Comments on: The Texas BOE Votes to Homeschool Entire State

By: Susie

Susie — Wed, 24 Mar 2010 20:45:26 +0000

Saw this on Jon Stewart and thought you’d enjoy it, Rechelle.
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/wed-march-17-2010/don-t-mess-with-textbooks

By: Brian V.

Brian V. — Wed, 24 Mar 2010 03:04:44 +0000

Quote from the article Rechelle listed above at
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/06/nyregion/06rite.html

Regarding the religio kooky loops who like to suck the blood off little Jewish penises that have just been razored for God, uh, uhhhh, uhhhhh, what the hell can one say??? Don’t mess with people who intend to harm their own children, whether it’s to beat the crap out of them or suck blood from their genital areas. This stuff just confirms all the research done by psychohistorians and others to document intentional harm done to children done through the ages, from binding to beating, belittling and buggering….bloody hell, you name it: It is okay to do it to kids. Lloyd DeMause has some of the horrors documented in various publications, a few of which are available on the net, I think.

By: Rechelle

Rechelle — Tue, 23 Mar 2010 21:06:06 +0000

Robbyn – Our complexity can be beautifully explained by natural selection and god is not necessary to this theory at all. The questions you need to start asking yourself are – if there is a god – why is their such an incredible unequal distribution of wealth. Why are some people forced to live lives of complete misery and others lives of ease. Why are babies born with hideous birth defects that have nothing to do with environmental causes. Why has god allowed all the various religious groups throughout time to commit mass murder, genocide, rape, and war in his name while he did nothing to prevent it? Where is this god of yours and why is he such a useless bastard? Oh wait!… because there isn’t one. See. Now doesn’t that make much more sense.

By: Ted Powell

Ted Powell — Tue, 23 Mar 2010 20:05:03 +0000

Rechelle wrote: Science has cured disease without relying on ‘god’s laws’ to make it happen. You simply use your brain. You use cause and effect.

Indeed, if scientific research into disease kept getting inconsistent results because of godly tweaking of experiments—whether at whim or in response to prayer—we would still be back in the age of holy water and bloodletting.

R: You create civil laws that have nothing to do with a god – but instead have to do with protecting life and liberty.

Sam Harris has quite a bit to say on the subject; 23:07 worth in the case of this lecture: Science can answer moral questions. Well worth watching.

By: Robbyn

Robbyn — Tue, 23 Mar 2010 14:56:51 +0000

My final comment…20 people will have 20 different ideas of you or me and none of their ideas can encompass our complexity in its entirety nor wholly “explain” us. I feel no need to defend God to anyone and I don’t care who in history does or does not explain God or conceptualize God in a particular way. My beliefs are always progressing and are very much different than they were 10 years ago, a month ago, a day ago in big ways and small. I disagree that science that science can do squat without God, or that anything exists with God, but I don’t expect you to have to believe that or agree with me. Peace.

By: Rechelle

Rechelle — Tue, 23 Mar 2010 13:08:26 +0000

Robbyn – when you get twenty people in a room, you have twenty different versions of god. Which one is the real god? Which god gets to call the shots?

By: Rechelle

Rechelle — Tue, 23 Mar 2010 12:42:26 +0000

How is it snark Robbyn? Because I don’t agree with you and use a little wit to make my arguments? People are pretty good at making the rules themselves. Our democracy is based on Greek ideas and they were not a monotheistic culture. Aristotle called the god ‘unmoved mover’ recognizing that whatever god might be out there, he did not give a flying fig about humanity. Science has cured disease without relying on ‘god’s laws’ to make it happen. You simply use your brain. You use cause and effect. You create civil laws that have nothing to do with a god – but instead have to do with protecting life and liberty. There doesn’t have to be a ‘standard’. In fact, there isn’t a standard. Every country has a different set of laws based on a different god or a different version of what that culture (or it’s leaders) value. These standards are constantly in flux. You might remember a time in history when women could not vote or African Americans were enslaved. Then the standards changed and now there is more liberty for more people. Standards have always been created by people – it’s just that a lot of them use the ‘bully pulpit’ of god to give their laws more power. That doesn’t mean it is necessary or better.

By: Robbyn

Robbyn — Tue, 23 Mar 2010 07:05:15 +0000

P.S. I do believe in using the ol’ brain to reason right and wrong. It’s just that when you get 20 people in a room reasoning right and wrong with their own brains as the only standard, you have 20 differing versions of it…which one then is right…what is so logical to one is not to the next..who gets to call the shots and make the determination?

By: Robbyn

Robbyn — Tue, 23 Mar 2010 07:03:10 +0000

My point was, Rechelle, that you can use Jefferson’s quotes both for and against your position. You seem to be upset that the christian church wiped out Jews, or allowed them to be wiped out throughout history because of their differences in beliefs but you now attack what you suppose mine and others’ to be. Who gets to determine what morality is..is it self-evident? I’m serious, Rechelle…who gets to say what is right and wrong if there is no standard somewhere, and if there is a standard, is it universal? Some universal more, taboo? Anthropology shows that to not be an across-the-board thing. Who do I answer to besides myself for some sort of right and wrong? Is it all truly relative…if so, there’s no standard at all.

Just throwing these questions out for discussion. But if you’re going to just snark them for the entertainment value, I won’t play :)

By: suzetta

suzetta — Tue, 23 Mar 2010 02:22:08 +0000

“Tolerance is not all that it is cracked up to be”. I think you’ve found a new name for your blog!

By: Rechelle

Rechelle — Mon, 22 Mar 2010 21:49:16 +0000

For one more example of disgusting religious practices that should not be tolerated in the Hasidic Jewish community read this article. It leads to death and mental retardation in infants and the NY mayor decided to protect the right anyway. All done for tolerance! Nice!

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/06/nyregion/06rite.html

By: Rechelle

Rechelle — Mon, 22 Mar 2010 20:48:59 +0000

Robbyn – Yeah – I am sure that Jefferson had lots of friends who thought slavery was perfectly okay and was happy to stay friends with them. This type of tolerance is something that I personally can’t stand. The same way I can’t tolerate people who think gays are defective or sinners. Tolerance is not all that it is cracked up to be. Jefferson said a lot of great things and was light years ahead of his time, but he had some serious flaws as well. So do you think that female circumcision is okay too Robbyn? Do you think it is okay to marry a twelve year old girl against her will? These are just a few of the sick things done in the name of religion. Should I tolerate those as well?

By: Robbyn

Robbyn — Mon, 22 Mar 2010 20:05:12 +0000

There are two other noteworthy Jefferson quotes that were not included among those you posted –

I never considered a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend.
Thomas Jefferson

I never will, by any word or act, bow to the shrine of intolerance or admit a right of inquiry into the religious opinions of others.
Thomas Jefferson

By: Action Squirrel

Action Squirrel — Sun, 21 Mar 2010 23:23:36 +0000

I’ve been following these developments; shocking. And… not shocking. I clearly recall specifically NOT being taught in school about whether Native Americans thought it sucked that they were given smallpox blankets, slaughtered en masse, and generally holocausted out of a culture, livelihood, and homeland. Privileged schoolmates less argumentative than I learned to go along with the education they were given and, it must be said, certainly earned way more money than I did, much earlier.

By: Rechelle

Rechelle — Sun, 21 Mar 2010 03:39:33 +0000

Jedi – I addressed (brilliantly I might add) Jefferson’s slaves in the post. Aquinas burned people at the stake. Calvin burned people at the stake. Jefferson burned no one at the stake. Jefferson wins. That was easy.

As to throwing the term ‘conservative christian’ around – these people have self identified. I am only using the labels they prefer – except the dentist on the Texas BOE prefers ‘fundamentalist’. Would it make you happier if I used that term instead? Because it makes me no nevermind.

McCarthy? Really? Methinks you oughtta re-read your history books dear. McCarthyism was about terrifying people who had the audacity to think. This would be the opposite of conservative christianity.