Rationality 2: Religion 0

The Ontario Human Rights Commission has ruled that York University is discriminating against people who are not of the Jewish faith! Full story here:

http://www.thestar.com/News/GTA/article/407447

I was surprised to learn that the university was actually closing classes for Jewish holidays. However, upon reflection, I then wondered why all universities cancel classes for Christian holidays.

In my local newspaper, a Letter to the Editor from a rather militant atheist also questioned why we have paid days off to 'celebrate' Easter. In his view, taking these days off legitimizes the Christian belief that Jesus was tortured, killed and resurrected. I agree. However, he went a little too far in asking people to ignore this paid holiday and go to work so as not to take part in this Christian belief (I think the writer used the word "lie"). Wouldn't renaming the holiday to equinox be a better plan?

I guess most holidays started by the simple observation that almost everyone wanted the day off for religious observance (since the beliefs in a community were relatively homogeneous) so why not just cancel the whole day? However, in today's multicultural environment it is no longer possible to make allowances for everyone (although the socialist left desperately bends over backwards to try).

The purely secular solution would be to wipe all the paid holidays off the calendar and choose new days to replace them (maybe the last working day of every month is a paid day off). Obviously a change like this would cause Christians to go nuts and would cause a great deal of short-term chaos. Maybe a simple renaming of holidays would suffice such as 'Christmas' becoming 'Winter Solstice' or 'Boxing Day' becoming, well, 'Boxing Day'.

Standing Up To Islam

Everyone has the right to be critical of any religion in a free and open society. This includes Christianity, Judaism, Mormonism, Buddhism and, yes, even Islam. Geert Wilders has the right to make a short film that is critical of Islam and the Koran. However, Muslims have issued death threats against him and, considering a Muslim killed Theo Van Gogh, the world must take this seriously.

I say 'world' because Islam is an ideology that is intent on conquering it. If you are born into Islam you are immediately indoctrinated into a religion that forbids you from leaving it - you had no choice to enter and no choice to leave! The punishment for leaving is death. The punishment for not being a Muslim is also death. There is no compromise.

There are those who insist we must respect religions. Sorry, they're wrong. How can I respect a religion that insists it has the right to kill me just because I am not a member of it? On the contrary, we have every right to show this religion the disrespect it deserves for making such outrageous claims!

The web host, Network Solutions, has suspended the website that was to promote the movie Fitna. Bullshit! Instead, web hosters around the world should be lining up to have a page promoting the movie. Presumably Network Solutions is afraid of being attacked by Muslims who object to the move. However, the way to defend themselves is not to run and hide but appeal to others to join them in solidarity! If radical Muslims want to attack those who use their freedom to criticize then lets give them lots and lots of targets.

Everyone, Muslims included, have the right to speak their minds freely in a free and democratic society. If Muslims disagree with the claims of the movie, then fight with words. Have an open dialogue. Convince us of your argument. But threaten us with violence and we'll drive you back to the desert from whence your ideology came.

Debating Ayaan Hirshi Ali's Publicly-Funded Protection

Excellent debate on whether people like Ayaan Hirshi Ali should get public funds for their protection. Of course, the answer is obvious. However, I was interested to hear the opinions of a moderate, reformed muslim speak very highly of what Ali is doing. Just try to restrain yourself from damaging your computer screen when you hear the more fundamental muslim speaker basically argue that Ali brought on these death threats herself!

Part 1:


Part 2:


Part 3:


Part 4:

Lying to the Children

The second great time of the year to lie to the kids is upon us again. Once again, we lie and tell the kids about the Easter Bunny and perpetuate their beliefs in the supernatural. Admittedly, I took part in this but as I've learned more I shall start behaving better. No more lies!

I asked my daughter this morning, "why does the Easter Bunny deliver eggs? Shouldn't it be the Easter Chicken?" Her response was basic logic, "An Easter Chicken, daddy? That's just stupid!"I then pointed out to her that a bunny bringing eggs makes sense but a chicken does not? She failed to see the problem. Funny, those with religious beliefs seem to master the same sort of doublethink. I can imagine reading their thoughts, "obviously your religion is ridiculous, but mine makes perfect sense".

This is maybe one issue I agree with religionists on - it's wrong to teach kids to believe in the Easter Bunny and Santa Claus. However, our reasons are very different. I don't think it's useful to make children think that supernatural beings really exist! After all, if a big bunny hiding eggs is possible (and true!) without evidence, it sets them up to believe that god exists (without evidence!).

Fortunately, my son now knows the truth (about gods and bunnies) and this should be my daughter's last year of belief. Instead of laying it on the line I'm going to use more covert methods. I'm going to ask questions out loud and tease out her inner logic. It's time to teach her the greatest lesson of all. To think.

What about 'The Bomb'?

After watching Hitchens, Dawkins and Harris defend atheism against the charges of Stalin, Mao and Hitler I began to wonder about the atomic bomb in Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

The first, and only, country to use atomic weapons was the U.S. Many people in the West are terrified of what will happen if Iran or North Korea get nuclear weapons. The fear is that these countries will use them in a religious war against us. Of course, we all know that those evil Muslims wouldn't think twice about bombing civilians - just look at 9/11!

However, the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were CIVILIAN targets! Why do we fear Muslims with WMDs when we already know that the U.S. will attack civilians?

The Japanese did a pre-emptive attack at Pearl Harbour; a military target. Certainly a tragic event. But what led the U.S. to bomb two civilian (non-military) targets?

If the U.S. administration were religious was their decision based on religion? Was the attack a 'Christian' attack on the evil 'god-emperor' of Japan?

On the other hand, if the decision by the U.S. were a 'secular' one, why did they attack a (presumably) innocent, civilian population?

I find it interesting that none of the religious debaters ever use the bombings in Japan as an argument against secular states. I presume that they believe the bombings had some sort of religious influence.

On the other hand, the atheist debaters don't mention the bombings either. Is it possible they think the bombing was a poor secular decision?

If anyone has any insight on this I'd really appreciate some input.

Rationality 1: Religion 0

An Ontario judge has ruled that Ontario's helmet laws do not discriminate against the Sikh religion:

http://www.thestar.com/News/Ontario/article/310015

The judge says allowing Sikhs to replace their helmet with a turban would cause "undue hardship" for the Province due to safety concerns. I'm not sure what that means but I'm guessing that it would be more costly to treat a Sikh in a motorcycle-related accident if they rode without their helmet (free health care here in Ontario!).

I would add the idea that riding motorcycles is a choice. Being a Sikh is also a choice. If one chooses to be a Sikh, they must follow the Sikh rules and wear a turban. If one chooses to ride a motorcycle, they must follow the Traffic Act and wear a helmet. Sikhs do not have a 'right' to ride motorcycles (it is a privilege granted by the awarding of a licence) therefore they do not have a right to replace the helmet with a turban.

I wonder, is there a market in Helmeturbans? Or maybe Helmerbans? How about Helbans?

I kinda like the last one: Helbans....

A Whole Bunch of Bull

Here's one of my favourite Internet Explorer links:

http://www.youtube.com/profile_play_list?user=IllParadox

Lots of great videos including the almost complete collection of Penn and Teller's Bullshit! series.

Enjoy!

My New Slogan

I was thinking about the quote we've all heard, "Just shoot them all and let god decide!" I don't know where it came from but I realize it was meant to be funny. However, it always puzzled me. Why should we shoot (or punish) anybody? Shouldn't god kill/punish people then decide their fate? Why does god need us to do it?

So, I came up with my own slogan:

"Shoot god and let the people decide!"

There, now that makes me feel better.

Required viewing for all women!

If you're a woman, you MUST watch this documentary! You have no choice, I demand that you do!

What? You don't like my patriarchal demands?

Good! Because this doc is all about patriarchy - its rise and a call for its removal. It traces the reasons why men have ruled the world for so long and why the time has come to change it.

I saw this doc years ago on TV and I credit it for spurring me on to eventually discover Humanism.

Part 1 (some of the beginning is missing):



Part 2



Part 3



Part 4



(The fifth part is only the credits)

George Carlin - Old and Still Funny!

New video of George Carlin has been posted at YouTube:




The remaining parts are available at YouTube (I'm too lazy to post them here!). Copy the link to the clipboard to get to the YouTube site to watch the other 6 parts.

I found two of his points particularly interesting.

1. We have no rights - Rights are manmade and not god-given and therefore can be removed at any time. Besides, if god gave us rights, why didn't he give us the right to have enough food and shelter?

2. Kids don't need to learn how to read - He says it's more important that kids learn how to question what they read and what others tell them. Question everything!

Of course, his points are made in the interests of comedy but we can all hear the ringing of the bell of truth. Illiteracy certainly is dreadful but the new medium of YouTube, GoogleVideo, etc., will bring a new type of literacy to those who can't read. The ideas are out there - we just need to know how to sort the good ones from the bad.

The Myth of Mental Disease

After reading toomanytribbles' blog on Prozac (Prozac was not shown to be more effective than a placebo), I was reminded of this book, Daggers of the Mind - Psychiatry and the Myth of Mental Disease, Gordon Warme, 2006. I read this book (twice!) about two years ago so I'm sharing it with you in this amateur attempt at a review.

The book can be read online here:
http://books.google.ca/books?id=sEz1Th0v-zEC&printsec=frontcover&vq=daggers+of+the+mind+book&source=gbs_summary_r#PPA162,M1zEC&printsec=frontcover&vq=daggers+of+the+mind+book&source=gbs_summary_r#PPA162,M1

First, let me start by stating, emphatically, that the author is not associated with Scientology. He is a psychiatrist that lectures at the University of Toronto who is critical of his own profession; not to destroy it but to increase its effectiveness.

This book changed my perceptions of 'mental disease'. His controversial claim is that mental diseases simply do not exist! But, on what basis? Here are three of the points that come to mind:

1. Mental diseases are not diseases: He outlines the medical definition of 'disease' and shows that depression, schizophrenia, anorexia, etc., do not fit the description. There are no differences between the brain of a 'normal' person and those with mental illness.

2. All psychiatric treatments have the same effectiveness - about 70%: Electroshock, taping a light to one's forehead, colonics, psychotherapy and pills all seem to work, about 70% of the time. In fact, even a placebo has a 70% effectiveness. What's going on here? Why does everything work?

3. Mental 'problems' are really solutions: People who act mad or crazy do so not through illness but because this is how they've learned to avoid or solve life's problems. Acting crazy is a solution to whatever problem they are having. Our society and culture has evolved to treat certain behaviours as 'normal' and others as 'abnormal'. But, to the schizophrenic, they believe their behaviour is normal and it's everyone else that just doesn't 'get it'.

It's a very interesting thesis and will likely make you re-evaluate how you perceive mental diseases.