This poll misses a golden opportunity.
What do you think Sarah Palin should do next?
Run for president.
46%
Run for some other office.
5%
Continue speaking as private citizen.
10%
Something else.
40%
“Something else”? But what? I can imagine lots of things I’d like to see Sarah Palin do…like get an education, or join the circus, or get eaten by wolves.
If you answer “Something else”, I think you’ll just have to expand on your answer here.
How dare the Northeast Florida CoR put up such an evil sign!
I am totally unsurprised that half the people so far find it offensive. We wouldn’t want unbelievers to be anything but alone, after all.
Are you offended by the message in this atheist billboard?
Yes (54.1%)
No (45.9%)
Hmm. Those numbers might change soon. Look quick!
Some days, I feel like the whole issue of the mention of God on our currency is trivial and stupid, and I really don’t care anymore. And then I see an ‘argument’ like the one in this argument defending keeping “God” on our money, and I realize that…YES, I DO CARE. I care very much that people are so deeply infected with religion that they actually think this is a clever defense.
The word “God” is not comparable to an organization, a building, a philosophy or a religion. God, unlike an establishment of religion, is a concept to atheists and believers alike. The believer perceives God as the living creator of all. The atheist perceives God as an unfortunate fictional concept that causes war. Either way, this country was founded on respect for a higher power than man — an entity generically referred to as God in the English-speaking world. The laws of our land protect our right to revere or disavow God, but they do not protect us from hearing and seeing the term. Believer and non-believer alike make up one nation under God, because the first law of the land protects belief or disbelief in God, the right to talk about God, and the right to make God the highest authority in one’s life.
Because we’re a nation under God — with God as a concept we are free to love as truth or disavow as fiction — we have never been one nation under Washington, Lincoln, Reagan or Obama. We are a nation that elevates God — whatever God means — above any human authority because we are a nation that elevates an individual’s choices above the agendas of authorities.
Get that? Believers like God, atheists think god is an “unfortunate fictional concept”, but either way, we have respect for a higher power. And because we are free to disbelieve in God, it is symbolic of our freedom to honor God. His god. That Abrahamic tyrant.
If they’re all interchangeable and we just need to honor a generic concept, then why not have alternating mintings where “God” is interchanged with “Allah” and “Cthulhu” and “Satan” and “Mammon” and whatever? It shouldn’t bother this author. After all, he suggests we just use our imaginations to insert whatever meaning we want.
When annoyed by currency, atheists have the option of interpreting “in God we trust” as “in a fictional concept we trust” for the sake of limited government.
I don’t care what you think of the issue, but you should vote for reason and against sloppy supernaturalist lunacy.
Should “God” be stricken from U.S. currency and the Pledge of Allegiance?
Yes, lose the references to God
43%
No, keep God on currency and in the Pledge
53%
I don’t know
0%
I don’t care
4%
If it helps, you can try interpreting “Should ‘God’ be stricken from U.S. currency and the Pledge of Allegiance?” as “Should gibbering lunatics like Wayne Laugesen be stricken from the editorial pages of the Colorado Springs Gazette?” For the sake of liberty, freedom, and justice for all. Amen.
There was this young child at a Catholic pre-school who was kicked out because his or her parents were lesbians. Now people are protesting, because that’s not what Jesus would do (I won’t quibble over their justifications — Jesus probably would have told the mob to stone the perverted parents to death — it’s OK that they’re doing the right thing for the wrong reasons). And the local newspaper runs a poll.
Yes
 43.98 %
No
 40.32 %
I’m not sure
 1.443 %
I don’t care if they protest or not
 14.24 %
For additional amusement, the good Reverend at the Catholic church at the center of this issue has a novel excuse for his actions.
“If a child of gay parents comes to our school, and we teach that gay marriage is against the will of God, then the child will think that we are saying their parents are bad,” Breslin said on his blog. “We don’t want to put any child in that tough position.”
Isn’t that sweet? It’s for the good of the child that they evict them, so they don’t hear the cruel condemnations the church will give their parents.
It’s pointless for these loons to try and make their case with a goofy online poll, since we’ll just smack it down. Here’s another one.
Do you believe homeopathy is an effective form of treatment?
51%Yes
49%No
The evidence is all against it, and reason suggests there is no mechanism. Perhaps they ought to correct those deficiencies before playing poll games.
Here’s a Fox-News-driven poll for you.
Should Al Gore remain on Apple’s Board of Directors?
Yes 48%
No 49%
Unsure 4%
What did Al Gore do to win this vote of no-confidence? Was he flirting with Linux, caught running Windows, abusing insider information to reap illegal profits from the booming iPhone business? None of the above. He attended a business meeting of the Apple board, and a few idiot stockholders carped about global warming. Which he ignored.
Look at the amazing reporting given by Fox News ‘reporter’ Gene Koprowski.
“Al Gore won a Nobel Prize and an Oscar for his film, An Inconvenient Truth. But in the last three months, as global warming has gone from a scientific near-certitude to the subject of satire, Gore — the public face of global warming — has been silent on the topic,” Koprowski reports. “The former vice president apparently finds it inconvenient even to answer calls to testify before the U.S. Senate. You can call him Al… but he won’t call back.”
“On Tuesday, Oklahoma Sen. James Inhofe — a prominent skeptic of global warming theory and the Republican leader of the Senate’s Environment and Public Works Committee — issued a request for Gore to come testify on global warming,” Koprowski reports. “In an interview with FoxNews.com, Inhofe said he wants Gore to appear because ‘it will be interesting to ask him on what science he based his movie,’ a film the senator considers ‘science fiction.'”
“Gore has yet to respond, but that didn’t prevent him from causing a stir at Apple’s shareholder meeting Thursday. According to CNET, Gore was seated in the first row while several stockholders bashed his high-profile views on climate change. One reportedly said Gore ‘has become a laughingstock. The glaciers have not melted,'” Koprowski reports. “Gore did not reply, and he has not commented on his blog or Twitter feed.”
I knew Fox was bad, but I didn’t know it was that bad. The scientific consensus on global warming hasn’t changed a bit — it’s only become stronger over the past years. James Inhofe is a flaming moron, and when the scientific authority you turn to is a Republican politician, you’ve got to be desperate.
I was sent these nice graphic designs to illustrate denialism. Fox News is the consolidator of all those dishonest red hexagons that turn people into infectious disseminators of lies.
I’m shocked that such a serious journal would find any value at all in running a web poll, but there you go. They’re everywhere. How about giving them a lesson in the frangibility of polls?
Should homeopathy be allowed on the NHS?
Yes 35%
No 65%
Those silly, harmless bus signs were the subject of the Sunday Sacrilege this week. But now New Zealanders have rejected the bus ads — and we’ve got a poll to see if that is fair. And we all know that polls are the perfect way to resolve ethical issues.
Was NZ Bus right to reject ads from an atheist group?
Yes, the ads are in bad taste and would distress people
23.3%No, this is unfair and discriminatory
67.0%The extra publicity is good for the atheist campaign anyway
9.7%
Oh, this is a cunning ploy to foil pharyngulation: a whole page of creationist polls, thrown up like chaff to distract us so we won’t slam any one of them too hard. You can still play, though, and skew them some. Here are three:
Do you believe dinosaurs and humans ever lived at the same time?
No
45,21%
Yes
39,92%
Probably not
7,84%
They probably have.
7,03%
How old is the earth?
Billions of years
47,01%
Around 6000 years
35,26%
Closer to 10,000 years
8,40%
Millions of years
7,56%
Close to 100,000 years
1,77%
Do you believe that humans were created or that they evolved?
I believe humans were created as humans in the beginning by God.
51,56%
I believe humans evolved from ape-like creatures with no intervention by God.
33,09%
I believe something different from all the options above.
9,44%
I believe God created humans and then they evolved.
5,91%
Right now it looks like a third to half of all respondents picked the stupidest answer possible, which is quite an accomplishment.
I like water, but I don’t think it has magic powers.
Do you believe homeopathy is an effective form of treatment?
65% Yes
35% No
