physeter

Have a great week everyone!

On Judgement Day, God conducts a pre-admission interview with a dog and a cat.

The dog pleads that he has always been “a good boy” and was always loyal and obedient and would sit and beg upon command.

Imaginary God is much pleased with the dog and pats him on the head.

He turns to the cat and asks if it was a goo…[Read more]

Reg,

“It’s still not weird enough for me.”–Hunter S. Thompson. 😱 😁

As for what two or more people do together as consenting adults is of no interest or concern to me unless I am one of them. Here in Ireland the penalty for bigamy is two wives!

Polygamous marriage would not be a problem in a free society…but Polygamous divorce might be.

We…[Read more]

@Enco – Yes, I think I did post it previously. I re-read the book every few years. Same with Fear  and Loathing in LV, just to make sure I am living correctly 🙂

As for what two or more people do together as consenting adults is of no interest or concern to me unless I am one of them. Here in Ireland the penalty for bigamy is two wives!

Reg,

I think you’ve posted the Dr. D.M. Brooks passage before, but it is well worth re-reading, especially for all who like Peyton Place-style trashy beach novels. 🌤 📚 😎

Not that there’s anything wrong with Sodomy, “homosexual entanglements,” or “bigamies” among consenting adults, of course, but doing these things while professing a morality…[Read more]

Just rereading a book that mentions the Puritans. It is over 100 years old now.  From ‘The Necessity of Atheism’ by Dr. D.M. Brooks;

When the Puritan Fathers landed in this country, they began an existence that has revealed to the world for all time the value of a “burning religious zeal.” In a sense they showed this zeal in regard to the…[Read more]

Unseen,

The Freedom to Harm article raises an interesting question in my mind. Atheism may not be a religion per se, but it is a religious position (a position on religion), and the day may come when we want to assert a right to a “religious exemption” using the same sort of law that in Mississippi and elsewhere gives religious people an exe…

[Read more]

Reg the Fronkey Farmer wrote:
However, that statement is a prime example of a non sequitur fallacy. It does not follow that the criticism of Islam, however hostile the vocal or written appraisal of it may sound, has anything to do with a fear or dislike of even a single Muslim.

Why do people keep conflating two separate things?

Three events…[Read more]

The term “Islamophobia” was first used in print in 1991 and was defined as “unfounded hostility towards Islam, and therefore fear or dislike of all or most Muslims.” It is admitted in the article that the term “Islamophobia” is not an ideal descriptor. However, that statement is a prime example of a non sequitur fallacy. It does not follow that…[Read more]

jakelafort wrote:
Reg has a short vid from Dawkins about Islamophobia. How to reconcile the positions taken by Autumn and Dawkins?

I am better looking, therefore correct.

Correct me if i misstate your position Autumn. Islamophobia is a valid term. Whether the target is Muslims or Islam is immaterial. It is not about Muslims or Islam. Rather it is…

[Read more]

Reg has a short vid from Dawkins about Islamophobia.

How to reconcile the positions taken by Autumn and Dawkins?

Correct me if i misstate your position Autumn. Islamophobia is a valid term. Whether the target is Muslims or Islam is immaterial. It is not about Muslims or Islam. Rather it is about bigots. Autumn rightly points to instances in…[Read more]

Simon Paynton wrote:
If people want to be free to be stupid, whose right is it to stop them?

As someone who used to condemn people who refused to mask up or get vaccinated or stay home, I’ve seen experts and studies that throw doubt on all of those things I used to preach. Maybe those experts and studies are in the minority, and if one simply…[Read more]

Following the verdict, the lawyer who headed the effort trumpeted his victory: “Freedom wins again,” he tweeted. But freedom to what? Freedom to suffer from preventable illnesses. Or to be hospitalized. Or to die. Or to transmit viruses to those who cannot be successfully vaccinated.

This is true.  It’s the freedom to drown in bullshit.  But freed…[Read more]

The Freedom to Harm article raises an interesting question in my mind. Atheism may not be a religion per se, but it is a religious position (a position on religion), and the day may come when we want to assert a right to a “religious exemption” using the same sort of law that in Mississippi and elsewhere gives religious people an exemption.

Let’s…[Read more]

Reg the Fronkey Farmer wrote:
World of Woo: A study into ‘truth relativism’.

I think it’s really interesting.

People who believe the truth is subjective and individual are more likely to believe conspiracy theories, and to hold onto their conspiratorial beliefs even when faced with real-world evidence and facts that contradict their con…

[Read more]

Re: The Brave New World of Synthetic Humans

Of course, the various religions may all decide that such manufactured humans will have no soul and so are at least an abomination if not also a work of the Devil.

But there are serious ethical questions for the rest of us, starting with this: Would these people have any rights at all? Would they exist…[Read more]

How would the church deal if confronted with the fact of intelligent life elsewhere than on Earth?

In the case of Christianity, would the demigod Jesus Christ also be the savior of intelligent pond scum on the surface of the planet Kepler 62F? Or would God have provided them their own pond scum savior?

This potential encounter been a theme, at…[Read more]

Why do Christians “seek atheists’ approval”?

It’s no mystery. Speaking as a one time Christian who was dragged to church for many years in childhood and went to church out of habit as an adolescent, there’s one thing I knew then that was confirmed in my Philosophy of Religion studies:

Two of the three main Abrahamic religions, Christianity and…[Read more]

Reg,

It is easy for anyone, not just criminals, to get a firearm. Even dumb criminals have no problem obtaining one. Often child criminals under 7 years of age have no problem finding one before killing a parent or sibling. About 34% of those children had no problem obtaining one before they took their own lives. Even good people with guns are…

[Read more]

my first thought was that it was hilarious this was posted on the New York Post.

Same here. I had to recheck it. Especially when you look at most of the sidebar stories. Maybe they are being sabotaged from the inside 🙂