Comments for BNFree / Bloomington-Normal Freethinkers http://www.bnfree.com Sun, 19 Jun 2011 15:43:20 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 Comment on Bylaws by Harry http://www.bnfree.com/about/bylaws/comment-page-1/#comment-1435 Harry Sun, 19 Jun 2011 15:43:20 +0000 http://www.sasquatchmilitia.com/bnfree/?page_id=46#comment-1435 I saw your group on meetups.com and was interested in talking more to you. I'm new to Bloomington due to a new job and interested in something that is more intellectual and your basic themes appear in tune with my interests. Look forward to hearing back and thanks! Harry I saw your group on meetups.com and was interested in talking more to you. I’m new to Bloomington due to a new job and interested in something that is more intellectual and your basic themes appear in tune with my interests. Look forward to hearing back and thanks!

Harry

]]> Comment on One of These Things is Not Like the Other by Skeptical Rationalist http://www.bnfree.com/one-of-these-things-is-not-like-the-other/comment-page-1/#comment-303 Skeptical Rationalist Thu, 16 Sep 2010 21:16:20 +0000 http://www.bnfree.com/?p=423#comment-303 And in other news, the original artist who thought up Everybody Draw Mohammed Day has had to go into self-imposed "witness protection" due to continued death threats: http://www.seattleweekly.com/2010-09-15/news/on-the-advice-of-the-fbi-cartoonist-molly-norris-disappears-from-view/ When atheists are killing people in the street and hounding people out of their lives for disagreeing with us, then and ONLY THEN will anyone have the right to characterize things as "acts of aggression and violence." And in other news, the original artist who thought up Everybody Draw Mohammed Day has had to go into self-imposed “witness protection” due to continued death threats:

http://www.seattleweekly.com/2010-09-15/news/on-the-advice-of-the-fbi-cartoonist-molly-norris-disappears-from-view/

When atheists are killing people in the street and hounding people out of their lives for disagreeing with us, then and ONLY THEN will anyone have the right to characterize things as “acts of aggression and violence.”

]]> Comment on One of These Things is Not Like the Other by ken http://www.bnfree.com/one-of-these-things-is-not-like-the-other/comment-page-1/#comment-277 ken Fri, 20 Aug 2010 16:30:37 +0000 http://www.bnfree.com/?p=423#comment-277 Have a pleasant day. Have a pleasant day.

]]> Comment on One of These Things is Not Like the Other by SkepticalRationalist http://www.bnfree.com/one-of-these-things-is-not-like-the-other/comment-page-1/#comment-276 SkepticalRationalist Fri, 20 Aug 2010 02:47:16 +0000 http://www.bnfree.com/?p=423#comment-276 In case you didn't notice, I hold your position in utter contempt. In case you didn’t notice, I hold your position in utter contempt.

]]> Comment on One of These Things is Not Like the Other by ken http://www.bnfree.com/one-of-these-things-is-not-like-the-other/comment-page-1/#comment-274 ken Wed, 18 Aug 2010 19:42:43 +0000 http://www.bnfree.com/?p=423#comment-274 Written by SkepticalRationalist on August 16, 2010. I thought about making a longer reply, but then I get to the end and saw where you characterized *making a drawing* as an act of aggression and violence, and I realized this is one of those times where you just don’t dignify with a response. ¶ You can kill a person with a gun, and you can also kill with a word. Written by SkepticalRationalist on August 16, 2010.

I thought about making a longer reply, but then I get to the end and saw where you characterized *making a drawing* as an act of aggression and violence, and I realized this is one of those times where you just don’t dignify with a response.

¶ You can kill a person with a gun, and you can also kill with a word.

]]> Comment on One of These Things is Not Like the Other by SkepticalRationalist http://www.bnfree.com/one-of-these-things-is-not-like-the-other/comment-page-1/#comment-272 SkepticalRationalist Tue, 17 Aug 2010 03:49:30 +0000 http://www.bnfree.com/?p=423#comment-272 I thought about making a longer reply, but then I get to the end and saw where you characterized *making a drawing* as an act of aggression and violence, and I realized this is one of those times where you just don't dignify with a response. I thought about making a longer reply, but then I get to the end and saw where you characterized *making a drawing* as an act of aggression and violence, and I realized this is one of those times where you just don’t dignify with a response.

]]> Comment on One of These Things is Not Like the Other by ken http://www.bnfree.com/one-of-these-things-is-not-like-the-other/comment-page-1/#comment-267 ken Fri, 13 Aug 2010 02:58:29 +0000 http://www.bnfree.com/?p=423#comment-267 I don't understand all the legal nuances as to what qualifies as prosecutable hate speech, so I'm out of my depth on that issue. I note, as reported a couple of days ago, that Richard Dawkins (I almost mistakenly typed Richard Dawson -survey says) labeled the burka as a "‘full bin liner thing’; in other words a garbage bag. He followed up with this observation.... "As a liberal I would hesitate to propose a blanket ban on any style of dress because of the implications for individual liberty and freedom of choice." As a liberal? As a liberal he should have better manners. The man is a stranger to himself. Why anybody pays the slightest attention to anything this bird says outside the classroom is a mystery. Maybe he thinks he's Albert Camus. He should think again. In any event, neither participating in Draw Mohammed Day nor burning the Koran are acts of civil disobedience because, as far as I can see, no laws are being broken. They are not acts of civil disobedience, just acts of in-civility, and are, themselves, examples of aggression and violence that lead to further conflict and division. I don’t understand all the legal nuances as to what qualifies as prosecutable hate speech, so I’m out of my depth on that issue.

I note, as reported a couple of days ago, that Richard Dawkins (I almost mistakenly typed Richard Dawson -survey says) labeled the burka as a “‘full bin liner thing’; in other words a garbage bag. He followed up with this observation….

“As a liberal I would hesitate to propose a blanket ban on any style of dress because of the implications for individual liberty and freedom of choice.”

As a liberal? As a liberal he should have better manners. The man is a stranger to himself. Why anybody pays the slightest attention to anything this bird says outside the classroom is a mystery. Maybe he thinks he’s Albert Camus. He should think again.

In any event, neither participating in Draw Mohammed Day nor burning the Koran are acts of civil disobedience because, as far as I can see, no laws are being broken. They are not acts of civil disobedience, just acts of in-civility, and are, themselves, examples of aggression and violence that lead to further conflict and division.

]]> Comment on Hyperbole: Is it always completely insane and unprecedented? by ken http://www.bnfree.com/hyperbole-is-it-always-completely-insane-and-unprecedented/comment-page-1/#comment-264 ken Tue, 03 Aug 2010 16:42:28 +0000 http://www.bnfree.com/?p=339#comment-264 Rule #1 - Never accept friend requests on social networks. It leads to nothing but trouble. I think Charlie Chan said that in a movie back in the 1940's. He was a wise man and knew what he was talking about. I saw all his films. I am his #3 son. Rule #1 – Never accept friend requests on social networks. It leads to nothing but trouble. I think Charlie Chan said that in a movie back in the 1940′s. He was a wise man and knew what he was talking about. I saw all his films. I am his #3 son.

]]> Comment on The “militant” atheists are guilty of … poor etiquette? by Happy Skeptic http://www.bnfree.com/the-%e2%80%9cmilitant%e2%80%9d-atheists-are-guilty-of-%e2%80%a6-poor-etiquette/comment-page-1/#comment-260 Happy Skeptic Wed, 28 Jul 2010 19:27:27 +0000 http://www.bnfree.com/?p=416#comment-260 These are both (The blog and Ken's comment) interesting perspectives and each draws me for some reasons. I'm simply matter of fact about it and end up very surprised when people are not aware of it [my Atheism]. These are both (The blog and Ken’s comment) interesting perspectives and each draws me for some reasons. I’m simply matter of fact about it and end up very surprised when people are not aware of it [my Atheism].

]]> Comment on The “militant” atheists are guilty of … poor etiquette? by ken http://www.bnfree.com/the-%e2%80%9cmilitant%e2%80%9d-atheists-are-guilty-of-%e2%80%a6-poor-etiquette/comment-page-1/#comment-258 ken Tue, 27 Jul 2010 20:41:08 +0000 http://www.bnfree.com/?p=416#comment-258 It is possible to be a religionist and reject organized religion, depending on how one defines religionist. The Transcendentalist movement with seminal figures like Emerson and Thoreau is an example. So is the deism of Jefferson and Thomas Paine. One can have a religious sensibility without struggling to construct creedal statements which need to be taken on faith. A suspicion of the transcendent rather than rigidly held doctrines may be sufficient to inform one's life. Neither is there a necessity to rely on some traditional or hierarchical authority to buttress these views. Poets do this all the time. Basically, atheism is not a moral position and has nothing to say on the subject. As others have pointed out, it exists solely in reference to the question of God's existence or non-existence. There it begins and ends. Like believers, atheists can be snooty, self-centered, obnoxious, ill-informed and intolerant, and as history informs us millions have been exterminated by political regimes based on materialism and atheism (China, USSR, etc.). Therefore, it has no relationship with humanism or ethics, although skeptics may imagine it does. Why biologists have become the "go to" people for the final say on all aspects of the human condition mystifies me. Thirty years ago it was Carl Sagan and the astronomers who enchanted and mesmerized us. I suspect the biologist's focus on human biology to the exclusion of all else is the most likely reason for our enthusiasm, in light of the fact that no other species is as self-absorbed as we are, unless you happen to be a shark or a jackal. I would no more consider Richard Dawkins an authority on religion than I would consider my plumber an authority on quantum physics. Specialists are the least trustworthy people to put any faith in (forgive me) outside their area of specialization. This should be apparent to anyone who has ever dealt with such people in the medical profession, or in academia. In fact most of them are doofuses who wouldn't survive a day in this world were it not for the fact that society has fortunately constructed stolid, well funded institutions as safe havens to enhance the specialist's chances for survival. It is possible to be a religionist and reject organized religion, depending on how one defines religionist. The Transcendentalist movement with seminal figures like Emerson and Thoreau is an example. So is the deism of Jefferson and Thomas Paine. One can have a religious sensibility without struggling to construct creedal statements which need to be taken on faith. A suspicion of the transcendent rather than rigidly held doctrines may be sufficient to inform one’s life. Neither is there a necessity to rely on some traditional or hierarchical authority to buttress these views. Poets do this all the time.
Basically, atheism is not a moral position and has nothing to say on the subject. As others have pointed out, it exists solely in reference to the question of God’s existence or non-existence. There it begins and ends. Like believers, atheists can be snooty, self-centered, obnoxious, ill-informed and intolerant, and as history informs us millions have been exterminated by political regimes based on materialism and atheism (China, USSR, etc.). Therefore, it has no relationship with humanism or ethics, although skeptics may imagine it does.
Why biologists have become the “go to” people for the final say on all aspects of the human condition mystifies me. Thirty years ago it was Carl Sagan and the astronomers who enchanted and mesmerized us. I suspect the biologist’s focus on human biology to the exclusion of all else is the most likely reason for our enthusiasm, in light of the fact that no other species is as self-absorbed as we are, unless you happen to be a shark or a jackal.
I would no more consider Richard Dawkins an authority on religion than I would consider my plumber an authority on quantum physics. Specialists are the least trustworthy people to put any faith in (forgive me) outside their area of specialization. This should be apparent to anyone who has ever dealt with such people in the medical profession, or in academia. In fact most of them are doofuses who wouldn’t survive a day in this world were it not for the fact that society has fortunately constructed stolid, well funded institutions as safe havens to enhance the specialist’s chances for survival.

]]>