This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.

utelme's Profile

utelme's Avatar Joined about 6 years ago
Gender: Male

Latest Discussions Started by utelme

More Discussions by utelme

Latest Comments by utelme

Go to: Art teacher made student pray to Jesus for forgiveness

utelme's Avatar Jump to comment 62 by utelme

daddy's band's official web page


Sheeeit, get the fire hose, lol

Sun, 21 Sep 2008 01:20:00 UTC | #237927

Go to: Look Who's Irrational Now

utelme's Avatar Jump to comment 61 by utelme

21% of self-proclaimed atheists believe in either a personal God or an impersonal force. Ten percent of atheists pray at least weekly and 12% believe in heaven.


Maybe they think that atheist means a theist. Yeah, yeah, I know, nobody could be that dumb..or could they?

Sat, 20 Sep 2008 01:24:00 UTC | #237543

Go to: Does faith have a place in medicine?

utelme's Avatar Jump to comment 23 by utelme

It's truly amazing how religion can twist anti-discrimination laws to suit itself. It discriminates for the religious and then against those that don't have their beliefs. What a marvellous double edged sword they wield. I'm glad that I'm living in an age where more and more people are standing up to their arrogance.

Fri, 19 Sep 2008 17:46:00 UTC | #237407

Go to: Does faith have a place in medicine?

utelme's Avatar Jump to comment 20 by utelme

comment 250439 by Diacanu

LMFAO...do popcorn...Stephen H... LOL

Fri, 19 Sep 2008 17:07:00 UTC | #237388

Go to: Letter from Sir Richard Roberts asking Reiss to step down

utelme's Avatar Jump to comment 246 by utelme

Lines have obviously been drawn in the sand (classroom)on the issues of science vs religion and some very good arguments have been proposed as to their incompatibility (and it's about time). Those who argue that "children" (are we including undergraduate students with this term?) need to be engaged in debate about the merits of evolution or any other branch of science and its superstitious opposite in a science class have an agenda that suits their particular theology.

Teachers and lecturers already deal with these issues in their own style and have been for years. There was no need for Reiss to make his comments at all unless he has a leaning toward his particular theology and wanted it to be imposed on everyone else by making a political football of it, especially in the current climate of religious fundamentalism, vote grabbing politicians and the rise of those willing to take on stone age, and in many cases, absurd beliefs and behaviours.

Teachers and lecturers are not all great at their chosen profession but are comprised of people of varying standards the same as the general populace. The fact that someone has a Doctorate does not necessarily make them competent teachers (an arrogant and pompous view). I'm sure that there are those here who have run into some good ones, average ones and absolutely terrible ones. It also isn't always for lack of trying by some of the bad ones . Getting rid of the bad ones may help but if you get rid of the average you won't have much left (hundreds of students per class?).

The good ones handle theological postulations well, the average struggle. It's hard enough to cover all the content of some science subjects, help the less bright students and get involved in religious claptrap that has been disproven by science long ago. The likelihood is that there are very few potential nobel prize laureates in the class and the rest don't need the enforced distraction of religious views of students that believe in a 6000 year old earth and have seen human footprints in dinosaur tracks (as an aspiring Vice President of the USA has stated).

Not to even consider that once they get involved in this debate they may then have to confront irate and litigious parents/organisations. By attempting to make it respectable by firstly infecting and causing dissension in an organisation representing science, then have the meeker agree with it and ultimately give fuel to those that want to virtually destroy science through political means and making it law is not merely disingenuous but stupid.

It is ridiculous to express surprise at the response by scientists and rational thinkers who reject stone age thinking. Leave it to a theology class or comparative religion class, perhaps those teachers can then handle questions on evolution and other branches of science. They have much more time to waste!

Fri, 19 Sep 2008 00:56:00 UTC | #237078

More Comments by utelme