The Hazards of Belief

robindch

As the world hits record levels of CO2, the EU releases a report indicating that things are getting worse, and the deterioration will accelerate:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-20408350
http://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/climate-impacts-and-vulnerability-2012

Meanwhile, in Jesusland, three climate-change-denialists are trying to head up the House Science Committee:

http://arstechnica.com/science/2012/11/three-climate-contrarians-vie-to-lead-house-science-committee/

Strangely, over a recent six month period, around 93% of reports from Faux News on climate change are either misleading or false:

http://www.ucsusa.org/assets/documents/global_warming/Is-News-Corp-Failing-Science.pdf

joseph brand

Saudi Arabia implements electronic tracking system for women.

RIYADH — Denied the right to travel without consent from their male guardians and banned from driving, women in Saudi Arabia are now monitored by an electronic system that tracks any cross-border movements.

Since last week, Saudi women’s male guardians began receiving text messages on their phones informing them when women under their custody leave the country, even if they are travelling together.

I wonder why more women don't join the Islam scam faith? :rolleyes:

joseph brand

Lisa Biron, N.H. lawyer with ties to conservative Christian group, arrested on child pornography charges.

Biron, 43, was arrested by FBI agents on Nov. 16 and charged with seven counts of child exploitation, including transporting a child for illegal sexual conduct. She was also charged with manufacturing and possessing child pornography.

Witnesses have testified to seeing Biron in possession of ecstasy, marijuana and cocaine, according to the Monitor.

Biron has worked with the Alliance Defending Freedom, a group of attorneys known for their work against gay marriage and Planned Parenthood

How very christian of her. (purposely left out sarcasm smilie)

She was probably 'fixing' these kids.

Gbear

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=THy0k9nI4js

Make the stupid stop.:(

pbowenroe

JuliusCaesar wrote: »

Tantic guru in India fails to kill skeptic

(Delete if it's a re-post!)

I wonder could the 'guru' be tried for attempted murder?:D If he really believed that he could kill him, isn't that what happened there?

Dades

Gbear wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=THy0k9nI4js

That lad about 35 seconds in isn't exactly killing himself.

Maybe he's just putting on a show to get his kid into the local school. :pac:

Gbear

I was thinking "lol, silly muslims".

But no. They're not silly. The people involved in this insanity are dangerous scumbags.



I can't believe this ****. ****ing savages.

Bannasidhe

Gbear wrote: »

I was thinking "lol, silly muslims".

But no. They're not silly. The people involved in this insanity are dangerous scumbags.



I can't believe this ****. ****ing savages.

What are they doing to that child?????

robindch

Bannasidhe wrote: »

What are they doing to that child?????

Looks like they're cutting his head open in order to make their deity happy.

More images of Ashura here:

http://ma-zaika.ru/post144461661/

jasonmcco

Zillah wrote: »

I saw that story on Fortean times not long ago. I found it hilarious.

really hilarious yeah. A fellow human through indoctrination probably believes in god and kills himself because of it.

I pity the guy and certainly don't hold him up as some kind of spokesman for believers so thus can laugh at his misfortune.

It just shows the pitfalls of these belief systems.

No wonder the god squads can claim morals as their ace card when an atheist takes pleasure in the death of another human.

FouxDaFaFa

I don't want to click on the link about the child because I don't think I could handle worse pictures but does anyone know why they were doing that to him and if he survived?

Such a disturbing photo.

robindch

FouxDaFaFa wrote: »

[...] does anyone know why they were doing that to him and if he survived?

Up to a few minutes ago, I'd thought that Ashura was in commemoration of Abraham's willingness to execute his own son. Turns out that Ashura is islam-specific and commemorates the death of Mohammad's grandson at some battle or other. I don't quite get why men are expected to cut themselves to ribbons, but I'm assuming the following page explains it somewhere or other:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Day_of_Ashura

I assume the child in the picture above was only cut with the knife, rather than murdered.

Bannasidhe

robindch wrote: »

Up to a few minutes ago, I'd thought that Ashura was in commemoration of Abraham's willingness to execute his own son. Turns out that Ashura is islam-specific and commemorates the death of Mohammad's grandson at some battle or other. I don't quite get why men are expected to cut themselves to ribbons, but I'm assuming the following page explains it somewhere or other:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Day_of_Ashura

I assume the child in the picture above was only cut with the knife, rather than murdered.

If adults want to cut/flay/whatever themselves then that is their bat**** crazy right - but step away from the children. :mad:

Gbear

http://imgur.com/a/izbvk

There's more pictures there if you feel like getting angry.


The thing that pissed me off the most (after assaulting children) was the captions to all the photos:

A young Indian Shiite Muslim cries as an elder makes a cut on his forehead with a knife during a procession to mark Ashura in Hyderabad, India

An Indian Shiite Muslim cuts the forehead of a Shiite child during a religious procession during the Ashura mourning period in Mumbai

**** them. Seriously. I'm fairly certain even a child isn't stupid enough to agree to getting stabbed in the face if they were actually given the choice.

How can we possibly coexist on a planet with this shower of nutters? How prevalent is this in Islam?

Nodin

..its only shia Islam and not everyone does it. In some countries its illegal to involve young kids. I remember some head getting done across the water for something similar.

Galvasean

Just when I thought I has seen it all. Does one's brain not kick in at same point and say, "Hey, maybe I shouldn't be cutting some poor child's head"!
Indocrination is scary stuff indeed...

Turtwig

Galvasean wrote: »

Just when I thought I has seen it all. Does one's brain not kick in at same point and say, "Hey, maybe I shouldn't be cutting some poor child's head"!

Nah it's more likely they'll look extremely far and wide for tenuous links to possible health benefits of the ritual.

Nodin

Galvasean wrote: »

Just when I thought I has seen it all. Does one's brain not kick in at same point and say, "Hey, maybe I shouldn't be cutting some poor child's head"!
Indocrination is scary stuff indeed...

Used be a catholic thing....them immigrants rob everything....

(it is wrong draggin kids into them things though...otherwise flog away)

Nodin

Make of this what ye will.........

Almost half of the lay people who voted against legislation to allow female bishops in the Church of England were women, according to figures released on Monday, as senior members of the church were urged to speed up reform or risk consigning it to years of ignominy and irrelevance.

Voting records released by Church House showed 33 of the 74 General Synod lay members who last week caused the long-awaited measure to fail were women and most of them are affiliated to the conservative evangelical group Reform or the traditional Anglo-Catholic movement Forward in Faith.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/nov/26/church-radical-strategy-female-bishops-memo

Aenaes

Wait, they can have women clergy but not women bishops? Never knew that. Oh well, just another thing that doesn't make sense I suppose.

Galvasean

Angus T. Jones quits Two & A Half Men, finds God.
http://www.krank.ie/category/snippet/stop-filling-your-head-with-filth/

The Benefits of Belief?

seamus

Galvasean wrote: »

Angus T. Jones quits Two & A Half Men, finds God.
http://www.krank.ie/category/snippet/stop-filling-your-head-with-filth/

The Benefits of Belief?

Theist in "unable to separate reality from fiction" shocker.

Though I suspect when the studio holds up his contract in front of him, he'll finish it out. Cos, y'know, who needs principles when you're being sued for breach of contract?

kylith

seamus wrote: »

Theist in "unable to separate reality from fiction" shocker.

Though I suspect when the studio holds up his contract in front of him, he'll finish it out. Cos, y'know, who needs principles when you're being sued for breach of contract?

Yeah, it's amazing what a solicitor's letter will do for the whole 'I need to stay on the show so I can use it to warn people of the dangers of excess' attitude.

MrPudding

pbowenroe wrote: »

I wonder could the 'guru' be tried for attempted murder?:D If he really believed that he could kill him, isn't that what happened there?

In the UK it is possible to be tried and convicted for an "impossible attempt."

MrP

legspin

MrPudding wrote: »

In the UK it is possible to be tried and convicted for an "impossible attempt."

MrP

I suppose the intent to kill is seen as being important enough to warrant it being an offence.

robindch

Galvasean wrote: »

Angus T. Jones quits Two & A Half Men, finds God.
http://www.krank.ie/category/snippet/stop-filling-your-head-with-filth/

Having had a day or so to think about it, Mr Jones issues a splendid unpology in which he apologizes for nothing in particular and evinces appreciation of an "extraordinary opportunity", perhaps connected to his massive salary:

Before: http://thedailyedge.thejournal.ie/two-and-a-half-men-filth-691229-Nov2012/

After: http://thedailyedge.thejournal.ie/two-and-a-half-men-filth-2-692726-Nov2012/

FouxDaFaFa

I find it funny that he's so desperate to get off the show but he's only recently renewed his contract.

FouxDaFaFa

7 Egyptian participants in the film "Innocence of Muslims" sentenced to death. (Thankfully, in absentia).

"The seven accused persons were convicted of insulting the Islamic religion through participating in producing and offering a movie that insults Islam and its prophet," said the judge, Saif al-Nasr Soliman.

Galvasean

Egyptian justice:

robindch

robindch wrote: »

Having had a day or so to think about it, Mr Jones issues a splendid unpology in which he apologizes for nothing in particular and evinces appreciation of an "extraordinary opportunity", perhaps connected to his massive salary:

Before: http://thedailyedge.thejournal.ie/two-and-a-half-men-filth-691229-Nov2012/

After: http://thedailyedge.thejournal.ie/two-and-a-half-men-filth-2-692726-Nov2012/

I was thinking thejournal had improved a lot when it comes to grammar and spelling but now I'm just waiting for a "v" at the end of their "articles" when someone's finger slips off the ctrl button.

pauldla

Man Faces Death Threats and Jail for Pointing Out That Weeping Jesus "Miracle" Is Just Faulty Plumbing

Sanal Edamaruku faces jail for revealing 'tears' trickling down a Mumbai church statue came from clogged drainage pipes.

November 26, 2012 |

When water started trickling down a statue of Jesus Christ at a Catholic church in Mumbai earlier this year, locals were quick to declare a miracle. Some began collecting the holy water and the Church of Our Lady of Velankanni began to promote it as a site of pilgrimage.
So when Sanal Edamaruku arrived and established that this was not holy water so much as holey plumbing, the backlash was severe. The renowned rationalist was accused of blasphemy, charged with offences that carry a three-year prison sentence and eventually, after receiving death threats, had to seek exile in Finland.

http://www.alternet.org/man-faces-death-threats-and-jail-pointing-out-weeping-jesus-miracle-just-faulty-plumbing?akid=9721.1087120.k1sq6c&rd=1&src=newsletter750513&t=11

Galvasean

Truth hurts...

Aenaes

Hurts even worse when it affects their coffers.

Mark Hamill

You would assume people who were just shown to be worshipping a false idol would be reluctant to start labelling someone else as blasphemer.

Links234

recedite

robindch wrote: »

a splendid unpology

I see what you did there, definition example #2 :pac::pac:

Hotblack Desiato

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2012/1130/1224327302533.html

More than one in five Irish Catholics do not believe in the resurrection of Jesus or that God created the universe, according to the Ipsos MRBI 50th anniversary poll.

It found also that 7 per cent of Irish Catholics do not even believe in God.

When it comes to making serious moral decisions, more than three-quarters (78 per cent) of Irish Catholics follow their own conscience rather than church teaching (17 per cent). Almost half of Irish Catholics (45 per cent) do not believe in Hell while almost a fifth (18 per cent) do not believe that God created man.

Overall, the poll found 90 per cent of respondents described themselves as Catholic, with 2 per cent Protestant, 2 per cent another religion, 5 per cent none, and 1 per cent refusing to say.

So according to this article, people who describe themselves as Irish Catholics are less likely to believe in god than Irish people as a whole. Wtf?!?!

seamus

Good old Irish Catholicism. "The Pope and God and shít, nah man that's a pile of crap. But hurry up and finish your pint or we'll be late for midnight mass".

Beruthiel

ninja900 wrote: »

So according to this article, people who describe themselves as Irish Catholics are less likely to believe in god than Irish people as a whole. Wtf?!?!

I believe you have to be a special kind of idiot to think you are still a catholic if you do not believe it god.
These kind of people have never engaged that particular part of the brain which houses logic and critical thinking.

magicbastarder

pat robertson, of all people, counters the '6000 years old' myth:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/28/pat-robertson-creationism-earth-is-not-6000-years-old_n_2207275.html

seamus

magicbastarder wrote: »

pat robertson, of all people, counters the '6000 years old' myth:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/28/pat-robertson-creationism-earth-is-not-6000-years-old_n_2207275.html

The woman said that her "biggest fear is to not have my children and husband next to me in God's Kingdom because they question why the Bible could not explain the existence of dinosaurs."

This is why I cannot understand people who say that the bible provides answers and peace of mind. All it does is cause confusion and make people worry about things which aren't even real things.

robindch

The UK now requires free schools to teach evolution as a "comprehensive and coherent scientific theory" on pain of losing funding.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-20547195

BBC wrote:

Any attempt to present as fact the view that God made the world could lead to new free schools losing their funding under government changes.

The new rules state that from 2013, all free schools in England must teach evolution as a "comprehensive and coherent scientific theory". The move follows scientists' concerns that free schools run by creationists might avoid teaching evolution.

Sir Paul Nurse, president of the Royal Society, said it was "delighted". Sir Paul told BBC News the previous rules on free schools and the teaching of evolution versus creationism had been "not tight enough". He said that although the previous rules had confined creationism to religious education lessons, "the Royal Society identified a potential issue that schools could have avoided teaching evolution by natural selection in science lessons or dealt with it in a such a perfunctory way, that the main experience for students was the creationist myth".

So far 79 free schools have opened in England with 118 more due to open in 2013 and beyond. They are funded directly by central government but unlike other state-funded schools are run by groups of parents, teachers, charities and religious groups and do not have to abide by the national curriculum.

The new rules mean if a free school is found to be acting in breach of its funding agreement - for example, teaching creationism as a scientific fact or not teaching evolution - the Department for Education will take "swift action which could result in the termination of that funding agreement".

The development of the theory of evolution is an excellent example of how science works and there is a clear consensus within the scientific community regarding both its validity and importance ”

In a letter to the Royal Society, the Schools Minister, Lord Hill, said: "While we have always been clear that we expect to see evolution included in schools' science curricula, this new clause will provide more explicit reassurance that free schools will have to meet that expectation." Sir Paul Nurse said: "The new clause in the funding agreement should ensure that all pupils at free schools have the opportunity to learn about evolution as an extensively evidenced theory and one of the most fundamentally important tenets of modern biology.

"The development of the theory of evolution is an excellent example of how science works and there is a clear consensus within the scientific community regarding both its validity and importance." A spokesman for the Department for Education said that the new clause would apply to the Grindon Hall Christian school in Sunderland and two others that this year became the focus of concerns about the teaching of creationism in free schools.

Grindon Hall, which was independent, reopened as a free school in September. The two others approved by ministers are not due to open until 2013. In July the principal of Grindon Hall said that creationism would never be taught in science lessons.

Rachel Wolf, director of the New Schools Network, which provides advice and support for groups who want to set up free schools, welcomed the funding agreement changes but said that the existing rules meant free schools already had to teach evolution in science lessons. "To my knowledge free schools have always had to teach evolution in science, but it is great that the government has reaffirmed its commitment to this," she said.

Andrew Copson, chief executive of the British Humanist Association, organisers of a Teach Evolution not Creationism campaign, said: "A requirement to teach evolution in free schools is an excellent additional safeguard against state-funded creationist schools and must be welcomed. "However, we continue to be concerned about the three free schools recently approved which are supportive of teaching creationism as science and which we must worry will continue to find ways to circumvent a ban in practice."

Dr Berry Billingsley who leads a Reading University project on how secondary schools handle questions that bridge science and religion cautioned against an oversimplified debate. "Evolution is a fantastic theory and explains so much about how humans come to be here. It is backed up by evidence and supported by the vast majority of scientists in the biological sciences. Many of those scientists also believe that the Universe is here because of God.

"The importance of studying evolution is indeed the first thing to be said but children also need opportunities somewhere in the timetable to explore the 'Big Questions', which our research shows they want to consider and it is often the science lesson that stirs up those questions."

Paul Bate, of the European Educators Christian Association, agreed schools should teach a broad and balanced curriculum: "Science and religion need each other in this debate. Albert Einstein, one of the greatest scientists of all time said, 'Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.'"

recedite

robindch wrote: »

The UK now requires free schools to teach evolution as a "comprehensive and coherent scientific theory" on pain of losing funding.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-20547195

Well now, I think evolution is more than just a theory at this stage.
These guys will present creationism and evolution as two theories, and guess which one they will emphasise more.

So far 79 free schools have opened in England with 118 more due to open in 2013 and beyond. They are funded directly by central government but unlike other state-funded schools are run by groups of parents, teachers, charities and religious groups and do not have to abide by the national curriculum

That's a very big mistake, funding schools without requiring them to follow the national curriculum. Its an open invitation to all sorts of wackos. The Brits will regret this.

Sarky

I think it may have been hazardous to believe that I could handle that last triple whiskey after just one plate of nachos <falls over>

kylith

recedite wrote: »

Well now, I think evolution is more than just a theory at this stage.
These guys will present creationism and evolution as two theories, and guess which one they will emphasise more.

The problem is in the misunderstanding of what a 'theory' is in science. Evolution is a theory in that it best fits the available evidence, but cannot be proven in that you can't see something evolving. Creationism is a hypothesis.

Galvasean

recedite wrote: »

Well now, I think evolution is more than just a theory at this stage.

I know what you mean, but in scientific terms you really can't get much 'better' than a theory. Science education should really nail home the point of what a theory actually is.

Sulla Felix

Beruthiel wrote: »

I believe you have to be a special kind of idiot to think you are still a catholic if you do not believe it god.
These kind of people have never engaged that particular part of the brain which houses logic and critical thinking.

Or apparently the part that houses religious thinking.

robindch

The parents of an 11-year old girl who died as they prayed over her are appealing their conviction for reckless homicide. They had diagnosed a "spiritual attack" rather than diabetes:

http://lacrossetribune.com/news/state-and-regional/wi/lawyers-ask-wis-court-to-rule-in-prayer-death/article_e8371dee-b457-532d-9732-6d976a89166b.html

JuliusCaesar

FouxDaFaFa wrote: »

It's incredible really that the RCC has so many female followers propping the church up when it so openly treats them as if they're second-class.

Also about the Mary McAleese thing, it is mind-boggling that that Archbishop got away with effectively scolding a sitting President like a child in front of a group of people. He must be out of his mind.

a friend directed me to this site:

Allowing "women priests" would not be fitting and would confuse the proper God-given role of the sexes. The priesthood is a fatherly role, not a motherly role. When people want to go to their father, they do not want to go to a woman!

"Women priests" may not be taken seriously by the congregation.

Allowing "women priests" may be distracting/offensive to men (and women).

Allowing "women priests" would put women over men (which is contrary to Scripture, as indicated above).

Men in a congregation might "hit on" female "priests".

Since men don't like to be commanded by women, they might leave the parish, possibly leading to an "all female" parish.

Women in a congregation led by a "woman priest" may be distracted by her hair, dress, appearance, etc. They may also become jealous if they see her talking with their husbands.

A female "priest" could become pregnant. Not only would this offend God and cause scandal, but what would become of the child?

Allowing "women priests" would be irreparably scandalous, since it would tell the world that the scriptural precepts, constant tradition, and rulings of the Church mean nothing. (Not to mention that it would be impossible for the Church to go against teachings marked with infallibility.)

Furthermore, on a practical level, many things about a woman's nature may be problematic with regard to priestly ministry. For example:
Women generally have less powerful, less commanding voices than men (so necessary for preaching hard truths).

Women tend to be more emotional than men.

Women may not have as much physical stamina as men and may handle physically taxing duties less graciously.

Women may tend to be "too compassionate" regarding sins - leading to the loss of souls!

Women may be moodier due to feminine hormonal changes which tend to affect behavior.

Women may be far more likely to allow emotions to get in the way of reason/logic.

Women may be more gossipy / talkative, and may be more prone to discuss the secrets of the confessional.

Women may be more concerned about appearance (both hers and yours).

Women may be more influenced by flattery.

Women may be weaker, making her safety an issue. She may often be alone with men who are stronger than she is.

None of the above are or have ever been issues with male priests. :rolleyes:

FouxDaFaFa

I was sure that was a joke. But it's not.
Also, this gem of a conclusion.

Finally, although women do not belong in the sanctuary, it may still be said that women do "make the best priests" - that is, they make all the men that will be priests!

*vomits everywhere*