The most disappointing part of any discussion like this is that it ultimately leads to people getting pissed off, people declaring that they are right and others are wrong and there is nothing to be done about it, that they have come by their beliefs and opinions "rationally," implying that they are obviously smarter than other people who have come to other conclusions.

To misquote, what we have here is a failure to communicate.

The people who are most problematic are the sorts of fundamentalists who still fall short of being like either Hitler or the Spanish Inquisition. When I think I fundamentalists, I think of those Christian fundamentalists who refuse to acknowledge that anyone besides them (even moderate and liberal Christians) could possibly be of moral value as a human being or could possibly have helpful ideas and valuable insights. I see the same problem from those atheists who fail to understand the complexity of religious diversity and lump all believers into the same Dr. Dobson-tastic category, immediately discrediting anything they might say or any insights they might have.

The fact is, moderate atheists, agnostics, Christians, Muslims, Jews, Buddhists, Hindus, etc, have far more in common than any of the extremists, on any side, want us to believe. And moderates of all faiths, or of no faith, can accomplish amazing things if we set aside our inherent desire to view different people as "other" or "alien" and work together to try to achieve the things that fundamentalists think can only come through conversion of heathens or eradication of religious institutions.

The point is not whether what I believe or what you believe or what Jane Doe on the corner believes is "better" or "more right" or "more true." I believe that objective truths exist, but I also acknowledge that we are all flawed human beings that will, at best, only be able to grasp at tiny glimpses of truth. But if we can stop insulting each other and getting defensive all the time, maybe we can add those glimpses together into something bigger and better than we ever thought possible. Maybe we can figure out if there isn't something more worthwhile in being a true community of diverse human beings than in trying to convince other people of our own righteousness.

It's interesting that people seem to think that religion has, on balance, done more harm than good throughout the world.

I note that believers of all stripes are more generous in charity than non-believers (I can dig up the data to back this up if I must but hopefully you will just take my word). In fact, the overwhelming majority of charities in this world were founded by religious groups. Mortal poverty in the middle ages was not really a problem because monks, priests, and the religious laity were convinced that they would burn in hell if they did not feed their starving neighbors. I hardly need to mention that the Civil Rights movement, the Liberation Theology movement in Latin America, women's suffrage, religious tolerance, government for and by the people, and most of the other steps we have taken towards allegedly "secular" civilization are actually products of believers.

I won't deny that a lot of people have used religion as an excuse to oppress others, and a nearly unforgivable amount of damage has been done in the name of God, Jesus, Allah, Yahweh, and any other divine names you might think of. But most of the good that has come into the world has also come through the work and sacrifice of those who believed in a supreme being.

In fact, if you want to flip the tables around and compare atheism's accomplishments for humanity with those of religion's, I'm afraid you will find the former quite lacking.

As a history buff (well, I suppose a history major) and particularly a fan of McCollough, I am both excited and relieved to hear that this new miniseries is not a flop. The movie musical 1776 shaped how I look at the Declaration of Independence and the American Revolution, and especially the character of John Adams. I don't know if Giamatti can really ever replace the singing William Daniels, but this still sounds promising.

SNL does not throw itself worshipfully at Obama's feet like the rest of the media and of course they get accused of being biased towards Clinton.

Because to deny the coronation of His Hopeness is no less than treason for any liberal these days.

I think most people here are misunderstanding Hedges when he says that humanity does not make progress. I don't think he means to suggest that human society has not changed over the course of centuries. Instead what I think he's suggesting is that the basic human moral condition is no better than it has ever been. We just have better structures and laws to protect ourselves from it, for the most part. The basic human instinct to hurt others has not evolved. The basic human instinct to wage war has not evolved.

We may have abolished slavery (in some parts of the world) and given women the right to vote (in some parts of the world) but 1/6 women are still raped or sexually assaulted in this country. Millions of people across the world are treated as little better than slaves with their wages and living conditions. The 20th century, in which we made the greatest technological leaps in our history, was also the setting for the greatest human atrocities ever committed and the most devastating wars that our species has yet seen.

Hedges point is not that human society stagnates and is never better now than it was then, but that the basic human condition never changes, and that we are always in danger of slipping backwards so far that we may not even recognize ourselves anymore. Any one of us could be a future Nazi in the making and our society, pleasant though it may seem to us, offers little protection from the whims of war-loving human nature.