“One of the many problems with the concept of protecting religion from defamation is that ideas (including religious ideas) cannot be defamed—only people can be defamed. If governments feel that any idea must be shielded from scrutiny, questioning, or even ridicule and satirical commentary, that idea must be extremely weak, or alternatively the society in question must be repressive.
This is why blasphemy should not be criminalized, but celebrated. Those subversive individuals with the bad manners to remind us that no idea is sacred—that governmental defense of any theology necessarily weakens the legitimacy of both the government and the theology—should be thanked for making us think and for reminding us that we live in a free, open society.
Nonbelievers are valuable contributors to society and deserve no inferiority complex or stigmatization, yet their government encourages it. “Theistic supremacy” is too often the official governmental line, only because politicians find it easy to pander to religious voters by exalting religious belief. It may not be akin to throwing atheists in jail, but it still isn’t right.
”
South African cardinal: ‘I can’t be accused of homophobia because I don’t know any homosexuals’
A South African cardinal has rejected accusations that he is homophobic, saying it is impossible because he knows no gay people.
The Catholic Archbishop of Durban, Wilfrid Fox Napier, was among the 115 cardinals whoelected Pope Francis as head of the Roman Catholic Church in March.
“I can’t be accused of homophobia,” Cardinal Napier told theSouth African Mail & Guardiannewspaper on Friday, “because I don’t know any homosexuals”.
He also described the promotion of gay rights by the US as “a new kind of slavery”.
“With the same-sex marriages, we are carrying out someone else’s agenda, it’s a new kind of slavery, with America saying you won’t get aid unless you distribute condoms, legalise homosexuality,” the cardinal said.
South Africa is the only African nation to have legalised equal marriage.
Last month, Cardinal Napier was forced to apologise for describing paedophilia as a sickness and not a crime.
“Paedophilia is actually an illness – it is not a criminal condition,” he told the BBC’s Stephen Nolan .
The 72-year-old cardinal has since apologised to victims of child abuse, saying paedophilia was a medical condition and sexual abuse of children was a crime.
“I can’t be accused of homophobia because I don’t know any homosexuals”
“I can’t be accused of homophobia because I don’t know any homosexuals”
“I can’t be accused of homophobia because I don’t know any homosexuals”
Infant Contracts Herpes Through Orthodox Jewish Circumcision Ritual, NYC Health Officials Say
A New York City infant contracted herpes last monthas a result of an Orthodox Jewish procedure known as metzitzah b’peh (MBP) that involvesorally sucking the blood off a newborn’s penis after circumcision, according to the city’s Department of Health and Mental Hygiene (DOHMH).
The news, which came in an April 3 email alert from the New York City Bureau of Sexually Transmitted Disease Control,marks the 13th such case in New York City since 2000. Two of those infants died (including one last year), and two others have suffered brain damage as a result, according to a department alert from January.
Read more at the above link.
Arkansas State Representative calls 8-year-old atheist a fool
I really, honestly wish that title was an exaggeration. The Arkansas state legislature recently passed a law requiring a minute of silence at the beginning of each day in public schools, which is explicitly provided for children to silently pray. You’d think that was bad enough.
Unfortunately, when an atheist mother voiced her concerns and objections about this asinine bill (specifically referring to the harassment her 8-year-old atheist daughter would likely receive when the other children noticed she wasn’t praying), Representative John Payton, the man of the hour, simply told her to read two bible verses that would answer her question.
Not that it matters, but what do those verses say?
Here’sRomans 1:19-25:
Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; butbecame vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened… Professing themselves to be wise,they became fools
… the hell?
And, of course,Psalm 14:1 reads:
The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God.They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good.
Way to go, Representative. Way to go.
Got handed a Jesus encrusted hard boiled egg pack by Jesus people today. Apparently Easter Eggs to South Korean’s are hard boiled chicken eggs.
Happy Easter, I suppose?
~Mooglets
THANK GOD! FREE VIDEO (AND EXPENSIVE MERCHANDISE) FOR EASTER
Tim Minchin’s new video, plus his latest blog post about it and links to his merch.
Church Of England Accused Of 'Dishonesty' In Prayer Survey Findings - The Huffington Post
I am in no way surprised by this.
Go. Read. Rant.
~Mooglets
Creationist stakes $10,000 on contest between Bible and evolution
Creator of Literal Genesis Trial believes people who argue in favor of evolution are at a scientific disadvantage
A Californiacreationist is offering a $10,000 challenge to anyone who can prove in front of a judge that science contradicts the literal interpretation of the book of Genesis.
Dr Joseph Mastropaolo, who says he has set up the contest, the Literal Genesis Trial, in the hope of improving the quality of arguments between creationists and evolutionists, has pledged to put $10,000 of his own money into an escrow account before the debate. His competitor would be expected to do the same. The winner would take the $20,000 balance.
The argument would not be made in a formal court, but under an alternative dispute resolution model known as a minitrial. Mastropaolo said he would present the argument in favor of a literal interpretation of the creation story once he had found a willing scientist to argue that a non-literal interpretation of Genesis is more scientific.
“They [evolutionists] are not stupid people, they are bright, but they are bright enough to know there is no scientific evidence they can give in a minitrial,” Mastropaolo said.
A minitrial differs from a regular trial because it does not need to be held in a courthouse and does not require the presence of traditional court figures. Mastropaolo plans to have a bailiff and court reporter in attendance, along with the judge. Contest rules state that evidence must be scientific, which means it is “objective, valid, reliable and calibrated”.
Mastropaolo believes thatevolutioncannot be proved scientifically. “It turns out that there is nothing in the universe [that] is evolving, everything is devolving, everything is going in the opposite direction,” he said.
Mastropaolo started making public arguments in favor ofcreationismabout 13 years ago, after reading an article about evolution in the newspaper. He has a PhD in kinesiology and taught biomechanics and physiology at a California university for more than 25 years. He is now a contributing writer at theCreation Science Hall of Fame, which is collaborating with him for the minitrial. The Creation Science Hall of Fame is a website, launched in February 2012, that honors those who have made contributions to creation science.
A majority of scientists disavow creationism, buta June 2012 Gallup pollshowed that 46% of Americans believed in a literal interpretation of the biblical version of creation. Legislation to allow students to be taught religious versions of the creation of life is currently beingconsidered in four states.
The Literal Genesis Trial contest would be held in a courthouse in Santa Ana, California and Mastropaolo has said he will create a list of potential superior court judges to decide the case. The participants would have to agree on a judge. Mastropaolo said that he hopes the trials can improve future debates between evolutionists and creationists by addressing the issue in a legal and scientific way.
“The evolutionists thereafter could read that transcript and make their case a bit stronger on the next one they contend against and we can do the same,” Mastropaolo said. “We can read the transcript and not have have to go through the same process over and over and over again without any let up, without any resolution.”
Oh wow.
Let’s keep a tally of how many times he turns down real evidence on some goal-moving stupid technicality.
But really. This guy should just be ignored. It’s obvious that he has literally no idea of what he’s talking about. For a real scientist to go and ‘debate’ this man, would put a veneer of respectability on him and his ‘evidence’.
Which is, of course, what he wants.
~Mooglets
Found via Atheist Aliance on FB
Pope Francis Kidnapping Controversy: Jorge Mario Bergoglio Accused Of Involvement In 1976 Abductions
Argentine Cardinal Named in Kidnap Lawsuit
I’m not saying he did, but there is a lot of talk going on about this already. There ae people coming from all sides, to either say he’s guilty of condeming these two men to imprisonment, or saying he had nothing to do with it.
I’m not sure yet. But these are two of the articles about it for you to read.
Mooglets
It’s OK to criticize religious practices
In 2012, a German court ruled that religious circumcision of male minors constitutes criminal bodily assault. Muslim and Jewish groups responded with outrage, with some commentators pegging the ruling to Islamophobic and anti-Semitic motivations.
In doing so, these commentators failed to engage with any of the legal and ethical arguments actually given by the court in its landmark decision.
In a new academic paper to be published shortly in The Philosopher’s Magazine, I argue that a firm distinction must be drawn between criticisms of religious practices that stem from irrational prejudice and bigoted attitudes and those that are grounded in sound moral reasoning.
Given that ritual circumcision is a pre-Enlightenment custom that elevates the inclinations of the community over the rights of the individual, it is hardly surprising that a growing number of post-Enlightenment philosophers and legal scholars are taking an ethical stand against it. As the “circumcision debate” continues, parties on all sides of the issue must remember to reason through the relevant considerations with care and respect.
Find his actual article: It’s OK to criticise religious practices here
“There is no more mileage in this issue [same-sex marriage] for the Catholic Church, and the sensible course would be to put it on the backburner with the heat turned low — to make peace with the gay world and move on.”
