Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member


cleanhippie's Journal
cleanhippie's Journal
February 26, 2012

Secret £14million Bible in which 'Jesus predicts coming of Prophet Muhammad' unearthed in Turkey Re

A secret Bible in which Jesus is believed to predict the coming of the Prophet Muhammad to Earth has sparked serious interest from the Vatican.

Pope Benedict XVI is claimed to want to see the 1,500-year-old book, which many say is the Gospel of Barnabas, that has been hidden by the Turkish state for the last 12 years.

The £14million handwritten gold lettered tome, penned in Jesus' native Aramaic language, is said to contain his early teachings and a prediction of the Prophet's coming.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2105714/Secret-14million-Bible-Jesus-predicts-coming-Prophet-Muhammad-unearthed-Turkey.html#ixzz1nVkJriXk
February 26, 2012

Protecting the children...

February 26, 2012

More absurdity

February 26, 2012

God: "Thats Absurd"

February 25, 2012

8,000 new instances of child sexual abuse alleged in Milwaukee Archdiocese

The bankruptcy hearings for the Archdiocese of Milwaukee have revealed more than 8,000 previously unreported instances of alleged sexual abuse of children, according to one attorney representing the victims. The charges cover a span of 60 years and implicate a group of 100 alleged offenders, including nuns, church workers and some 75 priests.

Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reporter Annysa Johnson writes that 570 “victim-survivors” have filed claims in the case, which is currently before U.S. bankruptcy judge Susan V. Kelley.

At a press conference on the federal courthouse steps in Milwaukee, Peter Isley, director of the Survivors’ Network of Those Abused by Priests said, “This is a public safety crisis, a child safety crisis that needs to be investigated. We need to know who they are and where they are. How can there be 8,000 crimes committed by over 100 offenders and there be no accountability?”

February 23, 2012

Wasn’t Atheism Responsible for Most 20th Century Atrocities?

Not that I think it will have any effect whatsoever on some peoples ad nauseam use of this fallacy... it is at least worth a try.

Wasn’t Atheism Responsible for Most 20th Century Atrocities?

The important part of any discussion as to whether a belief system has “caused” tragedies in the past or will do so in the future must be based on the logical connections between the tenets of the position and the resultant actions of the position’s holders. We can yell at each other all day that Hitler was a Catholic and Stalin was an atheist, but it doesn’t matter; the fallacy at hand is called “false equivalence.” It is a result of implying that because one trait is shared between two items, so must another, e.g. “Stalin brushed his teeth, and killed millions. Obama also brushes his teeth. Therefore, he is likely to kill millions.” This is obviously silly; they may share a trait, but one must make a direct connection between tooth brushing and the conclusion being drawn, killing.

Similarly, when one says, “Stalin/Pol Pot was an atheist, and so are you. Therefore you will also do immoral things,” this is just as silly as the tooth brushing argument, until you prove that atheism leads to immorality in the first place. So, the introduction of Stalin is just a pointless emotionally-charged debate tactic.

In truth, there is no connection between immorality and atheism. It is just as logical to follow “I don’t believe in God …” with either “ … therefore I will make this world as moral and happy a place to live as I can, because I know we all only get the one chance” or “ … therefore I will not be afraid of hell and likely commit murder.” The assumption that only the latter is true is enormously insulting. I would hope that the fear of punishment is not the only thing standing between you, dear reader, and a murderous rampage.

On the other hand, the connection between many religious texts and immoral action is much easier to make; most of the major, proselytizing religions have textual aspects that suggest believers are superior to non-believers, or that command believers to convert or conquer non-believers. Atheism has no such elements. So next time someone says that atheism will logically lead to violence, remind them of the importance of 1) the logical connection between ideology and action, and 2) the dangers of throwing stones while living in glass houses.


A worthy attempt, my religious comrades, but I am afraid that is simply not true. This is because there is nothing substantive about atheism: All it is really is a lack of one belief, a belief that god(s) exist. Therefore, innumerable belief systems may be consistent with atheism. To put the point strongly, an atheist is just as likely in principle to favor communism as he is to favor democracy or aristocracy.

Let there be no doubt: It was totalitarianism and human malevolence that wreacked atrocities, not the lack of one single belief.

February 22, 2012

Judge: State can't make druggists sell Plan B contraceptive

Washington state may not force pharmacies to sell Plan B or other emergency contraceptives, a federal judge ruled Wednesday, saying the state's true goal is to suppress religious objections by druggists — not to promote timely access to the medicines for people who need them.

U.S. District Judge Ronald Leighton heard closing arguments earlier this month in a lawsuit that claimed state rules violate the constitutional rights of pharmacists by requiring them to dispense such medicine. The state requires pharmacies to dispense any medication for which there is a community need and to stock a representative assortment of drugs needed by their patients.

Elaine Rose, CEO of Planned Parenthood Votes Northwest, said the issue was never about Plan B specifically but about the rights of patients.

"Really, this is a blow to access for all patients," she said.

"The real issue is when a person walks into a pharmacy with a prescription for a legitimate, legal medication, whether they are going to have that filled by the person behind the counter," Rose said. Under this ruling, it appears that any pharmacist or pharmacy can say they have an objection to dispensing a particular drug, she added. "Where is this going to stop?"

In his ruling, Leighton noted that the intervenors in the case included two HIV-positive individuals "concerned that the success of Plaintiffs' claims could result in the denial of lawfully prescribed and medically necessary drugs to combat their condition...."


When is this nonsense going to stop?

Profile Information

Member since: Sat Jul 3, 2010, 11:24 AM
Number of posts: 19,705

Journal Entries

Latest Discussions»cleanhippie's Journal