Baumblog  
 
 
     
 
Posts tagged with "religion"
 
     
     
 

Oh this one will be good...
posted by GJ on March 14, 2007 @ 5:39PM

Read and comment.

If homosexuality can be proven to be driven by biology...should we be altering humans to match what the Bible supposedly says, or should Christianity alter itself and its beliefs?

I bet this'll be a lively discussion. Muwhahahaha.

21 comments | Tags: philosophy, religion, intolerance

 
     
     
 

John Paul II a saint?
posted by GJ on March 30, 2007 @ 10:23AM

According to this story we have a nun who apparently was cured of her Parkinson's Disease overnight, and that she and others are attributing this miracle to John Paul II. Of course, for those who don't know, you must have at least one miracle attributed to you in order to be declared a saint.

I'll confess--this whole saint business was always a little weird to me, even back when I wasn't doing the non-belief thing. I mean, God is the all-powerful being here, so any miracles have to be attributed to he / she / it, right? (I'm going to use he from here one out, forgive me for being lazy). So what does the saintly person do to get the miracle attributed to them?

Oh, wait, I think I see. You pray to the dead person (say, John Paul II) and if you get what you prayed for, it's a miracle from God that can be attributed to this dead person. Ergo, this dead person interceded with God on your (or your prayer's target's) behalf, so the miracle is attributed to the dead person. Once we've convinced ourselves of this, we then basically say "they were such a good person when they were alive" and declare them a saint. Well, technically, the average Joe doesn't, the bigwigs in the church do. They know better that we do. Or something like that.

Here's a problem: afflictions, including disease and cancers, go away on their own all the time...sometimes without any medical treatment. Our bodies have significant resources to fight off these problems...and even against the nastier ones, sometimes we win without any help.

Scientists study these cases when they can, in order to glean information that might lead to a cure for that affliction. What is different about this person that made them recover, or made them immune? Can it be replicated in other victims to help them? That's what science is all about.

Religion, being built on myth rather than science, says, no, it was obviously a miracle! In this nun's case, people were actively praying for her in the name of John Paul II, and she was cured! It's a miracle, cut-and-dry.

The scientists look at the cured person, and often find one of two things: (1) they were misdiagnosed to begin with, and what they had was something else entirely. That item did respond to a treatment, and the symptoms vanished. No mystery there, except the how and why of the misdiagnose. (2) The person has some gene that grants resistivity, or ingested / was exposed to something that provided some benefit, or was sick with some other condition that competed with the obvious one and destroyed it.

In any of those cases, they work on proof--because they want something they can take to cure others with, so it had better be repeatable and consistent. So, off it goes to the labs for testing. Sometimes a cure is found--more often, just more knowledge is gained that brings us closer to a cure.

On the other side, the religious folk don't have proof. They have hearsay, poor logical induction, and their belief, and nothing else. You say, of course, why is this a bad thing?

Two reasons:

1. They are declaring a person's recovery the work of God. Therefore, science doesn't need to explain it (and they'd prefer that they didn't, lest it shatter the illusion they've constructed). Active denial of science is one bad effect--the other being lack of additional knowledge gained about a possible cure. They both suck.

2. They then elevate this person to saint--and then, anything this person did during their life can be held as a good example to others. Let's face it, nobody lives a perfect life. People with sinister aims can pick out the examples in this saint's life that fit their agenda, and push it on the faithful: "See--God favored this person for what he or she did, so we should emulate them!" Of course, God didn't favor the person, we did. And the one with the agenda is obvious looking to only highlight what works for him, be it good or bad. This is the hideous logic that can lead to blind faith in stupid commands--it's the genesis of religious terrorism, be it homegrown (abortion bombers) or overseas (like you need an example).

This is just one example of silliness in religion. It doesn't afflict just Christianity--all of them are silly on some level, because at the end of the day, they are human-created edifices. Humans are silly. God is supposed to be perfect..

Oh, back to the concept of miracles. Now, this gal and her pals were praying to JP II to intercede for her. How many millions of others did the same, and got nothing from God? That's not the actions of a benevolent God--that either due to a totally arbitrary God, or an evil one. I'll give you a hint--a total arbitrary God is what we science-based folks call chance.

Chance simple states that her affliction was cured by her own body. She then framed that by her religious background, and tada, it was a miracle!

So...what do you think? Saints / miracles? Fantasy or reality? Harmless or harmful?

24 comments | Tags: woo, religion

 
     
     
 

Mr. Deity and the Evil
posted by GJ on April 6, 2007 @ 11:03AM

9 comments | Tags: religion, funny

 
     
     
 

Is Bill O'Reilly a Closet Atheist?
posted by GJ on April 23, 2007 @ 2:44PM

Richard Dawkins, a very militant and outspoken atheist, will be interviewed by Bill O'Reilly tonight on Fox at 8pm. Should be...um...interesting.

Or maybe not. Seems Bill has "some" similar views to my own....just watch:

No comments | Tags: religion, politics

 
     
     
 

The Interview GJ Mentioned...
posted by Geoff on April 25, 2007 @ 3:56PM

Here is Bill O'Reilly interviewing Richard Dawkins. And no, Bill is not an Athiest as once thought...

3 comments | Tags: religion

 
     
     
 

OMG!!! Kurt Cameron and buddy to prove that God exists!!
posted by GJ on April 27, 2007 @ 1:30PM

Breaking news! Kurt Cameron and his buddy Ray Comfort are going to prove, on national TV, that GOD EXISTS. He's going to do this without mentioning the Bible, or Jesus, or any gobbledygook. I don't know about you, but I'm truly excited. Maybe I was wrong about this whole "God not existing" thing.

I've heard that he's going to demonstrate the Atheist's Nightmare on this show. Never heard of it? Never fear, I have a video where Ray explains it, and Kurt sits next to him looking pretty. Or something like that.

Fascinating, isn't it? Don't read the comments until AFTER you watch the video.

13 comments | Tags: woo, pseudoscience, religion

 
     
     
 

The Great Debate
posted by GJ on May 9, 2007 @ 1:30PM

The grand debate between the Way of the Master folks (Ray Comfort and Kurt Cameron) vs the Rational Responders (Kelly and Sapient) took place on May 5, and will air tonight on Nightline.

I've seen a few clips so far. Ray and Kurt's idea of scientific proof used the word "scientific". That's about as close to science as they got. As for not using the Bible, well, that lasted about five minutes. Then we got the standard Ray spiel, probably trying to convert the 50 atheists in the audience.

Kelly and Sapient weren't very polished--and didn't drive home the points that would have won this debate handily. Instead of refuting the silly arguments that Ray and Kurt were using, they instead went the route of "religion bad, atheism good." Duh. That of course plays well to the atheism crowd, and not at all to the other half. In effect, they were doing almost exactly what Ray and Kurt were doing. Egads.

I'll be watching it tonight--perhaps the small clips I saw weren't all that indicative. Feel free to post long winded comments if you end up watching it too.

6 comments | Tags: religion, science

 
     
     
 

Grrrr. Or Why Intelligent Design Supporters are SOOOO Stupid.
posted by GJ on June 7, 2007 @ 12:54PM

I heard the following crap make it's way out of John McCain's mouth during the Republican debate the other day.  It went like this:

"School boards should have the right to set their own education policy.   It's my opinion that all views, all theories need to be taught to our children."

This is code for "I want schools to be able to teach Intelligent Design if they so choose."  The backers of ID say, hey, evolution as a theory has lots of holes, and this ID is a competing theory.  We've been over this before in the blog--ID is not a theory.  See, a theory about the origin of species has so say something other than "Evolution is wrong, and here's why."

So, ignore for a second about me not thinking too fondly of ID.  Imagine, instead, that the 9/11 conspiracy nuts get in on this argument.  Shouldn't then "Loose Change" be shown along with "Fahrenheit 911" when talking about the events of that day in history class?  How about letting Holocaust deniers have a say when talking about what the Germans did to the Jews and other undesirables during WWII?  What about the moon landing hoax supporters?  Should they not get to counter the "theory" that we actually landed on the moon?

Of course not, right?  These are all crackpot ideas.  You have to draw the line somewhere, and you draw it with the evidence stick.  Have evidence to back up your theory?  Is it compelling?  Are there any obvious flaws that your theory cannot explain?  That is how we figure out what theories are the wheat, and what are the chaff.  Not all wheat theories hold up, but the chaff ones never do, so why bother wasting time with them?

So, let's be clear.   The proponents of ID want ID taught in school to counter the teaching of the theory evolution and show students that there is a "scientific" alternative to evolution that leaves room for some kind of something:  God, The Force, something.  However, it's not scientific, as it makes no provable claims about the origin of species.  Nada, nothing.   Does evolution have holes?  Of course it does--any theory does, and you work to close those holes over time.  Maybe someday we'll find a problem with evolution model, and discard it in favor of a better working model...but until that model comes around, evolution is the best explaination for the origin of species.

So, of course, the IDers want to push the teaching of ID in via the political process.  This is the problem--just because a bogus theory is popular, it does not make it any more functional or valuable.  There are a lot of people in the world that believe that 9/11 was an inside job--but they have virtually nothing beyond circumstantial evidence, and a lot of problems within itself that cannot be corrected.  As a result, we will not be teacing that in school--so why try to teach ID?  It doesn't pass the theory test, either.

So, thank you John McCain, and the rest of you politicians who have stated this opinion.  You're not getting my vote to help turn our science education in this country into a joke.

7 comments | Tags: woo, religion, politics, science

 
     
     
 

Thou shalt not pimp one's ride...
posted by Kristen on June 20, 2007 @ 10:11AM

The Vatican has given us some new commandments to live by!  Can't seem to find the actual list, but I hear that giving the finger is a no-no.  I've got some ideas:

1.  Thou shalt not drive 25 miles below the speed limit on I-95 with the exception of a monsoon or traffic jam.

2.  Thou shalt not stand on the brakes anytime one sees a police car, or something that resembles a police car.

3.  Thou shalt not drive a motorcycle in a wife-beater and bermuda shorts.

Anyone care to add their own?

18 comments | Tags: religion

 
     
     
 

Interesting study about doctors and religion
posted by GJ on July 31, 2007 @ 4:52PM

I'm not drawing any conclusions here, but it is interesting.

10 comments | Tags: religion, medicine

 
     
     
 

1 2 Next page

 
     
     
 
SEARCH
 
     
 

Login

Username: 
Password: 
Remember me
 
 

Tag Cloud

advice aliens animation anniversary announcements apple article atheism birthdays blogs browser car cars censorship comments commercials company complaint computer computers concert cool deals disney education espnsux exercise family fantasy FARK finance football fun funny game games Germany gift-guide GIMP guitar history hockey holiday holidays info internet intolerance joke law lifehacking literature medicine microsoft movie music mystery myths news NSFW opinion philosophy photos pics picture pictures playoffs polical politcal political politics pseudoscience psychics question quiz recreation religion review robots rush scam scare-tactics science science; separated_at_birth skepticism space speeches sports stupidity suggestions support tech technology thestupidithurts things that make you go hmmm trivia tutorials tv updates video voting war weather webcomic websites well wishes wii woo wow WWYD?

Archives

January 2009 (1)
December 2008 (14)
November 2008 (23)
October 2008 (22)
September 2008 (16)
August 2008 (16)
July 2008 (8)
June 2008 (22)
May 2008 (15)
April 2008 (15)
March 2008 (20)
February 2008 (7)
January 2008 (13)
December 2007 (14)
November 2007 (16)
October 2007 (27)
September 2007 (33)
August 2007 (22)
July 2007 (31)
June 2007 (25)
May 2007 (35)
April 2007 (38)
March 2007 (21)
February 2007 (8)
January 2007 (13)
December 2006 (16)
November 2006 (19)
October 2006 (30)
September 2006 (19)
August 2006 (43)
July 2006 (30)
June 2006 (30)
May 2006 (42)
April 2006 (39)
March 2006 (36)
February 2006 (36)
January 2006 (22)
December 2005 (22)
November 2005 (26)
October 2005 (19)
September 2005 (22)
August 2005 (26)
July 2005 (26)
June 2005 (14)
May 2005 (25)
April 2005 (33)
March 2005 (37)
February 2005 (39)
January 2005 (18)

Contributors

Aaron
Abby