[Edit: Title changed -- Thanks Brian ]

Just curious... is there a reason why the RRS seems to avoid going after AiG? Going after Kent Hovind is like a high-schooler beating up a middle-schooler. I agree that the whole Youtube thing was a wash, and I've been rooting the RRS on throughout this whole fiasco -- But AiG is, from what I've seen, a much more potent threat. If you don't know what I mean, or don't believe me, go read some of their content on answersingenesis.org -- it's maddening!

Anyways -- any RRS [O]fficial stance on this issue? When Mike Riddle (an AiG spokesperson) came to town a few weeks ago, he actually specifically mentioned the RRS (by name, I think..although he may have said "Those Rational Response fellows from the Internet" or something) and said that he more or less verbally pwned you all.

Thanks for reading, if you have any comments or suggestions you can reach me directly HERE. Or on Myspace HERE.
Stay rational,
Jack
and the RRS MI team

Table of Contents

Click HERE to find your local affiliate!

Rational Response Squad News

RRS Affiliate News

Science News

Religion

Government

Community

Entertainment

Kelly and I are going to Borders to see our story in Radar Magazine.

Submitted by Sapient on Mon, 2007-10-15 10:15.

I'm in a rush, but I just wanted to tell you that the November issue of Radar Magazine has a three page story on us. You can head to Borders Books around the country today to pick up the issue, consider calling in advance to double check. Barnes and Noble stocks Radar, but both stores we visited still had last issue, and the computer didn't think they'd get it for another month. We think that was an error due to the fact that Radar was previously bi-monthly. Another user reports that his Barnes and Noble stocks it.

If a proposition is undemonstrated, as things requiring faith are by definition, then the position requiring fewest assumptions is rejection of it.

"What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence." -- Christopher Hitchens, God is not Great

There is an infinite number of undemonstrable propositions, each of which would be untenable from a view based on evidence, but most are never articulated. Most that are described, are rejected without fanfare even by those that believe other undemonstrated things. Faith is not applied uniformly, generally favoring the assumptions of one's native culture.

Bruce Bain is going to respond to every review of The End of Faith at Amazon, with his bizarre straw-man arguments, until he up and dies of acute tedium. Todd Friel isn't as old or as fat as he sounds. We all know a historical Jesus wouldn't look like a white dude from the Southern United States, and yet... Alister McGrath and Lee Strobel both have doll eyes. Christopher Hitchens needs an intervention.

I consider myself a person with a reasonably standard range of emotions. One my society deems good, like empathy, love, and occasional courage; and ones considered harmful and selfish, like anger, spite and cowardice. I don't rule out the possibility of dualism, though I don't think it adds anything to the natural explanation of emotions: their reasons, their sources, their development, their physiology. Many Christians take it for granted that certain emotions, if powerful enough, must certainly transcend the corporeal human experience. I recall reading once that the sensation of "itching" is actually two kinds of pain sensation to encourage scratching to stimulate circulation in the affected area; but in a dualistic view, there must be an ultimate source of itchiness. It seems as fair as saying there's an ultimate source of love. Hopefully, they're not one in the same.

So I was alittle pissed today with the way my freelancing meeting went, but that's another story...After the meeting, I had a talk with one of the people about none other than Jesus. I think anyone should have the freedom to believe what they want.....in reason of course...no killing at thevery leasing involved...hopefully....anyways...
They said that they were a christian...and in that slipt second...I said "me too"...Why should I have to even lie about my belief or lack there of to anybody? I wonder when would the First Amendment become a first offence? I dunno.... I realize that picking and choosing your fights are a skill in itself.

Please excuse my lack of posts lately, I've just got a lot on my plate right now and the need to prioritize dictates that obtaining, preparing for, and settling in at my new job is at the top of my list. I do not foresee this affecting anything in the long term, but I may be working more hours as well, we will see. So, thank you for understanding, and my apologies, again.

Thanks for reading, if you have any comments or suggestions you can reach me directly HERE. Or on Myspace HERE.
Stay rational,
Jack
and the RRS MI team

Table of Contents

Click HERE to find your local affiliate!

Rational Response Squad News

RRS Affiliate News

Science News

Religion

Government

Community

Entertainment

Kelly and I are going to Borders to see our story in Radar Magazine.

Submitted by Sapient on Mon, 2007-10-15 10:15.

I'm in a rush, but I just wanted to tell you that the November issue of Radar Magazine has a three page story on us. You can head to Borders Books around the country today to pick up the issue, consider calling in advance to double check. Barnes and Noble stocks Radar, but both stores we visited still had last issue, and the computer didn't think they'd get it for another month. We think that was an error due to the fact that Radar was previously bi-monthly. Another user reports that his Barnes and Noble stocks it.

One of the most controversial questions among atheists involves moderate theists.  Many who identify themselves as simply non-religious would prefer that us outspoken atheists leave moderates alone.  After all, they will say, moderates don't hurt anybody, and most of them are really nice people.  Their religion is mostly just cultural.  They don't really believe the nasty parts of the Bible.  They should be left alone even though they do happen to practice a potentially nasty religion.  I take an opposing view, and I believe there is a very good reason for doing so.

Without spending thirty minutes finding statistics that will be debatable, I'm going to hazard a guess that maybe 20% of Christians in America are either fundamentalists or evangelicals or both. It doesn't really matter. The point is, they're the minority of Christians. Most are moderates. They believe in some version of Christianity, most likely one that leaves out the nastier elements like stoning homosexuals, and the unscientific elements like a 6000 year old cosmos.

Wrote this about 5 years or so ago. Let me know what you think.

Were Moving on

For god so loved the world that he fucked over his only son.
Now were all going blind, listen to the song and start moving on.....

Religion is a lie to cover the pain
Just like Able was struck down by his brother Cain
just like the millions, killed by Religions
Yes look at us now, we are the fucking stool pigeons,
that run with a book and kill for a belief
Rational thinking can only bring relief

but we are…

Killing our fellow man, and putting entire generations to sleep

Technorati Profile

An old flame contacted me today out of the blue. She called mostly to complain about her life choices and imply that those life choices were mostly my fault. I allowed her to rant for a bit before I tuned her out, which was a comfortable move for me as I did it through much of our relationship. While I was tuning her out, I reflected on the number of douche bags I deal with on a daily basis. What I discovered was disturbing and liberating. On any given day, I must deal with ten to twelve douches from the time I wake up until I fall into bed hoping not to wake up the next day.