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

Comments by jakelovatto

Go to: Dumb and Dumber: Are Americans Hostile to Knowledge?

jakelovatto's Avatar Jump to comment 46 by jakelovatto

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/901723.stm

"A hospital paediatrician has hit out at vandals who forced her to flee her home after apparently taking her job title to mean she was a paedophile.

South African-born Yvette Cloete - a 30-year-old trainee consultant at the Royal Gwent Hospital, Newport, south Wales - said she planned to move home after returning to find the outside of her property daubed with the words "paedo". "

Fri, 15 Feb 2008 10:36:00 UTC | #121184

Go to: Debate between Richard Dawkins and Madeline Bunting

jakelovatto's Avatar Jump to comment 19 by jakelovatto

From the sickly religious moderates to the blunt bible-believing christians.

http://library.digiguide.com/lib/uk-tv-highlight/Wonderland:The End of the World Bus Tour-2611/Documentary/

"Most package-holiday tourists are seeking sun, sex or adventure, but the customers in Sharon Stolebarger's charge are looking for something rather different. Sharon is the tour rep on a special ten-day holiday for people who believe the Apocalypse is only a few years away. Her customers are off to Israel to take a last-chance look at the "valley of Armageddon" - before it's awash with the blood of unbelievers - and to be baptised in the very waters that Jesus once walked on. They even get the chance to spend a day helping out at an Israeli military base - the highlight of the holiday for many of the tourists."

For those who have access to BBC iPlayer
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/page/item/b008yykd.shtml?q=wonderland&start=1&scope=iplayersearch&go=Find Programmes&version_pid=b008yyhx

Thu, 14 Feb 2008 14:30:00 UTC | #120663

Go to: Debate between Richard Dawkins and Madeline Bunting

jakelovatto's Avatar Jump to comment 9 by jakelovatto

It was hard to keep my food down listening to Madeline Bunting's piffle.

Thu, 14 Feb 2008 13:56:00 UTC | #120649

Go to: Bill Maher on Larry King Live

jakelovatto's Avatar Jump to comment 93 by jakelovatto

Ye there is no real reason to it just seems pompous to describe oneself as an apatheist.

Tue, 12 Feb 2008 09:38:00 UTC | #119703

Go to: Bill Maher on Larry King Live

jakelovatto's Avatar Jump to comment 91 by jakelovatto

notsobad

Bill Maher
"I'm not an atheist. There's a really big difference between an atheist and someone who just doesn't believe in religion. Religion to me is a bureaucracy between man and God that I don't need. But I'm not an atheist, no. I believe there's some force. If you want to call it God... I don't believe God is a single parent who writes books"

"Simply put, theists don't deny, agnostics don't know, atheists don't believe, and apatheists don't care about the existence of gods. "
http://www.wunderland.com/WTS/Ginohn/cetera/apatheism.html

"Apatheism -- a disinclination to care all that much about one's own religion, and an even stronger disinclination to care about other people's"
http://www.jonathanrauch.com/jrauch_articles/apatheism_beyond_religion/index.html

He may say he is but the notion that is often coupled with apatheism is the "disinclination to care about other people's". Apathy is not rational.

Tue, 12 Feb 2008 08:55:00 UTC | #119687

Go to: Sharia fiasco

jakelovatto's Avatar Jump to comment 66 by jakelovatto

Bill Maher
"I'm not an atheist. There's a really big difference between an atheist and someone who just doesn't believe in religion. Religion to me is a bureaucracy between man and God that I don't need. But I'm not an atheist, no. I believe there's some force. If you want to call it God... I don't believe God is a single parent who writes books"

Sun, 10 Feb 2008 16:21:00 UTC | #118810

Go to: Sharia fiasco

jakelovatto's Avatar Jump to comment 63 by jakelovatto

I've always thought Bill Maher was quite poor. He's terrible at the minute without his writers his monologues are pathetic.

Sun, 10 Feb 2008 16:06:00 UTC | #118807

Go to: Sharia fiasco

jakelovatto's Avatar Jump to comment 10 by jakelovatto

bujin
Like Peter Griffins
"You Know What Really Grinds My Gears?"

Sun, 10 Feb 2008 11:27:00 UTC | #118687

Go to: Conservative Rabbis to Vote on Resolution Criticizing Pope's Revision of Prayer

jakelovatto's Avatar Jump to comment 15 by jakelovatto

Richard Morgan
This kind of comment is typical of the kind of stupidity and childishness we could well do without on this site.


That's a bit of an overreaction. Religious belief relies on rationalisations, continuous leaps of faith. When you cannot realise your obvious folly you are stupid. But most people do, they know its stupid and they switch off their critical faculties and revel in their wilful ignorance. That if not stupid is certainly nothing to be proud of.

Sun, 10 Feb 2008 10:39:00 UTC | #118655

Go to: Conservative Rabbis to Vote on Resolution Criticizing Pope's Revision of Prayer

jakelovatto's Avatar Jump to comment 13 by jakelovatto

Opisthokont
Ye I can remember the furore that was caused when Ann Coulter said that Jews needed perfecting. That is what Christianity is.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,301216,00.html

sorry about the link being Fox News. I feel dirty.

Sun, 10 Feb 2008 10:24:00 UTC | #118647

Go to: Conservative Rabbis to Vote on Resolution Criticizing Pope's Revision of Prayer

jakelovatto's Avatar Jump to comment 1 by jakelovatto

"A person who uses threatening words or behaviour, or displays any written material which is threatening, is guilty of an offence if he intends thereby to stir up religious hatred." quoted from the Racial and Religious Hatred Act 2006.

????????????????????????????????????????????????????

Sun, 10 Feb 2008 09:31:00 UTC | #118622

Go to: Hitchens V. Boteach

jakelovatto's Avatar Jump to comment 445 by jakelovatto

Don't know if anyone has already posted the link but here is the youtube link to the full debate

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vnMYL8sF7bQ

Sat, 09 Feb 2008 07:02:00 UTC | #118222

Go to: Sharia law in UK is 'unavoidable'

jakelovatto's Avatar Jump to comment 199 by jakelovatto

Taken from a comment board about the issue:


Our current law states that "A person who uses threatening words or behaviour, or displays any written material which is threatening, is guilty of an offence if he intends thereby to stir up religious hatred." quoted from the Racial and Religious Hatred Act 2006. Now I refer you to any English translation of the Quran: Quran tells Muslims to kill the disbelievers wherever they find them (Q. 2:191), to murder them and treat them harshly (Q. 9:123), slay them (Q. 9:5), fight with them, (Q. 8: 6 )

Fri, 08 Feb 2008 08:04:00 UTC | #117939

Go to: Sharia law in UK is 'unavoidable'

jakelovatto's Avatar Jump to comment 191 by jakelovatto

Fri, 08 Feb 2008 07:07:00 UTC | #117916

Go to: Sharia law in UK is 'unavoidable'

jakelovatto's Avatar Jump to comment 145 by jakelovatto

http://www.archbishopofcanterbury.org/1573

Here's a transcript if anyone's interested.
His comments when taken in context are not as bad as mine and I assume most peoples knee jerk reaction was.

Couple of quotes that seem to sum up his argument:

It's very important hat you mention there the word 'choice'; I think it would be quite wrong to say that we could ever licence so to speak a system of law for some community which gave people no right of appeal, no way of exercising the rights that are guaranteed to them as citizens in general, so that a woman in such circumstances would have to know that she was not signing away for good and all; now this is a matter of detail that I don't know enough about the detail of the law in the Islamic law in this context; I'm simply saying that there are ways of looking at marital dispute for example within discussions that go on among some contemporary scholars which provide an alternative to the divorce courts as we understand them. In some cultural and religious settings they would seem more appropriate.


...we already have in this country a number of situations in which the law the internal law of religious communities is recognised by the law of the land as justified conscientious objections in certain circumstances in providing certain kinds of social relations


the ideal situation is one in which there is one law and only one law for everybody; now that principle that there's one law for everybody is an important pillar of our social identity as a Western liberal democracy, but I think it's a misunderstanding to suppose that that means people don't have other affiliations, other loyalties which shape and dictate how they behave in society and the law needs to take some account of that, so an approach to law which simply said, 'There is one law for everybody and that is all there is to be said, and anything else that commands your loyalty or your allegiance is completely irrelevant in the processes of the courts'. I think that's a bit of a danger.


He seems to be missing the obvious. As long as you don't break the law most "concientious objections" are permissible. I disagree with him profoundly though on his point that, "'There is one law for everybody and that is all there is to be said, and anything else that commands your loyalty or your allegiance is completely irrelevant in the processes of the courts'. I think that's a bit of a danger."
We have to have basic universal Human rights and I close with this quote

according to Christian Moe, Norwegian Institute of Human Rights, published at the site of The Strasbourg Conference:

"[T]he Court considers that sharia, which faithfully reflects the dogmas and divine rules laid down by religion, is stable and invariable. Principles such as pluralism in the political sphere or the constant evolution of public freedoms have no place in it. […] It is difficult to declare one’s respect for democracy and human rights while at the same time supporting a regime based on sharia, which clearly diverges from Convention values, particularly with regard to its criminal law and criminal procedure, its rules on the legal status of women and the way it intervenes in all spheres of private and public life in accordance with religious precepts."

Thu, 07 Feb 2008 17:21:00 UTC | #117757

Go to: Atheists to celebrate at Darwin Day in Coconut Creek

jakelovatto's Avatar Jump to comment 3 by jakelovatto

I agree. In a documentary "The Trouble with Atheism" by Rod Liddle

He trots out all the old favourites, Stalin, Hitler etc but then says

"They even have their own Holy Book" referring to On the Origin of Species. There's an atheist in it who changed his name to Darwin as well. Its not a good advert.

Mon, 04 Feb 2008 07:08:00 UTC | #115806

Go to: Female Muslim medics 'disobey hygiene rules'

jakelovatto's Avatar Jump to comment 52 by jakelovatto

It really is hard to understand this behaviour. The brainwashing that showing your fucking arms is an affront to a despotic maniacal fairy is beyond comprehension. Oh no sorry just prescribe genuflected grovelling 5 times a day from cradle to grave.

I mean the story is hyped beyond what it needs to be, its probably only 30 to 40 people but it's still a problem. The only criticism of this kind of behaviour unfortunately predominately comes from the right with an implicit undertone that is Christian.

There is an unfortunate alliance with the right with the kind of criticism that we are making. Its opening the door for Christian, White Supremacists like the BNP and the more vile wings of the Conservative party. Its hard to know whether to be exited or fearful that this is not taboo any longer.

Sun, 03 Feb 2008 15:54:00 UTC | #115573

Go to: Are Darwin's Theories Fact or Faith Issues?

jakelovatto's Avatar Jump to comment 13 by jakelovatto

Is there a clearer demonstration of incompetence and wilful deception of the creationist critique of evolution. It would be laughable if it didn't have so much political power.

Fri, 01 Feb 2008 11:01:00 UTC | #114407

Go to: Sentenced to death: Afghan who dared to read about women's rights

jakelovatto's Avatar Jump to comment 83 by jakelovatto

In Britain there is massive censorship going on. Just read about the Samina Malik case 'Lyrical Terrorist' and I think there was another case recently.

Thu, 31 Jan 2008 11:40:00 UTC | #113552

Go to: Sentenced to death: Afghan who dared to read about women's rights

jakelovatto's Avatar Jump to comment 73 by jakelovatto

Unfortunately Britain put a woman on trial for possessing documents likely to aid a terrorist.
Lyrical terrorist Samina Malik.

Thu, 31 Jan 2008 10:42:00 UTC | #113496

Go to: Richard Dawkins on The Big Questions

jakelovatto's Avatar Jump to comment 15 by jakelovatto

I was hoping Richard would be asked to make a point about whether John Barryman's comment (The special Guest, the Actor/Singer) that 'God' made him gay.
Richard has a discussion of the evolution of homosexuality on his FAQ at his Oxford website but I found it hard to follow. It's a question that I've never been able to satisfactorily explain, and it is of course such a big issue for the fundamentalists, that being gay is a lifestyle choice etc.
I must add its merely an academic question the answer wouldn't affect the fact that I believe people are free to do whatever they wish with the obvious caveats.

Tue, 29 Jan 2008 18:26:00 UTC | #112244

Go to: Richard Dawkins on The Big Questions

jakelovatto's Avatar Jump to comment 12 by jakelovatto

I can understand Richard's point about having to lie to protect your private life but the point was lost on the audience.
I think the tactic is a poor one though because it of course doesn't keep matters private it merely makes public a false private life.

Tue, 29 Jan 2008 18:09:00 UTC | #112240

Go to: The Moral Instinct

jakelovatto's Avatar Jump to comment 20 by jakelovatto

"It is better to be a human being dissatisfied than a pig satisfied." - John Stuart Mill

Morality is better based on solidarity and concern for others well-being, than increase in happiness.

Sat, 12 Jan 2008 09:09:00 UTC | #105537

Go to: The Moral Instinct

jakelovatto's Avatar Jump to comment 5 by jakelovatto

The last rabbit hole?
Where does morality come from if not from Superman?
This article is short enough, 8 pages, to show where morality comes from to the people who make this claim even those with short attention spans.
I agree with Pinker that the more we know about our morality the more 'moral' we can become.

Sat, 12 Jan 2008 07:53:00 UTC | #105519

Go to: Monkey, Business

jakelovatto's Avatar Jump to comment 177 by jakelovatto

Yeah I agree with Out Foxed being a decent film. Shows just the level of control exercised. I read an interview with Murdoch recently, I forget where, when he was talking about how he would like to make Sky News more like Fox but elements of British Law stopped him from being able to. He also said which I found comforting, although I think he protests too much, that he exercised massive editorial control over The Sun but was not able to over The Times.
You find much of the same stuff is reported in all the main papers apart from the odd stand out story from The Independent or The Guardian. Everyone follows Reuters by and large.
The internet is the antidote, I've got a few decent independent sources of news Z Net, UK Indynews to name a few.

Wed, 02 Jan 2008 11:02:00 UTC | #101106

Go to: Monkey, Business

jakelovatto's Avatar Jump to comment 170 by jakelovatto

Yeah I agree with the newspapers.
Id throw in The Times as a reasonable paper. Murdoch has little control. Although the editor is his best mate and goes on family holidays with the Murdochs so I am always wary of it.

Wed, 02 Jan 2008 10:48:00 UTC | #101093

Go to: Monkey, Business

jakelovatto's Avatar Jump to comment 156 by jakelovatto

Sorry for the racism accusation to used to nationalist types. The idea of mass radicalism in the UK comes from a book Londonistan by Melanie Phillips.
Suffice it to say, reading about Melanie Phillips after I read this article,
http://richarddawkins.net/article,1992,This-deadly-religious-resistance-to-vaccinations,Johann-Hari led me to suspect her of bias.
Don't forget the UK had the troubles in Ireland for over 30 years these kind of things shouldn't be scaring the public but they are. Memories are very short.

Wed, 02 Jan 2008 10:05:00 UTC | #101063

Go to: Monkey, Business

jakelovatto's Avatar Jump to comment 152 by jakelovatto

Steve Zara
I concur.
epeeist
Couldn't agree more.

Wed, 02 Jan 2008 09:56:00 UTC | #101056

Go to: Monkey, Business

jakelovatto's Avatar Jump to comment 136 by jakelovatto

The illusion that Capitalism equates to freedom is patently erroneous. Freedom for those who can afford. Let me back that up with an example.
Recent reports in the UK press talk about
"bright children from poor homes will be overtaken academically at school by less gifted pupils with the wealthiest parents"
source: http://news.scotsman.com/politics/Education-system-favours-children-of.3589742.jp
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/12/13/npoor113.xml
http://news.independent.co.uk/education/education_news/article3247549.ece

This is an example where government intervention is needed to correct the situation. In a private education system, as we do have operating in the UK also, there are no such problems. Why? Because they are only concerned with 'profits' i.e. better results which enables the ability to charge higher prices, by having a self perpetuating system of only selecting the most wealthy.
The poor are left behind.

Wed, 02 Jan 2008 09:40:00 UTC | #101037

Go to: Monkey, Business

jakelovatto's Avatar Jump to comment 127 by jakelovatto

Roger Stanyard
Hear hear!!!
If only Thatcher had left more things alone

Wed, 02 Jan 2008 09:24:00 UTC | #101019