ypsi~dixit

That is an excellent documentary. There is also an excellent podcast called Point of Inquiry that is put out by the Center For Inquiry. They had a good interview with Dawkins a few months ago. You can find it at http://www.pointofinquiry.org/?p=36

The documentary is readily available on bittorrent if you want to see a higher quality version that you can burn to a dvd on watch on tv.

It *is* an excellent documentary. He is so incisive and direct, and so down-to-earth--very refreshing and inspiring.

That Christian megachurch dude was truly frightening!

Did you note the truly manic gleam in his eye? The man is crazy.

Oh, I like the way he chased Dawkins off church grounds with his truck and threatened to call the police. If he were really secure in his religion, and didn't secretly suspect it was all a sham, he wouldn't mind someone questioning it. That he felt threatened enough by a few questions to actually THREATEN Dawkins and threaten to call the police, spoke volumes to me. Major insecurity, not to mention gross hypocrisy (don't Christians love their neighbor?).

Thank you for the podcast and bittorrent info.

Some of the many good, pithy quotes:

"...the process of non-thinking called faith."

"there is no well-documented reason to believe in a divine creator."

"I think the idea of a divine creator belittles the elegant reality of the universe."

"the time has come for people of reason to say, 'enough is enough'."

one more:

Dawkins at Lourdes, where he points out that for the millions of pilgrims over the past century and a half, there have been 66 alleged miracles--utterly statistically insignificant, even if miracles were true.

Over shots of sick people being wheeled on gurneys to Lourdes:

"It may seem tough to question these poor, desperate people's faith. But isn't a bracing truth better than a false hope?"

I cant watch those videos at the moment because I am at work.

Generally, I am not a person of faith but I know that in times of great crisis, some abstract concept of "God" can be useful. Like, one can blame God for bad things and direct anger towards God rather than at real people with feelings. It can also be comforting when people die to thing for a while that there is a higher purpose or whatever. There are tangible benefits to faith as well as costs.

As for the people at Lourdes: I dont know if bracing truth is necessarily better than a false hope all the time. Sometimes people simply are not ready to accept the truth. It is normal and even sometimes healthy for people to go into denial or to believe in things like miracles.

Lynne: I must respectfully disagree with you.

Like, one can blame God for bad things and direct anger towards God rather than at real people with feelings.

That strikes me as avoiding the issue. People have feelings. But if they're doing hurtful or dumb things, blaming God does not address the issue but may enable the behavior.

It can also be comforting when people die to think for a while that there is a higher purpose or whatever.

Dawkins had a good counter-argument to this. He pointed out that atheism, with its lack of an afterlife, makes one appreciate the all too short here and now all the more. I agree with that.

It is normal and even sometimes healthy for people to go into denial or to believe in things like miracles.

It is said that denial is one of the normal stages of grieving, and, to that extent, I think it's normal. To deny, however, that one's spouse has a drinking problem is a different matter.

And personally I think it's never healthy to believe in miracles. That is not using one's reason, but is magical thinking with no evidence or basis in reality.

Just my opinion.

The Virgo moon is a fan of order, cleanliness and general perfection. Unfortunately, with the other aspects affecting this day, most of these values are out of the question -- except perhaps glimpses here and there of some kind of "order," however haphazard and whimsical it may be. Instead of protesting, enjoy the divine mess.

ARIES (March 21-April 19). As often as you're warned not to let precious time slip through your fingers, "slippery" is the nature of time. Some of today's moments are only precious because they couldn't be held.

TAURUS (April 20-May 20). Things will take longer than you expect today, even if you take into account this horoscope. The best way to keep your attitude buoyant is to include an air sign (Gemini, Libra, Aquarius) in your plans.

GEMINI (May 21-June 21). Mischief is your hobby -- playfulness is your natural resonance. It's a good thing for those around you now, too, as your levity is contagious. Continue to look for the entertainment value in things.

CANCER (June 22-July 22). Your commitment to a special person is put to the test. Keeping your word on the little things is just as important as keeping it on the big things. The same goes with the other person's promises to you.

LEO (July 23-Aug. 22). Your weirdness is working to solve problems, believe it or not. For all your wacky creativity and total originality, you still fit in. You're a link in the great platinum chain of order.

VIRGO (Aug. 23-Sept. 22). You give the world a free pass today, and the world returns the courtesy. In other words, you don't expect anyone to live up to your expectations, and they agree not to impose their expectations on you.

LIBRA (Sept. 23-Oct. 23). There's so much going on with you now that you can hardly tell it all to even your nearest and dearest. Where would you start? The newsy bits you extract are only the tip of the iceberg. So, you work now and talk about it later.

SCORPIO (Oct. 24-Nov. 21). What's been gestating over a period of time is now ready to be born. You still need to make space in your life for this new arrival. Ask for support in clearing out an area, both physically and mentally.

SAGITTARIUS (Nov. 22-Dec. 21). When you don't know where you're going, why set a speed record to get there? Slow down. Better yet, stop. Observe. Contemplate. Dream of delicious destinations.

CAPRICORN (Dec. 22-Jan. 19). This afternoon, you're tempted to go "screamo," but it's really not worth it. Cool off by engaging in activities that honor your fabulous sense of humor -- read a funny book or go to the movies.

AQUARIUS (Jan. 20-Feb. 18). You're interesting because you're interested. It's your very attraction to someone that places you at the forefront of this person's mind. Tonight, you're inclined to behave as others expect you to, but only do so if it's genuine.

PISCES (Feb. 19-March 20). If you don't know how you like to be treated, it's impossible to do unto others as you would have done unto you. This is a day for experimenting, so you can put the golden rule to better use.

WEEKEND LOVE FORECAST: The Virgo moon urges us to demand much from love. Though it may not happen, we're better for having made the request. ARIES: Go out of your way to make a date special, memorable and successful in cementing a lasting bond. TAURUS: Someone is watching the attention you give others and measuring it against the attention you give him or her. GEMINI: Speak up about behaviors that cross your boundaries or hurt your feelings. CANCER: Your love is sought after. You're pursued relentlessly. LEO: It's not your job to fix anyone but yourself -- and even then, only if you're in the mood. VIRGO: Your cooking is the best. It's like an elixir of love. LIBRA: What felt like a hold on your love life is lifted. SCORPIO: Most of the arguments you feel drawn toward are pointless. Just get along instead. SAGITTARIUS: You're the first and last thing a loved one thinks about each day. CAPRICORN: Your romantic needs are changing. Luckily, loved ones can change, too. AQUARIUS: If you want to be more than friends, say so now! PISCES: Your humor endears you further to those who already think you're tops.

Thank you, kindest Oracle. I see Leo is spot-on today:

Your weirdness is working to solve problems, believe it or not. For all your wacky creativity and total originality, you still fit in.

Yessir. The Virgo weekend love forecast for my Virgo side is also accurate. Very helpful!

Was that "yum, idols" ?

In this case it is.

:)

Dawkins had a good counter-argument to this. He pointed out that atheism, with its lack of an afterlife, makes one appreciate the all too short here and now all the more. I agree with that.

FWIW, I agree that atheism has helped me appreciate life and also to believe that morality is important for its own sake rather than important because of a fear of God's wrath. However, I have known many people of faith who have had no problem appreciating the here and now as well as many atheists who have not been able to appreciate such things.

I think what rubs me the wrong way about these types of discussions is that, for whatever reason, it bugs me when people get an attitude that whatever their personal views on faith or lack of faith are one-size-fits-all and that people with different values and beliefs are somehow wrong. It is one of the major reasons I left the church I was brought up in. I couldnt stand it that they felt that the Russian Orthodox Church had all the answers and that everyone else was wrong.

There are so many different paths to enlightenment that it seems presumptious to assume that because one particular path works for one, it will work for everyone else. The problem, in my mind, isnt faith or lack of faith but rather, intolerance of other people's views.

Some people use faith in very positive ways. Martin Luther King, Jr comes to mind. People often use their faith as a comfort to themselves and others. They feel love towards God and then spread it around as much as they can. Not because they are hoping for a good spot in the afterlife but because they believe it is the right thing to do. Does it matter if part of the reason they believe it is important to treat others in a loving manner is because of some inner faith in God?

Yes, of course some people use religion to justify bad behavior. But I suspect that if there were suddenly an absense of religion in the world, those same people would use something else to justify their hatred and their bad behavior. I think that even atheists can use their lack of faith to justify intolerance towards others too.

ugh. I mean "presumptuous" (I hate it when I make spelling errors like that and don't notice them until after I hit submit)

Laura: An interesting comment from Richard Dawkins re: intelligent design: "I believe that all intelligence, all creativity, and all design, anywhere in the universe, is the direct or indirect product of a cumulative process equivalent to what we here call Darwinian natural selection. It follows that design comes late in the universe, after a period of Darwinian evolution. Design cannot precede evolution and, therefore, cannot underlie the universe."

His statement is included in a book I just bought and haven't yet read titled "What We Believe But Cannot Prove", mentioned in the NYTimes recently.

It promises to be a bounty of stuff to think about I'm betting.

I believe in people, since I'm pretty sure most of them exist.

Having said that, I think it's worth remembering that the average believer must want evolution taught in the schools. They have a large majority and this is still, more or less, a democracy. If they wanted Creationism, the schools would be teaching Creationism.

Also, every Supreme Court decision that angers the fundamentalists came from people appointed by believers and ratified by a group of mostly believers.

Some believers are easy to live with. Others are easy to prove wrong. I think the first group is more interesting.

Lynne: That is a thoughtful and thought-provoking reply. My first response is that it's certainly true that some atheists can be every bit as dogmatic and intolerant as some religious are, no question.

But I suspect that if there were suddenly an absence of religion in the world, those same people would use something else to justify their hatred and their bad behavior.

I would respectfully disagree with you on that.

In the monotheistic faiths, the Big Three, religion serves to establish a connection with the Creator of the Universe. If a believer acts according to the dictates in their holy text, they are acting in a holy manner (putting aside for a moment whether those dictates are in fact hateful or loving). To act in a holy manner is to act in a way that implicitly has the imprimatur of God.

This divine sanction to act is not of this world. It is a super-worldly sanction. As such, it is immune from logical arguments. We as a world are slowly evolving out of worldly prejudices based on e.g. skin color, because there is no logical reason for such prejudices and we are slowly coming to recognize that.

If someone says, "I hate you because you're white," you can say, "There is no logical reason for that. I wasn't given a checklist for skin color when I was in the womb. I am a person just like you." Logic can over time dismantle this prejudice.

If someone says, "I hate you because God told me to," well, there is no logical reply to that, because the prejudice is not a case of logic but of faith, which is immune from logic.

To sum up, if all religion were removed from the world, the only prejudices we'd have left would be earthly ones like prejudices against skin color and homosexuality and sex. Over time, logic can dismantle these prejudices to show that all people are equally worthy.

And the world, as a result, would be better off.

Just my two cents.

Addiann: A cat may look at a king, so I will say that Dawkins makes a crucial mistake in his otherwise elegant statement.

He says "I believe."

He should say, "Evidence shows."

To say "I believe" means that his statement can be seen as just one man's belief, and can instantly be countered with a fundy's "Well, *I* believe that God created...."