being able to read etc. Huge numbers of Christians, Muslims and Jews are selctive about the use of their own scriptures. This may well mean they are illogical but it does not mean they are necessarily hypocrites.
You ask why I spoke of agnostics and atheists as being eliminated and did not mention Christians and Jews in my comments on your ELIMINATION remark. If you go to your very own post you will see that specific mention of atheists and agnostics in this context originated with your own post! I was in no way trying to exclude Christins and Jews so please drop this topic since it is hardly helpful in any interaction between us.
You go onto say:
You say: “I am a radical agnostic pantheist.”
I say: I suppose you are unaware that statement is an oxymoron?
“An agnostic does not deny the existence of God and heaven(?) but holds that one cannot know for certain whether or not they exist.(!)
And, Pantheism is: A doctrine that the universe is God and, conversely, that there is no god(?) apart from the substance, forces, and laws manifested in the universe.
But I forgive you.”
Thanks for the forgiveness which is a happy change from your scathing critique. Perhaps you will also forgive me for pointing out that my description of my own current beliefs is in no way oxymoronic.
If you go to the dictionay and check on the definition of agnosticism you will soon enough find that there is more than one definition. Your definition speaks of “cannot know for certain” whether or not God exists. That is what I would call strong agnosticism. My own verison of agnsiticism (weak agnosticism) is of the DO NOT KNOW kind and may well be the kind of agnosticism which Huxley claimed. So when I say that I am an agnostic pantheist I am simpiy affirming that I do not know the answers regarding the nature of any divinty associated with the unniverse. A pure pantheist does aver—as you say—that the universe and God are the same thing. My pantheism is a little weaker than this since I make no such claim and feel that the if there is a divine attribute to the universe it has to be intertwined with the universe and not separate from it—whence agnostic pantheism. Clearly it is possible to be an agnostic without any pantheistic leanings and I am merely expressing my leanings.
The existence of the concepts good and bad, right and wrong is a really tough conundrum and it seem hard to me to explainan these concepts without some built in norms within the universe.
As for the radical it is surely possible to be a bland—sort of anything goes—agnostic and it is also possible to be a more robust agnostic who is willing to rule out certain options as too improbale and too illogical to be worth waisting time on. So I am radical in the sense that I DO reject the notion of a creator God—separate from an pre-existing the universe which He/She/It made. And together with this rejection I certainly deny the existence of heaven and hell together with that abomanable belief in eternal punishment.
Dare I say: Peace.
Report thisBy Jim H., June 21, 2007 at 9:32 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Re: 80199
Ted Swart;
About the “double posting”? I believe this is a result of some malfunction with the submission system, and seems to result when reviewing and correcting a second or third time, or when trying to cancel a submission so as to reformulate, and rewrite. Occasionally when trying to cancel, and without inserting the ‘code’ and without ‘hitting’ “Submit” I get a “thank you”! Strange!
--------------------------------------------
You say: “I ---am saying what I say on the basis of Nahida’s own postings which I have no reason whatsoever to doubt. (?)
I say: If someone talks “PEACE” and then cites a ‘handbook’ for bigotry and slaughter, you do a disservice by supporting what amounts to ‘bold faced lie!
And you say: “You don’t say which book you mean.”
Apparently, you do not ‘read’ very well!
First, Nahida talks of PEACE! and then, quotes a ‘handbook’ for ‘slaughtering’ anyone who does not bow to Allah! THE ‘BOOK’ SHE LIVES BY!
How you missed her citing the “Quran” is beyond understanding, unless, as I have already stated, “you cannot read”!
And, that you would ‘wonder’ “---which book you mean”,(?) after Nahida quotes it, and, then, ‘my’ quoting ‘it’, by citing “The Five Pillars of Islam, apparently ‘doubly’ proves that you cannot read the English language!
About Pinocchio? You Had said: “Nahida does not believe that aheists and agnostics need “TO BE ELIMINTED”.(?) (strange that both you, and she, left out Christians and Jews?) Was it intentional?
When someone ‘lives by’ and quotes the Quoran, ‘they’ ‘believe’ all “Infidels”; those who do not accept “Allah” as their “God”, must be “eliminated”, “it is better to “kill them”!
And, to deny this, and talk “PEACE” is the worst kind of hypocrasy!
I therefore, naturally, assumed you had not read Nahilda’s emails, and for some other reason ‘butted’ into the discussion like someone who’s nose is longer than it ought to be.
You say: “I am a radical agnostic pantheist.”
I say: I suppose you are unaware that statement is an oxymoron?
An agnostic does not deny the existence of God and heaven(?) but holds that one cannot know for certain whether or not they exist.(!)
And, Pantheism is: A doctrine that the universe is God and, conversely, that there is no god(?) apart from the substance, forces, and laws manifested in the universe.
But I forgive you.
Mass/energy never disappear
Ever were ever here!
J.H. 5/8/07
Conservation of Mass/Energy E=mc2
Report this1.The Universe contains an infinite amount of matter and energy.
We cannot create nor can we destroy matter or energy.
2.Matter can be changed in form, or state.
3. Energy can be changed in form.
4. We change matter to energy and energy to
matter never diminishing the totality.
--------------------------------------
Without something to ‘create! a “so-called “Creator-God”
is an impossibel superfluous nonentity!
------------------------------------------------
THE ORIGIN OF NATURE
Beginning is never found but keep an ear to the ground
Accept the word of a friend there’s no beginning or end
Natures origin for instance is ceaselessness Existence
The worst form of child abuse is warping of the mind!
JH 8/29/06
By Ted Swart, June 21, 2007 at 4:06 pm #
Jim H:
I see you have caught Nahida’s disease an have taken to double posting. What a lot of unfounded conclusions you arrive at without any basis. Whay are you so aggressive and angry?
YOU SAY: “Ted Smart? Is this an alias?”
If you read my posts you will see I am Ted Swart (which means black) NOT Ted Smart —no doubt a Freudian slip-up on your part since you imply I travel under an alias and pretend to be smart. Let me assure you I travel under my real name Jim H—whatever H stands for.
YOY SAY:
“ You say: “Nahida does not believe that aheists and agnostics need “TO BE ELIMINTED”.(?)
And, are you her ‘confessor’?”
No. I am not her confessor and am simply saying what I say on the basis of Nahida’s own postings which I have no reason whatsoever to doubt.
Or, were you the model for Geppetto’s “Pinocchio?
Waht a rude and uncalled for comment.
“ How much do you know about ‘that’ “Book”? Or those people who live ‘by’ it?”
You don’t say which book you mean. The Bible, the Qur’an the OT? I know the Bible extremely well and have some knowledge of the Qur’an from translations and commentaries. Both are what I would call a mixed bag.
“You, apparently do not read newspapers, nor are you knowledgeable about the happenings in the Middle East involving those “PEACE"-LOVING people your ‘friend’ refers to!”
What baseless asumptions on your part. I read a newspaper every day and am very well aware of the sad goings on in the Middle East.
“I suggest you do a bit of research before accepting ‘as fact’ assertions from someone that totally contradict their ‘life-long’ religious devotions based on early brainwashing, indoctrination, and mesmerized enslavement to a makebelieve fairytale conception of reality!”
WOW! What a mouthful of a sentence. How do you know I have not done at least as much research as you claim to have done. I am a radical agnostic pantheist but I don’t think that gives me the right to behave in an uncivil manner. People of worth cut right across all religions and include atheists and agnostics and—dare I say it—Muslims and Nahida’s behaviour speaks of a person of worth.
Report thisBy nahida, June 21, 2007 at 8:32 am #
Here I go again
, after being “illogical" 
(posting the same comment twice)
I’ll put the icing on the cake, and I will “selectively”
choose another quotation from the Quran, for those who can only shout abuse at any one with different views than theirs:
“...do not let one (set of) people make fun of another set. Do not defame one another. Do not insult by using nicknames. Do not spy on one another. Do not backbite or speak ill of one another."(49:11-12)
Report this