h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Math caling you deluded does not dehumanise you. As I have said before we all have delusions yours are that spirits inhabit trees, stnding stones and whatever other bit of the natural environment makes you feel

Me when i go to those places I feel too but I just think Dont drop litter, what a nice place for a picnic, close the gate..etc..."

I have delusions about my own dancing abilities and the quality of WBA's football team.

Being delusional is part of being human. Sorry your stuck with the rest of us.




Now for a rant.

Sent a delightful new member of the coaching team into a school to do some classes with five year olds at a local Catholic primary school. Ive worked there in the past and to be honest I dont like the school. Ive never had a crossed word with any of the staff and find the kids as good as any, but I think they lay the whole discipline thing on a bit too thick. I can deal with kids all saying "good aftrnoon visitors" in a slightly of kilter almost unison but them all getting it togetheer by the end to tell me "and god bless you" was if Im honest a little bit scary the first time round.

Any how by the end of the session I had a group of five 6 year olds shouting their names and having a controlled riot

Then at the end the class teacher comes in and tells them off for being noisy

Along with that Im not one impresed by overly preachy teaching and they have a *lot* of the "bigG is great and you are ungrateful sinners" propoganda plastered on the walls but to be fair they still have fair trade and Amnesty stuff up too.


Anyway sent in the new member of staff J, a dance teacher to do some stuff it was a big departure because before we have only done tag-rugby and basic skills in schools with rugby coaches so although Id done dance before (hardest six sessions of my life) I wanted to set my mind at ease that it was going to be alright. I went in to see her before the first session and check she and the school were all happy. She had plannig that put mine to shame (it was all neat and spelt right for a start) it was even done to match seasonal events! She showed this to the teacher and everyone was happy. I went off to shout at some other kids and get them good and muddy.

I called the school the next day and spoke to J, everyone was happy. Two days later I got a phone message from the office that the school had called and wanted J to change her planning.

Now her dance classes were themed around British folklore and traditions namely Halloween and bonfire night. OK I should have twigged sooner a festival based on the execution of Catholic terrorists and a paganistic-lite ghoul fest might not be totally in keeping but I just dont see things like that. I thought interesting and timely, well done J!

I wrongly assumed it was the school but the duputy head told me it was just one parent who had made a complaint

Maybe I could get the story into the Daily Mail "School bans Halloween"

one love

Welcome to my life BB.

We've had an award winning Maths Dept Head suspended because a Parent Governor suspected he was a Witch. A friend who ran a Homeopathic Shop almost run out of town by Evangelicals. I've been shouted at, cursed and spat upon by Christian Protestors at Stonehenge and the Rollright Stones (in front of Police who did nothing). And there is much, much more.

Despite all that we pagans do not pull the victim card. We don't sue churches or schools under the HRA or campaign for repressive legislation. We just get on with it.

Blessings,
Matholwch .

Hate that phrase, "pull the victim card" its used too more often than not by agrssive HEADS who feel other people ought to put up with whatever physical or verbal abuse they dish out but want to make other people feel guilty for tattle taleing the minuet they receive any censure for their unpleasant behaviour.

If you are a victim and decide to take action within the law or make a genuine appeal against immoral treatment you dont deserve to be called *more* names.


Maybe you should be using the law in the way is was intended or atleast ought to work. Stating claerly what the law is and making them work for you as they should might root out more people like this bigoted, halfwit.


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/south_yorkshire/6411165.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/south_yorkshire/7055708.stm

http://www.pinknews.co.uk/news/articles/2005-5820.html

http://www.christiantoday.com/article/christian.magistrate.appeals.to.high.court.over.gay.adoption.ruling/14108.htm

Here's the story covered originally by the BBC with an update and taken from both ends by sources of different persausions.


"Andrew McClintock, of Sheffield, South Yorkshire, said civil partnership laws clashed with his religious beliefs.


And his lawyer said:


"Mr Diamond said his client believed he had "rational grounds" to question whether it was in a child's best interests to be adopted by a gay couple...He said if there was evidence that a child would suffer, for example from bullying, then it would not be right to place them with a gay couple.

Mr McClintock claims the Tribunal failed to consider expert evidence provided by Professor Dean Byrd, President of the Thrasher Research Fund, and Clinical Professor of Medicine, University of Utah School of medicine.

Dr Byrd is also Vice president and standing psychologist to the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH), the foremost research body in the USA on the subject matter of medical and social study of homosexuality.

Professor Dean Byrd told the court that there was substantial evidence to support Mr McClintock's conviction that ordering a child to be raised by a same-sex couple was not in their 'best interests'. The Court also failed to take into account other legal precedents in Mr McClintock’s favour.

As the Court also failed to give any consideration to accommodate his religious beliefs, Mr McClintock believes it has created a precedent which will eventually see Christians forced out of serving in public office if they stand up for their convictions.

Now Mr McClintock is certainly either a halfwit or a bigot and more than likely both.

If I were decideing on an issue of child welfare Id decide it based on child welfare. Im funny like that. Any thinking and allegedly caring person would say if chikldren were in danger in a same sex relationship that they were in danger and not send them. Full stop, preiod, end of story, but that's not what Mr McBigot did is it.

No, he dragged religion into it and scuppered his alleged "reasons" for not placing children with gay families. However his claims about child welfare look paper thin when you consider that he didnt just stick to his guns about the dangers. Exactly how concerned was he when he asked to be EXCUSED from making those decisions

If I saw a tough decison for someone elses welfare that needed to be made Id consider it my duty to make that call based on the evidence not to run away from it.


Not only that it suggests his reasons arent all that substatial, why didnt he just make judgements based on the reason as he claimed initially. Afterall that's what he was *meant to do*. He was being paid to make judgements for the love of Bod!



I (being me) also have to question even his bigotted knee jerk actual reactions to gay adoption. Yes it is described as a sin in the bilgeble but so are a lot of things does he also think its bad to send to children to the homes of idolators, those who worship false gods, divorced people, people who dont keep the Sabbath or who wear clothes made from mixed fibres?

No he doesnt appear to be so bothered about these other commandments he just has it in for gays.

I think I'll add pretentious lying scum to the bigotted halfwit description.

one love

A good a place as any for this one:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/shropshire/7078455.stm






What grief? How can you grieve when someone has done exactly what they believe their god would want them to do? If the spokesman really is grieving then he really does need to reassess his beliefs.

One can only hope that this will, when they are old enough, turn the twins she has abandoned away from moronic belief systems. You would have thought that if their god hadn't wanted people to mix their blood he would have made everyones blood incompatible...but no...we have blood that IS compatible.

Maybe it's just evolution at work. The human race gets smarter because stupidity kills.

Or maybe not. There's at least two weeping bairns who will likely grow up being told that god wanted their mum more than he thought they needed her.

I just do not understand Jehovah's witnesses at all.........
I knew one when I was growing up whose parents insisted (to him) that Christmas did not exist and they treated it like any other day. No presents, nothing. He used to come around to ours and play Cowboys and Indians with us in the back garden until his mother called him - he would drop his toy gun and hide around the corner in fear of being discovered.

Today? He is a serial womaniser, four kids by different women, does drugs and drink to excess and his bitter mother has disowned him.

Another example. My mum opened the door once (back in the 60's) to an elderly german woman who asked "May I discuss God with you" Well, mum was polite and tried a few times to turn her away but in the end this woman stuck her shoe through the door to keep it open and sneered "You didnt really win the war did you?" Mum was 8 when the war broke out.....

Now to today - a young mother dies to "Service" a belief system that in my experience twists people inside and out. I predict that the children will grow up to hate the church for taking their mother away and the world will potentially inherit two more people wounded by "Religion"

How do these "Witnesses" still exist in the 12st century?

Hi Tumsup

"Maybe it's just evolution at work. The human race gets smarter because stupidity kills."

I wish it did, I really do. However, this young woman will become a poster girl for the JW's, an martyr for their cause, and in an increasingly fundamentalist age that is a truly dangerous thing.

Given the attitude of her husband and family I would recommend that Social Services remove the twins and send them for adoption lest they also become victims of these fanatics. Then they might finally know a mother's love.

From press coverage I have seen so far, and there is no reason for me to believe it is entirely accurate, the medical professionals involved in this were unable to intervene in case they breached the woman's human rights.

I can never understand how 'medical professionals' will not allow a terminal cancer patient in unbearable agony to choose to die, but will let an otherwise perfectly healthy young woman do so with everything to live for.

If I have to go into hospital with an incurable condition I'm taking a revolver...

Blessings,
Matholwch .

A sane theist?

-Given the attitude of her husband and family I would recommend that Social Services remove the twins and send them for adoption lest they also become victims of these fanatics-

Math, I couldn't agree more. Sadly, such a move is impossible in our culture. To do it would require some kind of enlightened fascism. (there's one for the oxymoron thread)

In the end there's nothing for it but to keep educating. Especially the very young. Start by getting rid of the shite that parents own their children and can send them to any mediaeval madressa that their twisted 'god' inspires them to.

Indonesia has recently seen a number of instances in which representatives of the majority religion of Islam have succesfully demanded the arrest of sect leaders who claim adherence to differing interpretations of the Koran. During Ramadhan last month, radical fundamentalist Muslim groups forcibly shut down cafes and other places that serve alcohol, while the police stood by "to keep the peace", i.e. arrest anyone who interfered with the vandalism or defended the victims.

This editorial appeared this morning:

From The Jakarta Post:

Indonesia's growing tolerance of the suppression of opposition
Patrick Guntensperger
Jakarta

Years ago, in another country, a very successful real estate company’s president said to me, “In business, as soon as someone tells me that he’s a committed or devout Christian, I make it a policy not just to scrutinise the deal with extra care, but also to count the silverware when he leaves the room.”

What he was getting at was not that he didn’t trust Christians, or followers of any particular faith, but rather that the unsolicited announcement of someone’s most deeply personal convictions made him suspicious of that person’s motives and accountability. He went on to say that those people in business who feel it necessary, or even appropriate, to wear their religious views on their sleeves were more likely in his experience to display questionable business ethics, and even to deal with outright dishonesty.

Wow! I thought.

We discussed this some more and he expanded on that observation. Religious views, he felt, were a personal matter; a matter for the individual and God and no one else. A community of like-minded individuals is perhaps pleasant, and provides some support and reinforcement of the common ground of faith and understanding; all that is fine. Hence we have churches, synagogues, mosques. But when, in a secular, business environment one introduces oneself as a devout follower of any religion, it suggests a number of things.

It suggests an assumption of superiority (I know the truth…you don’t) that some might find offensive. More importantly, it suggests exclusion (You are not one of the enlightened, chosen ones and I am), and that raises some concerns on the other’s part. The extension of that kind of thinking is often that since you are not “one of us”, it’s acceptable to deal dishonestly with you; to treat you in ways he wouldn’t treat his fellow believers.

My friend went even further. He pointed out that strongly held faith is all too often used as a justification for the most egregious behaviour. Some adherents to religious dogma substitute devotion for moral judgement. His admittedly strong position was that religion, in some people, replaces a moral compass. It permits those people to act in any unethical, self-serving way and at the same time claim the moral high ground because they are devout and therefore incapable of immorality.

He asked, “How would you react if I were to introduce myself at a business deal with the announcement that I am an atheist and that I live and conduct my business according to those principles? I imagine you would find it disconcerting and grotesquely inappropriate as a gambit.”

Whatever we think of my friend’s suspicions of the overtly religious, it is probably fair to say that the outspoken and passionately devout are a matter of concern. It is also fair to say that the inclination, here in Indonesia, to grant special dispensation to the vociferously religious for otherwise intolerable acts is becoming more and more a matter of concern.

Muslims, Christians, and atheists alike have every reason to be concerned when they see the country’s police stand by and protect self-appointed guardians of particular religious doctrines as they assault, vandalise, and terrorise those of whom they disapprove.

The people of any country, and most especially of a budding democracy, have every reason to be deeply concerned when a religious group in that country demands the arrest and punishment of those whom they feel have “deviated” from the one, true path. And when that group has the apparent support of the government, in direct contradiction of the country’s constitution, there is reason for very grave concern indeed. When that group represents the majority view, it is time to move from concern to genuine fear.

It is ironic that the very people who see themselves as the holy defenders of their version of Islam, would, had they been alive a little over 1400 years ago, have been crying out for Mohamed’s blood for his deviation from the then-current dogma.

It is time in Indonesia for people to act in the way they would like to be perceived. Indonesia prides itself on being a country of tolerance. Right now the only tolerance the world sees is that Indonesia is tolerant of the suppression of opposing views, tolerant of the state-sanctioned imposition of the majority religion upon minorities, tolerant of violence against those of different faiths.

Tolerance doesn’t mean passivity. To be tolerant is to be courageous and to speak up when the rights of others are being trampled. To be tolerant doesn’t simply entail tolerating those who mirror your views. True tolerance, in the sense that is embedded in Pancasila, means being tolerant of views with which you disagree, even views you abhor. It even means standing up and fighting back on the behalf of those people with whom you disagree.

Indonesia is constitutionally a tolerant country. It is time that we realise that means that we cannot tolerate religious or any other kind of fascism.

Interesting points.

If I may pick up on <>

I once worked for a company that dealt extensively with minorities in a business that was very susceptible to fraud. The company had developed a comprehensive series of checks and balances to counteract this. Top of our "suspect" list were businesses run by Ghanaian Christians. Statistically, we had an over 40% chance of being ripped off by them, as a result they had restricted credit limits and I had to keep an especial close eye on them. Sure enough, over a year two of the five Ghanaian Christian businesses tried to pull a fast one.

Some months ago, the Atlantic Monthly magazine ran an extensive story on the subject of why Presidents lie. Along with the usual political reasons there was an interesting discussion of why they seem even to lie to themselves.
What was conspicuously missing was any discussion of religion. And this with a picture of GW smirking on the cover.
Charismatic religion essentially means that ANYTHING THAT YOU FEEL LIKE DOING is the will of god since that feeling isn't your will but his.
Some days I feel like giving up, finding godand cashing in.

<>

I am sorry, I was going to, but I can't let you get away with such egregious nonsense!

The whole point of religion is discipline. (This from Merriam-Webster, for instance):
Main Entry: re·li·gion
Pronunciation: \ri-&#712;li-j&#601;n\
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English religioun, from Anglo-French religiun, Latin religion-, religio supernatural constraint, sanction, religious practice, perhaps from religare to restrain, tie back — more at rely
Date: 13th century >>

Note the etymology, "restrain, tie back"... )

Charismatic or not, the point of religion is exactly *not* doing quote "whatever you want" unquote.

Your comment is therefore nothing more than prejudiced nonsense.

In fact, to judge by what I've seen some people saying on the Dawkins thread, the whole point of *atheism* is thinking, doing and saying whatever you want! Why else is atheism so popular here?

VL

DA, you miss the point!

" the whole point of *atheism* is thinking, doing and saying whatever you want!"
No it's not, it's saying what has been proven using scientific method. You are not allowed to say that the moon is made of green cheese because it has been proved not to be.

Gosh, could it be because it is based on rational, logical thought using the evidence available and coming to the conclusion that all gods that have been created for millenia are tosh...they worked for their time at that point but then humans moved away from them. Now there are still numerous gods around but the judaic-abrahamic one just happens to be the one that is hanging on by it's finger tips.

It isn't that 'atheism' is popular here it is that rational, logical thought is...which is what the majority of people here indulge in.

<< the whole point of *atheism* is thinking, doing and saying whatever you want!"
No it's not, it's saying what has been proven using scientific method. You are not allowed to say that the moon is made of green cheese because it has been proved not to be.>>

Ok, I must have missed the point - because I just don't agree that Atheism = Science and therefore (presumably) believers of any sort are meant/required to eschew science!

Many centuries back, Science = Islam. (Well, it did!)

There are Christians (and Muslims) working in science now! So why claim that atheism simply is science? That's very arrogant on their (the atheist's) part...

VL

Oh, look. This thread is still going.

And I forgot to unsubscribe.

Wrong way round and its not abslute, Della.

"Atheism = Science" is as you say wrong. What is observably true is that "More science (knowledge) = more atheism"

Many people make the mistake of thinking technology is science. The Ancient Egyptians had some very sophisticated ways of applying what little science they knew, but they still believed some very odd things which you would not believe in and think them a little for beliveing.

For instance their bigG ejaculated caught it in his own mouth, became pregnant and gave birth to the universe and all the other gods who did equally bizzare things.

Yes for a long time Muslims did keep the embers of Egyptian, Mespotamian and Greek science alive. This was simply because at that time some Muslim states were more tolerant of antique ideas than were the conservative and in Europe pretty much all pervasive Roman Church.

You cant deny that Darwin was shumnned when he put forward his theories, this can only be because his ideas threw into question the very actual belief that most held at the time ie that as according to the bible the bigG had created Man separate to the beasts.

This idea above all others gave rise to thecurrent climate of sceptical recluctance to simply believe in things which are shown by science not to be anywhere near the truth.

one love

-I am sorry, I was going to, but I can't let you get away with such egregious nonsense!-

DA, you saw the there didn't you? I like to put a little warning on the lure to give the fish a chance to think.

EVERYONE is disciplined (contained) by the workings of their own mind. I'm just like you, I'm disgusted by people who do things that I don't do (or get a chance to do) I'm just like the moslem (and christian) fundamentalists who feel that people who are not like me should be killed.

The difference is that I'm disciplined by the knowlege that those things are just my FEELINGS and aren't true. I could easily go looking through the great ink blot of scripture to see justification. I could easily go to a quiet place, put my hands together, close my eyes and practice self hypnosis. It would confirm my feelings. I could call it the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit ALWAYS makes one feel good. He always tells you what you want to hear, no matter what that is. It's called the miracle of the Pentacost. Neuroscience calls it the confirmation bias. Except in epileptics and schizophrenics, the brain always finds a way to a calm state. It's an evolved way to save energy.

You always find what you're looking for in the last place you look. We scientists just keep looking. It's called discipline.

The truth is found outside of yourself. You don't find it by closing your eyes and looking within.

Oh, you're a scientist.... that's why you have such a dogged refusal to actually listen to any contrary views! The arrogant assumption that everyone in an 'enemy' group is irredeemably stupid, is also a dead giveaway...

<>

Where on (American atheists perhaps) did you get the idea that "Christian fundamentalists" think *anyone* should be killed? It's possible you've met fundamentalists and never known it... because by you, they should be insane strait-jacketed loonies spewing hatred. Newsflash, we're not. *

Once I'd never have described myself as a fundamentalist. Now I do. Years of hysterical bullying from insecure gays and atheists have made me reclaim the term, somewhat as feminists reclaimed the term crone in the 1980s.

* I mean a Christian fundamentalist... your American spelling of Muslim tells me that you're in the USA or Canada, where Muslims have to hide from the like of Cheney...

Vicky