Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
"It is in the torah and the talmud that it's a good thing, dare I say a mitzvah, for a man to marry his sibling's daughter."
Uh, no, it's not.
"at various places in the Old Testament, it is prophesied that 'a virgin shall give birth'"
Again, no, it's not.
is just another TV preacher, selling his no religion as the One True Faith.
Yet another mud wrestling night here on Salon, I see. Nothing like religion to bring out the sneering in the posters here. So gratifying to know that open-mindedness and good sportsmanship are alive and well in America today.
You know, every time the secular utopians start talking about the ridiculousness of religion and how bizarre its ideas are, I want to ask them to explain, in detail, how they feel about Schroedinger's Cat. If there was ever a bizarre, ridiculous-sounding theory, which makes no sense whatsoever to anyone not initiated into the mystical discipline it springs from, it's that one. And yet, the folks who aren't scientists are just supposed to relax and take it all on faith, just because science says it's so.
Well, it's just as hard for those who don't understand to swallow such a thing whole, as it is for those atheists who froth at the mouth at the mention of Jesus to understand why people believe the things they do. It doesn't matter whether it's provable or not. That's what they don't get. Proof has nothing to do with religion, and anyone who says it does is selling something. (Usually a book, in this case a movie.)
"If men get into a fight with one another, and the wife of one intervenes to rescue her husband from the grip of his opponent by reaching out and seizing his genitals, you shall cut off her hand; show no pity."
Seriously, I just pulled that right out the bible. And If you think that was a gem, you need to check out the quran and hadith for even more fun stuff.
Yep, sure sounds like some divinly inspired stuff there....
C'Mon people, this stuff is silly in the extreme, it is time we just were honest about it and accepted how nutty it all is.
Does one person here really think that Noah got EVERY living creature on his boat? Even Polar Bears and Komodo Dragons and Grizzly Bears? (Wow, what did they eat? Must have been quite a walk/swim to get there)...No, you dont.
Do you really believe in the tower of Babal? Even though everything we know about human evolution and culture completely says the story is BS? No, You dont!
Do You really think that Gahndi is in Hell, because he was a hindu, but Ante Pavelic (the leader of croatias catholic nazi ss) would be in heaven, because he believed in Jesus? No, you dont.... But that is what your books say. In black and white.
Look somethings just plain deserve to be made fun of, and religion is one of them. Now, granted, this is what it is. It is a movie for non religious people to point and laugh at the willfully ignorant people, and that is all.
If you want a serious discussion on the topic, pick up The God Delusion or watch Richard Dawkins' "Root of All Evil".
Ah yes, just yesterday I remember hearing about that woman in pakistan who was stoned to death, because she misspoke about Schroedinger's Cat.
and how can we forget all those people just trying to push Schroedinger's Cat on everyone, telling them they have to conform and live according to Schroedinger's Cat.
And dont forget.... Schroedinger's Cat is toted as the ABSOLUTE truth of all everything, including how you need to live your life, and is UNQUESTIONABLE, infact just to question Schroedinger's Cat and you are tared as a scum bag bigot who will burn in torture forever.
Kurdt told me so.
O'Herir:
<"I'm sorry, that's right--one of this year's candidates is a Muslim.">
1st question: WHICH ONE WOULD THAT BE? On the ticket we've got a Christian and a Catholic, a so-called or lapsed Christian and a Pentecostal evangelical who might talk in tongues and is on an admitted blessed mission from God, as ordained by a pastor witch-hunter.
2nd question: Even if any one of them were Muslim, what's wrong with that (providing he/she is not a radical Islamic terrorist plotting against the world)?. Being Muslim does NOT equal war not peace. Very important distinction.
3rd question: So why the apology?
(from p. 1...Obama is not a Muslim. The United Stupid of America never cease to amaze me.
-- aceniantor)
(from p.1...@aceniantor...I'm fairly certain Mr. O'Hehir was being ironic there...
-- John N.)
Irony not appreciated, even if intended. I thought it was lame and doesn't add to what's going on in the election now--even moreso because Independent Maher has actually come out in favor of the Democratic candidate this year. SORRY, O'Hehir, Bill can say it and get a laugh or chuckle. You, in context, put it into a place where insult could easily be construed. And hey, I'm a huge Maher fan, but I don't think he's right on everything, and I'm sure he wouldn't think I'm right on everything either.
SORRY from me that I'm tired of peace-loving Muslims getting shafted into the terrorist sects.
First, it is pointless to get offended by Maher's simplistic depiction of religion. I try to remind myself, whenever he goes off on one of his anti-religion rants, that he's not talking about me. He thinks he's talking about me, but I know that the faith I practice is nothing like what he describes. So why bother getting upset over what he says? It'd rather listen to him non-defensively. That way I learn something instead of getting exhausted by cheap outrage.
Second, I think he is speaking from a very legitimate place of frustration and anger, and as an agnostic in the public eye he sometimes has to be brash and loud about his ideas because otherwise they don't get listened to. His anger over the influence of religion on public life is grounded in truth and worth hearing. That he insists on framing that outrage in such extreme terms is part of his style, part of the reason why people pay attention to what he says, and I think also his way to speak to the people he really wants to hear him -- other people who feel the way he does but don't feel as free to express themselves. There's a place for that in our public dialogue, and I don't think that it is necessarily a destructive thing. We can hear the truth in what he says without getting pulled in to the rhetorical and stylistic excesses, no matter how sincerely they are presented.
Third, to all those who are saying that you don't need to have known religion from the inside or to have studied it carefully to understand it, and everyone rolling their eyes at the notion that theologians are important ... look, it is actually a good thing, as I think most of us would agree when it comes to other roles in public life, for people to aspire to be somewhat qualified, or at least well informed, when they pontificate about vast segments of the population. That doesn't mean you have to be religious to have a well informed opinion about religion, but it does mean that you shouldn't take for granted that you know what you are talking about because you grew up in an evangelical home or have annoying fundamentalist in-laws, or whathaveyou. And if you are just going off of media depictions of religion, or experiences of religion in one section of the US, you really are drawing generalizations out of narrow experiences so, yes, actually, that lack of experience does make a difference in how closely your opinion corresponds with reality. I prefer less intellectual sloppiness when it comes to talking about people, just like I prefer the reasoning supporting the theory of evolution to that of the intellectually sloppy and disingenuous "theory" of intelligent design.
And since we have of late been on the defensive about the "well educated elitists are baaaaad" stream of American anti-intellectualism, let's not do the same thing with our "oh those theologians with all that silly useless elitist book larnin', who cares about them!" Things like Liberation Theology and Process Theology, or the intersection between the atheistic strand of Existentialism and Christian thought (concepts that are completely lacking in Maher's understanding of contemporary religion) actually have a huge impact on how millions of people experience their faith on the ground on a daily basis. If you don't have some grasp of those concepts (whether you could name them as such or not), you will probably have a very hard time understanding a lot of non-fundamentalist religious beliefs and practices. Dismissing these theologies outright without making any effort to understand them first makes Maher sound intellectually lazy and emotionally reactive. Which is too bad, because he is a very intelligent man with well-placed passion for justice.
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
The survivor and author is upset about comparisons some on the right are making to genocide
Once seen as a lunatic fringe, reactionary anti-women groups are courting respectability
Salon headlines in your mailbox
