Everyone should congratulate the Scientific Indian and spouse on the birth of their daughter — and on their excellent taste in names!
Pharyngula
Evolution, development, and random biological ejaculations from a godless liberal
Everyone should congratulate the Scientific Indian and spouse on the birth of their daughter — and on their excellent taste in names!
Damon Linker doesn’t like the New Atheism because it is “illiberal”, and so he writes a screed in the New Republic — one that is poorly thought out and guilty of the crimes he accuses atheists of, while exercising his distaste for the godless, and nothing more.
The problems begin with his opening gambit: he’s outraged that Richard Dawkins dares to regard religious indoctrination as a form of child abuse. As has been typical for complaints of this sort, Linker doesn’t bother to address the substance of the argument, since that is apparently too difficult for him — is, for instance, telling a child that they will go to hell if they get a blood transfusion a damaging psychological act or is it not? — and instead makes the lazy and fallacious leap to the claim that Richard Dawkins wants Christian parents arrested.
‘Tis the season for ridiculous commercialism: I’ve been seeing these unbelievable commercials that feature some smug guy surprising his wife by giving her a luxury car (with a bow on top) as a present, or popping open a box with a big honkin’ diamond in it. The women always clap their hands with glee and lean in for a hot passionate kiss. I see these and I wonder…just how stupid do advertisers think men are?
I can tell you exactly what would happen if I spent a month’s salary or more on jewelry (or worse, a year’s income on a car). My wife would look aghast, and waver between calling the hospital for an immediate psychiatric consult and kicking me in the groin. I would spend that much on inessential frippery? Without consulting her? There sure wouldn’t be any sexual arousal, unless these commercial makers easily confuse that sinking feeling in the pit of the stomach at the thought of budget-busting debt with “sexy.”
Desirable women are too smart to be bought with flashy gee-gaws. My wife and I are talking about getting ourselves a snow-blower for Christmas…now that is romantic.
Don’t delude yourself — you can’t buy monogamy.
I have to wonder if Navy Lt. Cmdr. John Thomas Matthew Lee, Chaplain, was considered a man of good character—he just received a two year prison sentence after using his office for years as a base for preying on young Navy men…and he was also HIV-positive. He had his sentence reduced for his willingness to give up all of the names of his sexual partners, for their own good, I presume.
I also wonder if the Navy would be so fierce in their denunciations if he’d been using his rank and reputation to molest young women. There’s also a troubling suggestion that their pursuit of the victim’s names wasn’t entirely virtuous.
By trying to control the story and dampen the coverage, Marine officials delayed informing the public about the case — and Lee’s partners and victims about potential health risks. The officials knew that aim was important: They were willing to reduce the fairness of the sentence to achieve it.
Had the Corps released this public information to the media, it would have bought Lee’s victims more than a month to seek treatment, since the charges relating to his HIV status were preferred Nov. 1. It might not sound like much, but ask the victims whether they would like that time back. More important, ask anyone who’s had sex with the victims since then.
What the heck is a
zebibah?
The zebibah, Arabic for raisin, is a dark circle of callused skin, or in some cases a protruding bump, between the hairline and the eyebrows. It emerges on the spot where worshipers press their foreheads into the ground during their daily prayers.
I didn’t really want to know. I especially didn’t want to know that this injury caused by bashing one’s head into the floor is considered a signifcant accomplishment.
“The zebibah is a way to show how important religion is for us,” said Muhammad al-Bikali, a hairstylist in Cairo, in an interview last month. Mr. Bikali had a well-trimmed mustache and an ever-so-subtle brown spot just beneath his hairline. “It shows how religious we are. It is a mark from God.”
No, it isn’t. It’s a mark of self-inflicted brain damage.
Hey! Dan Whipple got to see a preliminary screening of Ben Stein’s silly movie, Expelled!
Read the review — it makes the point that the movie doesn’t even bother to explain what ID and evolution are before taking sides, and it defends its position incompetently. The movie is “so intellectually garbled it’s hard to summarize,” which is about what we all expected.
There’s no mention of my role, but I expect it would be a tiny part anyway; no mention of Eugenie Scott, either. Dan Whipple, if you see this — there are a lot of us who’d like to know more details about how our interviews were chopped up for this movie!
Texas Citizens for Science has come up with the site visit report for the ICR. It’s funky stuff: it seems they had creationist-sympathizers review the program, and they issued a pile of fluff and let them slide on their content.
So that’s what the ICR is up to
If you’ve been wondering what’s up with that attempt by the Institute for Creation Research to get accredited by the state of Texas, Texas Citizens for Science has dug up some suggestive information: the ICS is trying to trade up from their past worthless accreditation by an evangelical accreditation board, and they’re hoping to tap into some secular legitimacy.
The story is below the fold.
A recent poll of bigotry among religious groups managed to expose another level of bigotry in a certain unthinking tool, one David Briggs, who reported on it. It’s fine that they’re examining the problem of prejudice, but the last sentence at the end of this quote makes it clear that the virtue isn’t seen in terms of ending prejudice, but in promoting religious adherence.
A new study by Michigan State sociologist Ralph Pyle presented at this month’s joint meeting of the Society for the Scientific Study of Religion and the Religious Research Association in Tampa, Fla., shows how all sides in the conservative-liberal religious divide have work to do in combating prejudice and promoting tolerance.
Pyle measured nearly 3,000 responses from General Social Survey data from 1998-2004 on several issues such as openness to racial intermarriage and racially mixed neighborhoods and ranked religious groups on a scale of anti-black and anti-immigrant attitudes.
He found that moderate Protestants held the strongest anti-black attitudes. The next most prejudiced group? Liberal Protestants.
As expected, black Protestants were the least prejudiced against blacks. But they were the most prejudiced against immigrants. Conservative Protestants were the second most prejudiced group against immigrants. Jews, Catholics and other religious groups showed less prejudice to both groups, being particularly open to immigrants.
The good news for religious groups: People who go to church regularly were less likely to be prejudiced, Pyle said. The bad news is people with no religious affiliation were also much less likely to be prejudiced than individuals showing modest levels of commitment to their faith, those who attend services monthly or less.
Whoa. It’s “bad news” to discover that atheists and agnostics are more tolerant than modest church-goers? I guess it’s bad news for the church that’s trying to pretend they have the one true path to righteousness and goodness, but it sounds like good news for the people who are being discriminated against that there are many ways people can reduce their biases.
That is the goal, right?
The first part of this video bugged me — it sounded like Pascal’s Wager for global warming warriors — but hang in there. He admits that treating the alternatives as equal in probability is bogus, and what you need to do is rational risk assessment, and it makes a lot more sense.
