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

Comments by crazy4blues

Go to: Atheist speaker draws crowd

crazy4blues's Avatar Jump to comment 24 by crazy4blues

I had seen that RD was going to speak in one of my old stomping grounds, and I was very intrigued. The tone of the article is not surprising at all. I was just in Columbia, SC this summer, and I'm always struck by how Balkanized the place can feel. When you're on the USC Campus, it feels like a "proper university". However, drive just 5-10 miles down Knox Abbot Blvd, and you're DEEP in the Bible Belt. At this very moment, you'll see the signs in front of the various churches proclaiming the evils of Halloween. It is also a very beautiful place with lovely countryside. Of course, there's also the amazing and tragic history of the Civil War (the first shots were fired in this state). If you have the opportunity, visit South Carolina. Oh, and don't be surprised (or offended) if a store clerk 20 years your junior calls you "darlin'". It's just the local language ;-)

Tue, 20 Oct 2009 21:35:00 UTC | #407151

Go to: Atheist clubs are springing up in American high schools, warns head of US Catholic bishops

crazy4blues's Avatar Jump to comment 1 by crazy4blues

I went to see The Invention of Lying this weekend and was surprised to see so many teenagers at this movie. They, along me, were laughing the hardest!

Wed, 07 Oct 2009 21:23:00 UTC | #404191

Go to: Bill Maher on Religion

crazy4blues's Avatar Jump to comment 30 by crazy4blues

Great clip! I nominate Bill Maher, Penn Jillete, Lewis Black, and George Carlin (in absentia, of course) as The Four Horsemen of Comedy!

Wed, 20 Aug 2008 13:13:00 UTC | #221381

Go to: Escape or betrayal.

crazy4blues's Avatar Jump to comment 47 by crazy4blues

Hey, Black Mamba, I noticed that the time of your post is 9:11 pm. What, did you wait to hit the enter button or something?

Yeah, I know that this is a kinda dumb thing to say, but, given what you're on about, I think it fits, no?

Fri, 25 Jul 2008 10:51:00 UTC | #207074

Go to: New Zealand man sells his soul to 'Hell'

crazy4blues's Avatar Jump to comment 15 by crazy4blues

Okay, fine. But what about depreciation? What about the re-sale value???

Thu, 03 Jul 2008 10:18:00 UTC | #193425

Go to: Breaking the Silence

crazy4blues's Avatar Jump to comment 21 by crazy4blues

Ain't gonna hush! Gotta love it. How many "Islamic" men have the sack to do what she does?

Mon, 16 Jun 2008 08:40:00 UTC | #184322

Go to: Debating creationism in Louisiana schools

crazy4blues's Avatar Jump to comment 51 by crazy4blues

Well, of course, the worst thing about this segment, for me, is that the "crawler" text revealed that the San Francisco Giants lost, while the Los Angeles Dodgers won. It is perfectly clear to me where the bias of this tv station"s convictions lay--and that's with the dreaded Dodger Blue. One can easily discern this, as everyone seems to be wearing the color blue. Shame. This is an affront to objectivity and, indeed, scientific inquiry. I'm outraged!

Sir Byshe St. John, Missus

Fri, 13 Jun 2008 19:58:00 UTC | #183041

Go to: Unlike Others, U.S. Defends Freedom to Offend in Speech

crazy4blues's Avatar Jump to comment 28 by crazy4blues

"Canadians do not have a cast-iron stomach for offensive speech," Mr. Gratl said in a telephone interview. "We don't subscribe to a marketplace of ideas. Americans as a whole are more tough-minded and more prepared for verbal combat."


Hilarious! Seriously, does this elitist really think the average Canadian would want anyone to say that of him? Has it really come to this for others in the West?

Thu, 12 Jun 2008 12:38:00 UTC | #182528

Go to: The Faith of Flanders

crazy4blues's Avatar Jump to comment 48 by crazy4blues

Hafta agree wtih JeremyH. The reason the Flanders character works is because he's very humanized, and not just a hollow steretype. This why all of the characters are sympathetic.

Thu, 29 May 2008 09:32:00 UTC | #176573

Go to: A Conversation with Expelled's Associate Producer Mark Mathis

crazy4blues's Avatar Jump to comment 12 by crazy4blues

I've listened to part 1, and Mathis is completely "On Message" the whole time. I especially like the bit when he suggests, nay, comes right and says that Ken Miller of Dover trial fame isn't a "real catholic". That's the thing with these folks; if they aren't simply obfustacting, they absolutely stick their feet in their mouths when they get to the heart of their point, which is, 'We want everyone to believe the same lies we do--whether you want to or not!'

Sun, 20 Apr 2008 20:46:00 UTC | #156785

Go to: The atheist delusion

crazy4blues's Avatar Jump to comment 86 by crazy4blues

Hey, do know who John Gray is? He became well-known in the 80s and 90s by creating the "Men are from Mars; Women are from Venus" pop-psychology series of books. He made millions speaking at "seminars" and selling self-help books and audio tapes. He probably thinks he's some kind of an authority on theology only because he made so much money on psychobable! This is a very easy case of considering the source . . . He's merely a fraud.

Sun, 16 Mar 2008 13:04:00 UTC | #137238

Go to: Turkey in radical revision of Islamic texts

crazy4blues's Avatar Jump to comment 45 by crazy4blues

Wonderful! Check back with me in about 200 years when some of this might take some effect!

Fri, 29 Feb 2008 11:52:00 UTC | #129088

Go to: Believe it or not

crazy4blues's Avatar Jump to comment 37 by crazy4blues

crazy4blues, but they are. Most of them are voting against the republicans. Just check the survey, most of the godless are independent and liberals, only 17% in 2001 see themselves as republicans. I'm sure the percent is now smaller after everything that has happened since 2001.

The sad part is that almost all of the presidential candidates are religious.


Well, we don't know that for sure. As RD has suggested, there simply must be a significant percentage of elected officials who're atheists, both Republican and Democratic, but they'll never own up to this, lest they offend reliable voting blocks. Can anyone really think that Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama were sincere in their tawdry pandering to religious sentiment by saying "faith" as many times as they could in debates earlier this year? Obviously, they were told by their campaign gurus that they need to play the "religious card" more.

Lately, there have been articles popping up about how younger Evangelical Christians are starting to adopt more liberal views on issues like global warming, poverty, and social justice. These folks are "up for grabs" politically, but they aren't about to renounce Jesus as the savior of mankind–far from it. In fact, if it turns out that a significant number of Evangelicals (e.g., 10 or 15 million) "deliver" the vote for the Democratic candidate, then you can bet that there'll be little change in the American epistemological landscape. It'll still be Jesus this and Christ that, and present policies will change little. We'll still have faith-based organizations receiving tax dollars, and there'll be a lot of lip service and token executive orders, further eroding the seperation of church and state.

The reality is, the Christian Right is a very highly organized political machine that has been 20 to 30 years in the making. They started locally, taking over school boards, city councils, and state legislatures; they had elaborate and very duplicitous ways of getting their people elected.

To be sure, many of us abhor these methods, but we are only just beginning to organize into something that could be of measured political significance. It'll take a lot of time and commitment.

Wed, 12 Dec 2007 20:35:00 UTC | #93404

Go to: Believe it or not

crazy4blues's Avatar Jump to comment 35 by crazy4blues

30m is a HUGE number. For how long are they going to ignore the Godless people?


As soon as it can be determined that we are voting in strong, predictable numbers. Why do you think that the Christian Right is taken so seriously? They are the most reliable voting block in America.

Wed, 12 Dec 2007 16:13:00 UTC | #93283

Go to: The empty myths peddled by evangelists of unbelief

crazy4blues's Avatar Jump to comment 8 by crazy4blues

This guy makes D'Souza sound positively professorial! Seriously, this is like a really bad freshman essay that assistants have to suffer trough while doing Eng 101. Frankly, I'd have more respect for a top-shelf Liberty U. student than this simpleton!

Tue, 11 Dec 2007 10:50:00 UTC | #92597

Go to: Response to Dinesh D'Souza op-ed

crazy4blues's Avatar Jump to comment 2 by crazy4blues

Again, D'Souza is an American right-wing errand boy, and has latest mission is to trupment right-wing Christianity of the stripe of George Bush. Like Ann Coulter, this latest writing assignment for the Republican Party is to whip up the ire of "Christian" voters so that they can elect republicans. At this point, exploiting this demographic is the only way Republicans can win.

Mon, 05 Nov 2007 10:40:00 UTC | #81370

Go to: Sam Harris at AAI 07

crazy4blues's Avatar Jump to comment 167 by crazy4blues

"I'm Catholic. What are you?"

"There are some who call me . . . Tim."

Wed, 31 Oct 2007 12:12:00 UTC | #79997

Go to: Are the 'New Atheists' avoiding the 'real arguments'?

crazy4blues's Avatar Jump to comment 1 by crazy4blues

Finally, an answer to the "That's not MY religion" statement! Nice article!

Wed, 31 Oct 2007 12:03:00 UTC | #79991

Go to: Debate between Christopher Hitchens and Dinesh D'Souza

crazy4blues's Avatar Jump to comment 43 by crazy4blues

While several have pointed out D'Souza's sophistry, there is something else going on. D'Souza is on a greater mission that goes well beyond the mere refutation of atheism; he's "throwing in" for Jesus because that's what the American Republican Party and the conservative movement are about now. He's been writing books and going on conservative tirades (using the same rhetorical tactics) for 20 years now, and it is only recently that he's focussed on Christianity so much. Basically, as an American conservative, he has no choice but to do so because that is the most powerful zeitgeist in that political movement. It's come to this for American conservatives: Jesus = State. No member of the U.S. Republican Party can be elected w/o genuflecting to the Christian Right. It used to be that you could simply say you were the toughest on crime, taxes, and government spending. Now, you must demonstrate how much you believe in end-of-times theology in order to hold office.

Wed, 24 Oct 2007 12:53:00 UTC | #77502

Go to: A Revelation

crazy4blues's Avatar Jump to comment 14 by crazy4blues

I think that 'Bama has it about right, but I'd add, from my experiences in South Carolina, that religion as a cultrual trope is simply more visible. It was in the South that I first saw a sign in front of a church decrying the evils of Holloween! You'd never see anything like that in the liberal San Francisco Bay Area, but sentiments like that are very public in the South and the "fly-over" section of the U.S.

As the U.S. economy continues to worsen, the only cultural identifiers that people have are religion and political conservatism, Rush Limbaugh style. Neither one requires much thought or soul searching, if you will; it's simply the easy way out for someone suffering from the fact that the "American Dream" is no longer accessible for the middle class.

Fri, 12 Oct 2007 08:28:00 UTC | #74566

Go to: We need a more intelligent religion debate

crazy4blues's Avatar Jump to comment 33 by crazy4blues

From the theist's manual for debating Richard Dawkins:

Step 1. Don't read TGD. Or just read the first 10 pages or so . . .

Step 2. Say Richard Dawkins lacks a "sophisticated view of religion".

Step 3. Simply make up shit that Dawkins never said and refute that.

Step 4. Keep smiling while you're lying . . .

Fri, 07 Sep 2007 14:22:00 UTC | #65100

Go to: The smallest signs of retreat

crazy4blues's Avatar Jump to comment 42 by crazy4blues

Bunting seems to have adopted the one tactic any loser in a debate ultimately resorts to: just lie. Look, we're so used to this in the US, it hardly seems remarkable. Conservatives have conflated politics and relgion (or is it the other way around?) so that, now, you have lies supported by other lies.

Funny, there was that article in which RD exposed Cornwell's dishonesty, and Bunting cheerfully commits the same crime--as if knowing, like Cornwell, that an audience sympathetic to her simply cannot distinguish between fact and fiction! This is cynicism at its deepest.

Fri, 07 Sep 2007 14:01:00 UTC | #65094

Go to: Shop targets U.S. hunters with camo Bibles

crazy4blues's Avatar Jump to comment 30 by crazy4blues

Sooooooo . . . I don't suppose there's a Camo version of The God Delusion in the works? No? Okay, how about Letter to a Christian Nation then????

Tue, 28 Aug 2007 19:53:00 UTC | #62726

Go to: Fallen Pastor Seeks Aid to Pursue Studies

crazy4blues's Avatar Jump to comment 6 by crazy4blues

Ha! The University of Phoenix is a "degree mill"--it's below a "safe" school! So Mr. Haggard has descended from the highly exalted to the utterly ordinary. Hmmm, one wonders if he'll have to study evolution to fulfill the science requirement! Actually, probably not. Check the Wikipedia entry of the above named "university" and you'll quickly see that it's just a way to get a ticket punched. Folks, this is a wonderful example of bottom feeding in American education. Just perfect for this guy, particularly since he plans on applying his newly gained knowledge at a "faith-based" center. Ah, some things never change . . .

Mon, 27 Aug 2007 08:37:00 UTC | #62519

Go to: Arrogance, dogma and why science - not faith - is the new enemy of reason

crazy4blues's Avatar Jump to comment 70 by crazy4blues

In trying to account for the innanity of this article, I, like others, did a quick google of Melanie Phillips. It turns out that she is nothing other than England's version of America's Sean Hannity (google it, and you'll see very quickly).

The neo-conservative rhetorical technique is to repeat lies over and over again until they take on a life of their own--hence her highly predictable positions on science, religion, and society in general. In fact, the more outrageous the lie the better.

Neocons have a great interest in the well-being of religion because they know how effective its techiques of persuasion are. Basically, they play on peoples' worst fears of terrorism, foreigners, and whatever bogeymen they can create. Ever heard of the "War on Christmas"?

So, Mother England, I must ask: Is Phillips one of a kind? Or is she part of a vast right-wing network of neocons spreading lies just like O'Reilly, Hannity, Gibson, and, well, all of the folks on Fox News?

Tue, 07 Aug 2007 08:05:00 UTC | #58615

Go to: The New New Atheism

crazy4blues's Avatar Jump to comment 4 by crazy4blues

Typical Hoover Inst. tripe. Condi Rice, anyone? We see how well that kind of thinking is working out!

Mon, 16 Jul 2007 11:45:00 UTC | #53418

Go to: Is Christianity Good for the World? A discussion between Christopher Hitchens and Douglas Wilson

crazy4blues's Avatar Jump to comment 25 by crazy4blues

Great point, Antonio.

Here's one of my favorites: What in the OT or NT prevents me from marrying and impregnating my 12 year old cousin? There's nothing, of course, and the 10 Commandments fall completely flat. Indeed, the Bible would actually condone such an abomination!

When present-day theists are gently reminded that it is, in fact, our evolved knowledge of modern psychology and medecine that provides the *authority* for the inherent immorality of marrying and impregating an adolescent, it boggles the mind how quick the "faithful" are to run to the Bible as the "authority" to disallow a union between two consenting *adults* merely because they are of the same sex!

So the Bible is the authority for morality?

Wed, 11 Jul 2007 19:04:00 UTC | #52506

Go to: Is Christianity Good for the World? A discussion between Christopher Hitchens and Douglas Wilson

crazy4blues's Avatar Jump to comment 21 by crazy4blues

So Wilson's rhetorical strategy is to keep demanding an answer for the question: What is the color of water?! When Hitchens responds with the subtlety required for such an answer, Wilson reponds, "Ha! You refuse to tell me the color of water! I win the argument because God has told me this answer! The color of water is that Jesus died on the Cross!" This is how Wilson seems to reason everything.

I think that Hitchens didn't really bother to "get into it" with Wilson because it's rather like Mohmmad Ali against a child in a boxing match; it simply would be *immoral* to carry on in such a contest! Yet, it's the child who insists that fight go forward. Wudda ya gonna do?

Wed, 11 Jul 2007 17:08:00 UTC | #52489

Go to: Row over religion's role in US jails

crazy4blues's Avatar Jump to comment 17 by crazy4blues

Paul:

Your mad scientist example would appear to be the god of the old testament, no? As such, it's not really a good rhetorical device, as it can easily be turned back on itself to argue against a belief in God--assuming yo mean the God of the old testament, who is only too happy to give a "helping hand" to the races of people he doesn't much care for. Could one who believes in God say that this is morally wrong?

Tue, 26 Jun 2007 12:12:00 UTC | #49155

Go to: Row over religion's role in US jails

crazy4blues's Avatar Jump to comment 13 by crazy4blues

I work in the US federal prison system as a teacher, and there is an fact a faith-based initiative housing unit in the medical facility in Carswell, Texas. Here is how this thing will fix itself. If there is a perceived inequality among the christians and non-christians in the prison, the prisoners themselves will most likely "handle" it with law suits or even violence.

The other side of the coin is this: any program such as this, be it secular or overtly religious, actually helps to make the prison easier to run safely, both for inmates and staff. The inmates are occupied by a guided activity of some type. It's very pragmatic, actually. The success of the program is really measured on these terms. I would be most skeptical about your garden-variety recidivism study; they are often quite flawed, and almost always keep track of the inmate for no more than one year after release; often it's for only 6 months.

Tue, 26 Jun 2007 08:26:00 UTC | #49092