 |
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Mal_Content Great Old One Joined: 03 Jul 2009 Total posts: 779 Gender: Unknown |
 Posted: 05-06-2011 11:31 Post subject: |
 |
|
|
| Re the Rice university guff on scientists and spirituality - shame it doesn't define what they meant by "spirituality" - it's the sort of word that can mean just about anything to anyone. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| ramonmercado Psycho Punk
Joined: 19 Aug 2003 Total posts: 17933 Location: Dublin Gender: Male |
| Posted: 05-06-2011 14:18 Post subject: |
|
|
|
| BlackRiverFalls wrote: | | Quote: | | She would approve, she said, a ban on genital mutilation of males in Ireland. Last Thursday she received unanimous support in the Seanad for her proposals to ban female genital mutilation in Ireland. |
Maybe i've missed the context here, but I wasn't aware Catholisism supported that kind of thing? Or is she talking about other kinds of religious fundmentalism also just not by name? |
Someone may have mentioned male circumcision. There is no case for it other than for medical purposes. This would of course annoy Muslims and Jews. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| ramonmercado Psycho Punk
Joined: 19 Aug 2003 Total posts: 17933 Location: Dublin Gender: Male |
| Posted: 06-06-2011 18:33 Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Quote: | Dawkins urges constitutional reform to remove church role
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2011/0606/1224298471229.html
PATSY McGARRY, Religious Affairs Correspondent
Mon, Jun 06, 2011
FREEDOM OF expression and of religion “should be limited only by the need to respect the rights and freedoms of others”, according to the Dublin Declaration on Secularism and the Place of Religion in Public Life, adopted unanimously at the World Atheist Convention yesterday.
The declaration also states that “the sovereignty of the State is derived from the people and not from any God or gods”.
Speaking to The Irish Times yesterday, well-known atheist Prof Richard Dawkins said the Irish Constitution should be reformed to “remove all influence of the Roman Catholic Church and all other churches . . . incorporating tolerance for all religions”.
Referring to the oath that must be taken by Irish presidents and judges, he said they might as well take an oath “to Zeus or Thor” as to God.
He “rejoiced” at the growth of secularism in Ireland and when he read the papers “about the pathetically diminished number of priests”.
He hoped the churches would “wither away”, describing the Catholic Church as “an evil institution . . . by far the worst where the churches are concerned”.
The three-day convention also launched Atheists Alliance International, a newly restructured umbrella group for atheists worldwide, whose first chairwoman is Tanya Smith of the Atheist Foundation of Australia.
Keynote speakers included Labour Senator Ivana Bacik, American science blogger PZ Myers and Iranian activist Maryam Namazie, of the British Council of Ex-Muslims.
Other speakers included Prof Dawkins, Danish neurobiologist Lone Frank and Indian author Aroup Chaterjee.
Organised by Atheist Ireland, the convention was attended by 350 delegates, many of them Irish, with a preponderance of young people in their 20s.
On education, the Dublin declaration says State education should be secular and “children should be taught about the diversity of religious and no-religious beliefs in an objective manner, with no faith formation in school hours”.
Children should also “be educated in critical thinking and the distinction between faith and reason as a guide to knowledge. Science should be taught free from religious interference.”
It says “freedom of conscience, religion and belief are private and unlimited” and that all blasphemy laws should be repealed. “There should be no right ‘not to be offended’ in law.”
Under the heading “Secular Democracy” it says: “The only reference in the Constitution to religion should be an affirmation that the State is secular.”
Public policy “should be formed by applying reason, not religious faith, to evidence” and “the State should be strictly neutral in matters of religion, and its absence, favouring none and discriminating against none”.
Religions, it says “should have no special financial consideration in public life, such as tax-free status for religious activities, or grants to promote religion or run faith schools” and that “membership of a religion should not be a basis for appointing a person to any State position”.
Where law is concerned it says “there should be one secular law for all, democratically decided and evenly enforced, with no jurisdiction for religious courts to settle civil matters or family disputes”. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| ramonmercado Psycho Punk
Joined: 19 Aug 2003 Total posts: 17933 Location: Dublin Gender: Male |
| Posted: 06-06-2011 18:34 Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Quote: | World atheist convention chairman of irish group explains atheist 'arrogance'
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2011/0606/1224298471194.html?via=rel
Mon, Jun 06, 2011
ATHEISTS WERE arrogant “because we do not believe that the entire universe was created for our benefit”, Michael Nugent, chairman of Atheist Ireland told the convention.
They were arrogant because they did not believe “that the most powerful being ever created a universe of over 100 billion galaxies, each with over 100 billion stars like our sun, which existed for 14 billion years, and then picked one of the 100 billion galaxies and picked one of the 100 billion stars in that galaxy, and picked one planet revolving around that star and of the million species on that planet he picked one animal member of all those species and said: ‘I’ve really got to tell that guy to stop gathering sticks on the Sabbath’.”
Mr Nugent thanked delegates for the success of the convention, despite attempts to sabotage it by false e-mails saying it was called off. A man also falsely ordered in loads of pizzas and 11 bunches of flowers to the convention. Later the man inadvertently confirmed he had ordered the pizzas and flowers and would now be billed via the gardaí.
“It’s the sort of thing one gets used to in Ireland,” Mr Nugent said, and referred to those who, in 2009, saw “Their Lady” on a tree stump in Rathkeale, Co Limerick. He recalled a comment at the time that “if she looked like that it’s no wonder she was a virgin”.
He recalled how when an atheist woman died in Donegal recently there was nowhere to bury her except a municipal graveyard in Derry. When asked where in the graveyard she was buried, the reply was “the Protestant section”.
PATSY McGARRY |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| BlackRiverFalls I wear a fez now.
Joined: 03 Aug 2003 Total posts: 8716 Location: The Attic of Blinky Lights Age: 44 Gender: Female |
| Posted: 18-08-2011 16:38 Post subject: |
|
|
|
Without searching through all 115 pages of this thread, does anyone remember some guy that turned up a while back banging on about "kicking the atheists heads in, one at a time"?
It sounds a lot like this guy who's just been arrested in Canada for spamming and threats going back upto 15 years. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| rynner2 What a Cad!
Great Old One Joined: 13 Dec 2008 Total posts: 21365 Location: Under the moon Gender: Male |
| Posted: 30-08-2011 13:55 Post subject: |
|
|
|
I was going to post this in the Irony thread, but then I thought "This is deeper than mere irony":
Spanish man on pilgrimage to give thanks for recovery from car crash is run over and killed a mile into journey
By Daily Mail Reporter
Last updated at 8:08 AM on 30th August 2011
A year earlier, he had been injured in a road accident and made a full recovery.
So the man decided to make a pilgrimage to a shrine to give thanks for his survival – only to be knocked down and killed by a car less than a mile into his trek.
The 40-year-old Spanish man died instantly after being hit by the vehicle just 20 minutes into his journey.
Two women walking with him were also killed in the accident.
The pilgrim left his home in the town of Ordes, in north-west Spain, on Saturday morning.
He planned to walk the 20 miles to Caion so that he could give thanks at the shrine of the Virgin Mary.
A spokesman for Ordes town hall told French news agency AFP: 'He had been injured in a road accident a year earlier and wanted to give thanks to the Virgin Mary for making a full recovery.
'But he was tragically hit by a car barely a mile into his journey and died instantly.
'Two women walking with him, believed to be his aunts, were also killed.'
It is thought the three victims were making the journey as part of a group of six pilgrims.
An Ordes police spokesman said the driver of the car had probably fallen asleep at the wheel and that an investigation into the accident had been opened.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2031530/Spanish-man-pilgrimage-thanks-recovery-car-crash-run-killed-mile-journey.html#ixzz1WW2DvIxH
Does this prove:
A. God does not exist?
B. God exists, but doesn't care about our existence or our worship of Him?
C. God is a trickster god, like the Norse Loki, with a sick sense of humour?
or
D. Something else?
Discuss.... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| ramonmercado Psycho Punk
Joined: 19 Aug 2003 Total posts: 17933 Location: Dublin Gender: Male |
| Posted: 30-08-2011 13:59 Post subject: |
|
|
|
Definitely Loki!  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| gncxx King-Size Canary
Great Old One Joined: 25 Aug 2001 Total posts: 13561 Location: Eh? Gender: Male |
| Posted: 10-01-2012 20:21 Post subject: |
|
|
|
Even more from the Waters book, here's someone I'd never heard of, crusading atheist Madalyn Murray O'Hair:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madalyn_Murray_O'Hair
Too long to reproduce in full, but worth a read. What this doesn't mention is that she went out of her way to agitate people, including with racism and anti-semitism, so she was a bit of a nutter who even die hard atheists might have thought twice about. There's a great movie in this somewhere! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| kmossel Give in
Yeti Joined: 14 Dec 2006 Total posts: 94 Location: San Francisco Gender: Male |
| Posted: 01-02-2012 20:02 Post subject: |
|
|
|
Speaking of atheists going out of their way to agitate people, have you ever wondered what it would be like if an atheist adopted the rhetorical methods of the more extreme evangelicals? If so, Ernest Perce V is here to show you:
| Quote: | The Pennsylvania House of Representatives is up to its batsh**tery again by approving H.R. 535, a resolution that designates 2012 the “Year of the Bible.” This Resolution was introduced by the Bible-banging Rep. Rick Saccone (R-Elizabeth Township), along with 36 other legislators. This Bible-banger insists that the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States are founded on the Bible.
I am often asked by Christians why I make fun of believers and why I go out of my way to be offensive and ridicule their precious beliefs. Well, this is why. For years believers have gone out of their way to use taxpayer-funded public office to shove their brain-infected, psychotic dogma down my throat. Then they get upset when I will go out of my way to refute them and shove my rational and sane rebuttal right back at them. Many times I use the scriptures just to shut them up and that is why I am known as “The Saint’s Revenge.” After all, you reap what you sow (Gal 6:7). It’s “Game On!” It’s“The Year of the Bible!’”
The way to turn a Christian into an Atheist is to let them read the Bible. Let this year be the year of mockery, ridicule, scorn and public humiliation for the believers. Let the billboards come about and the media onslaughts begin. Yet you, believers wonder why Atheists make fun of you? Sigh.
So, I’m going to “renew your mind” and show you how American Atheists, Inc. will celebrate 2012 as “The Year of the Bible” here in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. Yet, I know the majority of supporters of “H.R. 535” will not stand by the scriptures in this hateful, repgunant, mysogynisytic, slave driving book. As the State Director of American Atheists, Inc., I remind you that your bible calls you hypocrites since you are to be doers of the word and not hearers only. (James 1:22). It’s “The Year of the Bible!’”
I know what you’re going to say about some of my points in this letter even before I finish writing this, “That’s the Old Testament. We’re under a different covenant, this is the church age, and God didn’t really mean that…” So I’m going to solve this right now. The Resolution proclaims several falsities, but I’ll touch on one. “WHEREAS, Biblical teachings inspired concepts of civil government that are contained in our Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States…” Your Bible says “Let God be true and every man a liar”, that includes Rep. Saccone! (Rom 3:4) It’s “The Year of the Bible!”
I’m sure you knew that your Bible is clear that all married female Representatives and employees of the Commonwealth that participate in the open prayer in the House, a court, or the public and do not cover their heads are hypocrites. The women who are not covering their heads are openly dishonoring and bringing shame upon their husbands and Jesus, (1Cor 11:5). According to your Bible, they are going to crack hell wide open and burn in a devil’s torture chamber forever. So are the men, since all people should be praying in secret. (Matt 6:5)“The Year of the Bible!’”
There should also be no woman in a position of authority over a man. Remove all female employees of the Commonwealth who have authority over a man. Remove all female police officers and that disobedient Mayor of Harrisburg, Linda Thompson. This woman is an affront to the “The Year of the Bible”. She must be punished immediately since she violates both the scriptures, (1Cor11:5; Matt 6:5). She also flaunts her authority over man as a proud and boastful woman. She forgot about “not usurping authority over man and keeping silent,” (2 Tim 2:11). As a matter of fact, when you walk into the House of Representatives or any place in the Commonwealth and any female asks you to do something, either ignore her or you should say, “You shut your mouth, it is not permitted for you to talk to a man in public or have authority over me. You’re commanded under the Bible to take that uniform off right now and put on some humble clothes ! If you do not understand what I am telling you, then go home right now and ask your husband to teach you some respect. Paul the apostle gave you the command to chew some humble pie topped with silence crème.” Don’t get mad at me Momma Christian, this is in your Bible, (1 Cor 14:34 and 2 Tim 2:11). I’m tired of all you women who are in outright disobedience to God, you should be flogged! It’s “The Year of the Bible!” |
And so on. I can't say I agree with his methods, but I did find the piece wryly amusing. Full (long) article at:
http://www.opposingviews.com/i/religion/christianity/atheist-pennsylvanias-year-bible-will-backfire |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Jerry_B Great Old One Joined: 15 Apr 2002 Total posts: 8265 |
| Posted: 18-02-2012 10:39 Post subject: |
|
|
|
Hmm - not being able to pray before meetings is now, apparently, 'illiberal'. So much for the seperation of Church and State... And Pickles simply seems to be over-ruling a legal judgement because he doesn't like it...
Councils win prayer 'rights' as Localism Act powers fast tracked, ministers say
The government is activating a power it says will allow councils in England to hold prayers at meetings.
Communities secretary Eric Pickles says he is "effectively reversing" the High Court's "illiberal ruling" that a Devon council's prayers were unlawful.
He says part of the Localism Act that aims to give councils greater powers and freedom will be brought in early.
The National Secular Society questioned the act's reach and said the move could be challenged in court.
The group opposes prayers in "a secular environment concerned with civic business".
Earlier this month, in response to legal action brought by the society, the High Court ruled that Bideford Town Council had acted unlawfully by allowing prayers to be said during meetings.
Mr Justice Ouseley said that, under the Local Government Act 1972, the council had no powers to hold prayers as part of a formal meeting.
The controversial judgement has been regarded by many as an example of the marginalisation of Christianity, as well as a test case that has applied to councils in England and Wales since 10 February. Bideford Town Council has said it would appeal against the ruling.
'Wake-up call'
The government argues that it was not intention or will of Parliament for this act from 40 years ago to be used to prohibit prayers.
"The High Court judgement has far wider significance than just the municipal agenda of Bideford Town Council," said Mr Pickles.
"By effectively reversing that illiberal ruling, we are striking a blow for localism over central interference, for freedom to worship over intolerant secularism, for Parliamentary sovereignty over judicial activism, and for long-standing British liberties over modern-day political correctness."
He added that the Bideford council case should be "a wake-up call".
"For too long, the public sector has been used to marginalise and attack faith in public life, undermining the very foundations of the British nation. But this week, the tables have been turned."
The Localism Act 2011 establishes a "general power of competence" enabling councils legally to do anything an individual could do unless specifically prohibited by law.
The communities secretary has fast-tracked the parliamentary order activating the power, hoping it will "give councils that want to continue holding formal prayers the confidence and legal standing to do so".
The power can be exercised by all major local authorities in England from Saturday, and should be available to smaller town and parish councils - like Bideford - by the end of March.
The National Secular Society had called the High Court ruling "an important victory for everyone who wants a secular society, one that neither advantages nor disadvantages people because of their religion or lack of it".
In response to Mr Pickles' latest statement, its executive director Keith Porteous Wood said: "A number of senior lawyers have expressed doubt whether the Localism Act will, as Mr Pickles hopes, make prayers lawful, and the Act was clearly not passed with that express intention.
"His powers to pass legislation are not, as he implies, untrammelled. Council prayers increasingly look set to become a battle between the government and the courts at ever higher levels."
The Localism Act's "general power of competence" does not apply to Welsh councils, but the Welsh Assembly Government does have the power to legislate in this area.
BBC Source |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Cochise Great Old One Joined: 17 Jun 2011 Total posts: 1104 Location: Gwynedd, Wales Age: 58 Gender: Male |
| Posted: 18-02-2012 11:21 Post subject: |
|
|
|
In the UK the Anglican church is an established part of the State, just like the Monarchy, and therefore this country is a Christian constitutional monarchy, with the Monarch as head of both Church and State.
I'm really surprised at the number of people who've commented in the recent controversy that don't seem to know that. But I don't think they teach British Constitution as a subject in schools any more - they did when I was there!
The legal judgement actually does seem strange, and not to the point of the plaintiff, who was objecting to _compulsory_ attendance at prayers. There's no reason why you would need specific powers to say prayers if the councillors wish to do so - in fact, how could you stop them, since prayers need not be said out loud? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Ravenstone I suffer bad press in Genesis. I may sue...
The Original Sin Joined: 01 Aug 2001 Total posts: 6073 Location: Outside the Garden of Eden, with my flamin' sword Gender: Unknown |
| Posted: 20-02-2012 22:41 Post subject: |
|
|
|
The argument about the prayers before the Council meetings was going on for weeks in the local rags. Letters to and fro from one side and the other. While I understand the guy being annoyed about prayers before the meeting, I can't quite understand why he felt the need to resign over it. I think there are far more important things to discuss in Council meetings. Well - at least you'd assume there would be. Actually, thinking about the people I know on the local Councils, and the minutes I've read (and the gossip about who was shagging who in the toilets before and/or after the meeting  ) then I take that comment back. They really haven't got anything better to talk about. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| BlackRiverFalls I wear a fez now.
Joined: 03 Aug 2003 Total posts: 8716 Location: The Attic of Blinky Lights Age: 44 Gender: Female |
| Posted: 20-02-2012 23:30 Post subject: |
|
|
|
I wonder what the point is of having courts and high court judges if the government is just going to overturn decisions it doesn;t like very much.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Jerry_B Great Old One Joined: 15 Apr 2002 Total posts: 8265 |
| Posted: 21-02-2012 11:28 Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Cochise wrote: | | The legal judgement actually does seem strange, and not to the point of the plaintiff, who was objecting to _compulsory_ attendance at prayers. There's no reason why you would need specific powers to say prayers if the councillors wish to do so - in fact, how could you stop them, since prayers need not be said out loud? |
As I've said elsewhere, what should actually be happening is that councillors should be getting on with their jobs (getting on with meetings, getting things done), not faffing about doing other things. If they want to pray, they should find the time to do so when it's not inconveniencing those that do not, and certainly not before meetings. I'm sure people would be less agreeable if certain people decided that they must have a cigarette before a meeting, and were seeking to advance that as matter of course for what's required before any given meeting. Ideally, Church and State should be kept seperate in the public sector/civil service. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Cochise Great Old One Joined: 17 Jun 2011 Total posts: 1104 Location: Gwynedd, Wales Age: 58 Gender: Male |
| Posted: 21-02-2012 13:01 Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Jerry_B wrote: | | Ideally, Church and State should be kept seperate in the public sector/civil service. |
Well, yes, ideally in your opinion. But in this country church and state is not seperate (unlike the US or France).
Maybe it ought to be, but that should be changed through democratic process and not court rulings.
I agree prayers should not be compulsory. The 'cost' thing is spurious - it would make no difference to the costs if it was a voluntary thing before the meeting which the judge said was OK. And I suspect people do drop out for a fag as required both before meetings and at breaks while their colleagues are likely having informal discussions on the issues of the day.
For goodness sake let us not go totally to a Benthamite utilitarianism - sometimes we should be a bit more relaxed about stuff. Perhaps we should have a three minute rendition of the Hokey-cokey before council meetings - might get the rod out of some people's backsides. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
