1. From the TWoP recap of Dancing with the Stars:
Backstage, everyone is chanting for the Gute. I think they all had a little too much sugar before the show.
No, I still think Penn started it.
Penn pretends to fall down while walking backstage because he can't not be the center of attention.
Ha. So true. But so entertaining.
2. An amusing take on the taboo of criticizing religious beliefs.
The most common excuse is to claim that non-adherents of a religion should not "offend" religious believers by criticizing their faith. This argument is based on the idea that criticism of a belief system is the same as a personal attack on the believers. Sometimes, and in some cases, such a connection may be valid -- but for the most part it is not.
Good point.
3. Your God must be a real dick.
4. This is a good idea, actually. And why am I not surprised that they're based in Oregon?
5. Is Atheism Only a Bundle of Sentiments?
exposing atheism “more as a bundle of sentiments than a coherent doctrine.”
I don't know about anyone else, but part of the reason I'm an atheist is because there isn't a doctrine. Atheism, to me, is a loose group of ideas or ways of thinking. That's all. But that's a good thing.
This semester, I learned that one of my colleagues is teaching our Sociology of Religion course with two supplemental texts, neither of which could be characterized as sociological in nature.
Since when do texts used in social science courses have to fit strictly into their specific little subfields? And notice the word "supplemental" up there? Yeah. That means they're extra, not the core of the readings. You said it yourself, dude.
And then there's this:
Back in my days as an atheist, speaking truthfully on a panel would have required a public admission that I rejected Christianity largely because it would not have allowed me to continue getting drunk and high every night while splitting time between four girlfriends.
Because one guy's reason/s for being an atheist is surely the same as any other person's reason/s. [The same argument applies in reverse, though. One guy's idiotic reason for believing in god doesn't mean that all believers are equally idiotic.]
This did make me think, though, about why I'm usually reluctant to talk about my personal reasons for being an atheist. When it comes down to it, I think it's a combination of three factors. 1) I suck at arguing/debating anything, 2) I don't want to offend the usually religious person I'm talking with (which is nigh unavoidable since many religious people think the very existence of atheism is a personal attack against them), and 3) I've been burned too many times already.
Don't get me wrong. I've had it relatively easy. I've never lost real friends or a job due to my nonbelief. But I grew up in the Midwest. I've experienced enough friction over this topic to make staying in the closet often preferable to confrontation.
Backstage, everyone is chanting for the Gute. I think they all had a little too much sugar before the show.
No, I still think Penn started it.
Penn pretends to fall down while walking backstage because he can't not be the center of attention.
Ha. So true. But so entertaining.
2. An amusing take on the taboo of criticizing religious beliefs.
The most common excuse is to claim that non-adherents of a religion should not "offend" religious believers by criticizing their faith. This argument is based on the idea that criticism of a belief system is the same as a personal attack on the believers. Sometimes, and in some cases, such a connection may be valid -- but for the most part it is not.
Good point.
3. Your God must be a real dick.
4. This is a good idea, actually. And why am I not surprised that they're based in Oregon?
5. Is Atheism Only a Bundle of Sentiments?
exposing atheism “more as a bundle of sentiments than a coherent doctrine.”
I don't know about anyone else, but part of the reason I'm an atheist is because there isn't a doctrine. Atheism, to me, is a loose group of ideas or ways of thinking. That's all. But that's a good thing.
This semester, I learned that one of my colleagues is teaching our Sociology of Religion course with two supplemental texts, neither of which could be characterized as sociological in nature.
Since when do texts used in social science courses have to fit strictly into their specific little subfields? And notice the word "supplemental" up there? Yeah. That means they're extra, not the core of the readings. You said it yourself, dude.
And then there's this:
Back in my days as an atheist, speaking truthfully on a panel would have required a public admission that I rejected Christianity largely because it would not have allowed me to continue getting drunk and high every night while splitting time between four girlfriends.
Because one guy's reason/s for being an atheist is surely the same as any other person's reason/s. [The same argument applies in reverse, though. One guy's idiotic reason for believing in god doesn't mean that all believers are equally idiotic.]
This did make me think, though, about why I'm usually reluctant to talk about my personal reasons for being an atheist. When it comes down to it, I think it's a combination of three factors. 1) I suck at arguing/debating anything, 2) I don't want to offend the usually religious person I'm talking with (which is nigh unavoidable since many religious people think the very existence of atheism is a personal attack against them), and 3) I've been burned too many times already.
Don't get me wrong. I've had it relatively easy. I've never lost real friends or a job due to my nonbelief. But I grew up in the Midwest. I've experienced enough friction over this topic to make staying in the closet often preferable to confrontation.
Labels: atheism, fundamentalism, Penn and Teller, sex
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home