Happy Face

Apparently they are re-making it for Hollywood as well. Good film that. But Renton, check out some classic Bergman. With the subtitles And von Trier

Come on Pud keep up..... Redheugh earlier today said "There will be a statement tomorrow. Its a bank holiday in USA today. Official statement; quotes and all. It will be positive Will have some detail later". Redheugh later said "lads, i know i said i would have some details later today, just to let you all know its going to be another two hours". 2 hours past and Redheugh said "There will be good news this week, Not the "end of the week", This week. The only caveat has to be MA - who knows what he is thinking. Halliwells are in charge now. Which needless to say was tad anti climaxal....... This is a sorrier spectacle than Obama putting an end to don't ask don't tell

Damn you and your big city perks

I was going to post how much I'm enjoying the new Dizzee Rascal album, but I always like to try and link it back to what someone else thinks, keep the conversation going and that y'knaa. So I searched for Dizzee Rascal and got these results.... I hope you realise that he's utter shite. You came round in the end then Brock?

Kamikaze pilot attacks spring instantly to mind...for more examples.... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suicide_attac...orical_examples

But they were just the trigger men. Those pulling their strings are very much embittered by injustice, be it real or invented. I don't believe you could persuade an atheist to kill himself in the name of X, but there are some very legitimate political grievances governing the strikes against western targets. Do you honestly think that Atta or Bin Laden really cared/care about the Palestinians? You can argue about the July 7th bombers from a perceived grievance pov (but only then because of religious brotherhood) but honestly think for many Muslims (and as I said extreme US Christians) it is a religious conflict. I would also say that suicide bombing has only become "fashionable" in conflicts where that extra spice I referred to is present. You could argue for example that the ANC had a real grievance but as far as I know they didn't use suicide bombing. The trigger for Bin Laden was more that he was disgusted by Saudi Arabia turning down his offer of protection when Iraq invaded Kuwait in preference for non-muslim troops (US/UK). Mohamed Atta became radicalised following the Gulf war too, but the Oslo accord has also been credited, one friend said "He was most imbued [sic] actually about Israeli politics in the region and about U.S. protection of these Israeli politics in the region. And he was to a degree personally suffering from that."

Nothing to do with religion at all. Both sides frame it in religion to because of your next point.... Religion is a far less complex issue than the decades of socio-economic opression the west has enforced in the middle east. Far better to frame it as "they hate us for our freedom" and "we will liberate them from the their theocracy". I'm not saying that sort of delusion in itself is not an issue, but rather than convince someone there is no god...to then go on and discuss what the war is REALLY about....it's a far better approach to discuss what the war is REALLY about and don't have god come into it at all, they can keep their belief if they want to and still come out with a more realistic view on what's going on around the world. Leaving the West aside for the moment, what motivated Mohammed Atta and his peers to kill himself and thousands of others? The event that triggered both Afghanistan and Iraq? Was it political ideology, or the supreme belief in his God and his reward thereafter? What makes the Taliban tick? Is their religious extremism the cause of their oppression or is it something else? The importance of religion is absolutely critical to the instability in the Middle East, and therefore the world, imo. You can't "leave the west aside for the moment". This is exactly what I'm talking about whereby the preference of government is to have it framed in a religious context so you can dismiss the terrorists as crazed religious nut jobs. You can rest easy that you're on the good guys side because there's no reason for them to attack us outside of extremism. No need to consider what we've stolen from them, or how we've used them for our own ends then abandoned them. Undoubtedly, they are crazy religious, and it's the most crazy religious ones that are radicalised by the leadership with promises of life everlasting, but that promise is predicated on a desire to fight the very real political axe they have to grind. If their devout belief is the root cause of it though...then why did they choose to attack the US and only the US? Why not Japan? Korea? Switzerland?

There are a few issues for Faith schools for me: Firstly I'd say it imposes the parent's views on the kid - I know that happens generally but I think one thing Dawkins has fundamentally right is that describing kids as "whatever" really grates on me. We impose ages of consent/legality for things like voting and sex but seem okay to just define kids by their parents gangs. Secondly I find them divisive - no matter how much they deny it, having gone to a catholic school I know theres an attitude of "we are right, the rest of you are damned" which goes beyond simple school pride/loyalty and the attitudes can pervade throughout life. Thirdly I find the dishonesty of parents pretending to find God to get into schools to be nuaseating - faith schools get better results beacuse they select (as studies have shown) not because of innately better work ethics as argued. Finally I think despite a set curriculum its easy for faith schools to teach bollocks - including in science - and as someone who cares about knowledge I find that deeply wrong. Overall I think France and even the US in principle have it right - I think state schools at least should be secular and religion should be pushed into the private sphere as much as possible - where I do believe honestly in the right for anyone to believe any bollocks they like. Apart from you not wanting to impose a parents view but preferring to impose the states view, I'm in complete agreement. Oh, and the "we are right, the rest of you are xxxxx" is as true for an atheist as it is catholic, muslim or jew. As has been shown by the 'ban faith schools' sentiment. I find it strange that an atheist, against the enforced indoctrination into a belief system would advocate such a restriction of peoples freedom. Will we also enshrine in law that parents can't tell their kids about santa or the tooth fairy? Comparing the indoctrination of religion with enlightened thought? Nice. Isn't that the whole debate? Science good...Religion bad. No. School should be about teaching rational thought and life enrichment through the arts imo. Not brainwashing kids through a pack of demonstrably false lies. Not to mention scaring them shitless through teaching Hell and Brimstone, whilst at the same time creating conflict with people of other faiths. What do you think science is in any case? It seems my understanding of it may be different than yours. I've not said religion should be taught in the science class btw. I think our understanding of it is exactly the same. I don't even have any strong opinion on teaching religious education. My problem is when you say all faith schools should be banned immediately. Perhaps my understanding of a faith school is misinformed, but I don't think it's necessarily one that sacrifices science in favour of religion.

Nothing to do with religion at all. Both sides frame it in religion because of your next point.... Religion is a far less complex issue than the decades of socio-economic opression the west has enforced in the middle east. Far better to frame it as "they hate us for our freedom" and "we will liberate them from their theocracy". I'm not saying that sort of delusion in itself is not an issue, but rather than convince someone there is no god...to then go on and discuss what the war is REALLY about....it's a far better approach to discuss what the war is REALLY about and don't have god come into it at all, they can keep their belief if they want to and still come out with a more realistic view on what's going on around the world.

There are a few issues for Faith schools for me: Firstly I'd say it imposes the parent's views on the kid - I know that happens generally but I think one thing Dawkins has fundamentally right is that describing kids as "whatever" really grates on me. We impose ages of consent/legality for things like voting and sex but seem okay to just define kids by their parents gangs. Secondly I find them divisive - no matter how much they deny it, having gone to a catholic school I know theres an attitude of "we are right, the rest of you are damned" which goes beyond simple school pride/loyalty and the attitudes can pervade throughout life. Thirdly I find the dishonesty of parents pretending to find God to get into schools to be nuaseating - faith schools get better results beacuse they select (as studies have shown) not because of innately better work ethics as argued. Finally I think despite a set curriculum its easy for faith schools to teach bollocks - including in science - and as someone who cares about knowledge I find that deeply wrong. Overall I think France and even the US in principle have it right - I think state schools at least should be secular and religion should be pushed into the private sphere as much as possible - where I do believe honestly in the right for anyone to believe any bollocks they like. Apart from you not wanting to impose a parents view but preferring to impose the states view, I'm in complete agreement. Oh, and the "we are right, the rest of you are xxxxx" is as true for an atheist as it is catholic, muslim or jew. As has been shown by the 'ban faith schools' sentiment. I find it strange that an atheist, against the enforced indoctrination into a belief system would advocate such a restriction of peoples freedom. Will we also enshrine in law that parents can't tell their kids about santa or the tooth fairy? Comparing the indoctrination of religion with enlightened thought? Nice. Isn't that the whole debate? Science good...Religion bad.

You honestly don't see religion as a problem internationally? I presume you don't operate from a "doesn't affect me so I don't care" pov so I would find not seeing it as a problem to be strange tbh. I had a great day ironing yesterday. It's one of my favourite hobbies. Get the steam generator on, a few hours of podcasts on the ipod and I'm off. Renton. Sorry but that fear is about as low on my fear list as an Al Qaeda attack or Swine Flu. I can totally respect anyone reading it out of interest (as you say), but in no way is it a pressing issue on the national or international stage imo. I find that an incredible statement. Out of interest, what issues are more pressing on the international stage? As I suggested before, it's not the religion that's at issue in any international conflict in this day and age, it's only the sideshow. Have George Bush and Barak Obama waged two wars in the name of christianity? Has the global economic crisis been brought about by anything but greed? The closest to an international issue over religion is Israel/Palestine. Do Israeli's and Palestinians still not get along because of faith or because of land? The palestinians would call a ceasfire tomorrow if Israel would stop taking their land. A good proportion of Israelis view their part in that war as immoral and actively speak out in defiance of that governments invasions.

There are a few issues for Faith schools for me: Firstly I'd say it imposes the parent's views on the kid - I know that happens generally but I think one thing Dawkins has fundamentally right is that describing kids as "whatever" really grates on me. We impose ages of consent/legality for things like voting and sex but seem okay to just define kids by their parents gangs. Secondly I find them divisive - no matter how much they deny it, having gone to a catholic school I know theres an attitude of "we are right, the rest of you are damned" which goes beyond simple school pride/loyalty and the attitudes can pervade throughout life. Thirdly I find the dishonesty of parents pretending to find God to get into schools to be nuaseating - faith schools get better results beacuse they select (as studies have shown) not because of innately better work ethics as argued. Finally I think despite a set curriculum its easy for faith schools to teach bollocks - including in science - and as someone who cares about knowledge I find that deeply wrong. Overall I think France and even the US in principle have it right - I think state schools at least should be secular and religion should be pushed into the private sphere as much as possible - where I do believe honestly in the right for anyone to believe any bollocks they like. Apart from you not wanting to impose a parents view but preferring to impose the states view, I'm in complete agreement. Oh, and the "we are right, the rest of you are xxxxx" is as true for an atheist as it is catholic, muslim or jew. As has been shown by the 'ban faith schools' sentiment. I find it strange that an atheist, against the enforced indoctrination into a belief system would advocate such a restriction of peoples freedom. Will we also enshrine in law that parents can't tell their kids about santa or the tooth fairy?

I had a great day ironing yesterday. It's one of my favourite hobbies. Get the steam generator on, a few hours of podcasts on the ipod and I'm off. Renton. Sorry but that fear is about as low on my fear list as an Al Qaeda attack or Swine Flu. I can totally respect anyone reading it out of interest (as you say), but in no way is it a pressing issue on the national or international stage imo.

???? Even in the UK the impact is tangible and wrong imo - elsewhere it's definitely worrying. Perhaps you could say what tangible impact religion has. I can't really prove the lack of impact (like we can't prove the lack of god ) I know Songs of Praise is annoying on a Sunday night. The number of faith schools - including the whackier recent academies thanks to Blair - this also includes creationist teaching - curriculum or not. The Bishops in the lords and also in recent years consultations/exceptions made for Catholics on adoption. I don't want to belittle that issue, but the freedom of choice to send your kid to a faith based school or not seems to me the opposite of a...

???? Even in the UK the impact is tangible and wrong imo - elsewhere it's definitely worrying. Perhaps you could say what tangible impact religion has. I can't really prove the lack of impact (like we can't prove the lack of god ) I know Songs of Praise is annoying on a Sunday night.

only one of his books is explicity about atheism. I didn't realise. Didn't Darwin have the old evolution thing pretty much on the button. How's he gotten ten books out of that Ignoring your wink, perhaps because the process of the evolution of life is arguably the most interesting thing in the universe. This also conveniently explains UFO sightings. I'll have to give one of his earlier books a go, before he joined the unholy trinity.

Speaking personally they condense and illustrate the evidence and arguments. I found Hitchens' book to be the best as I found his widespread intellectualism and occasional nastiness refreshing. Same here, and as Trophyshy says, out of all his published books (must be double figures), only one tackles religion overtly head on. Must confess I Hitchins has passed me by a bit. I did read Francis Wheen's 'How Mumbo Jumbo took over the world' a couple of years ago which was interesting in parts. HF, seems you don't care that the enlightenment period has stalled and we are under the threat of a new age of religious fundamentalism and the loss of freedom that would entail. OK, that's a bit of an extreme case scenario, but who knows? Don't criticise others for being interested though. Did I criticise? I apologise unreservedly if I did. Just an area of non-fiction I have no interest in whatsoever. Seems to me like the sideshow it always has been. Keep the surfs arguing over religion, the split between church and state, how much gets taught in the classroom, make out it's what causes war etc. while the government steal trillions from us and wage war for oil. Religion has very little impact on schooling or government so I do think your last paragraph is a bit extreme.

I think he was on Fox last week with O'Reilly - the description I read just said O'reilly ended up shouting over him about "no morality without God".

only one of his books is explicity about atheism. I didn't realise. Didn't Darwin have the old evolution thing pretty much on the button. How's he gotten ten books out of that

Aren't other people fucking thick. I refer you back to my earlier point...

I don't think any believers read his books, or want to. The rage is there to entertain those that read his books to have their own anti-religious indignation reinforced imo.

Do Dawkins' books tell an atheist anything they don't know? Seems to me like reading a book on the evidence against alien life forms or astrology. Very dull.

....... and you an Atheist! What will the children think? I'm a god-parent twice over already. I don't take atheism or religion seriously enough to refuse....and it never stopped the people from asking me. I probably live my life pretty close to what the bible would advocate I just don't do so out of a selfish desire to protect myself in an imaginary afterlife. These people who make a point of not joining in during a church service wind me up though. fairy snuff That wasn't a pitch for the job by the way

....... and you an Atheist! What will the children think? I'm a god-parent twice over already. I don't take atheism or religion seriously enough to refuse....and it never stopped the people from asking me. I probably live my life pretty close to what the bible would advocate I just don't do so out of a selfish desire to protect myself in an imaginary afterlife. These people who make a point of not joining in during a church service wind me up though.

That's the second one isn't it?