Breaking News Events

[dreadgeek]

Originally Posted by dark_crystal

I just think that religion only ever has anything to fear from science when we insist on seeing God as an entity with a consciousness similar to ours...i don't see how we lose anything by seeing God as a force, or even four forces.

although, i guess it is harder to imagine how he knows the number of hairs on our head or has his eye on the sparrow, etc, but that just shows the limits of our imagination. i can see how it's not personal enough for some people, though

If people want to view god as a force or a person, that's fine. I think religion does fine if it doesn't try to answer scientific questions. Religion gets itself in trouble when it tries to answer questions better left up to science. The problem is that a world where there is an activist, interventionist, creator deity is going to look *very* different than one that is the result of blind and impersonal forces.

I'm not a theist and I don't have a lot of kind words for theism--but I recognize that humanity is stuck with religion and thus theism for any foreseeable future. So I'm trying to be at peace with that. However, I will demarcate and defend the boundaries of science against attempts by religious people to make science conform to their parochial, sectarian interests. That's not what science is for. Science is for discovery and understanding. Most modern science is complicated enough that cluttering the subject up with religious beliefs that must be conformed to. (For example, creationism being taught as if it were a viable alternative theory to naturalistic evolution when it most manifestly is not.)


Cheers
Aj

[waxnrope]

Originally Posted by HowSoonIsNow

and, now, Beck spits out the words *liberation theology* like it is a disgusting concept perverting the message of Christ and/or Christianity.

of course he does ... it is a threat to (his) the order of things ...

[SuperFemme]

Originally Posted by HowSoonIsNow

That's so messed up, SuperFemme and am sorry you and your family experienced such hatred and ignorance.

I am curious as to how the Board and/or school responded or resolved these complaints if you don't mind sharing.

The Principal called in this group of parents for a meeting with us after three weeks of my son being told that his Mom was an Evil Whore who was going straight to Hell and that he was a Faggot going to the same place. Day after day.

We met with the parents in hopes that we could quell the problem, but their words for us were that we were an abomination and sick and a walking representation of Satan at that school. (public school). One parent even attacked my son at a school rummage sale telling him that he was a worthless piece of shit and a "waste of faggot space on this earth".

The Principal made it clear that further words would result in expulsions and suspensions. So parents went to the school board. The school board decided that a mandatory tolerance workshop for both parents and students was in order (teachers as well), and it did wonders. We found out that there are three other kids who have same sex parents at our school, and now that they all know of each other they have comfort in numbers.

It's been some times now, and the issue in no longer an issue. I have to say that the kids who were being persecuted handled it with great dignity and grace and I dare anyone to say that kids from same sex households aren't healthy and socially responsible little people.

[waxnrope]

Originally Posted by dreadgeek

If people want to view god as a force or a person, that's fine. I think religion does fine if it doesn't try to answer scientific questions. Religion gets itself in trouble when it tries to answer questions better left up to science. The problem is that a world where there is an activist, interventionist, creator deity is going to look *very* different than one that is the result of blind and impersonal forces.

I'm not a theist and I don't have a lot of kind words for theism--but I recognize that humanity is stuck with religion and thus theism for any foreseeable future. So I'm trying to be at peace with that. However, I will demarcate and defend the boundaries of science against attempts by religious people to make science conform to their parochial, sectarian interests. That's not what science is for. Science is for discovery and understanding. Most modern science is complicated enough that cluttering the subject up with religious beliefs that must be conformed to. (For example, creationism being taught as if it were a viable alternative theory to naturalistic evolution when it most manifestly is not.)


Cheers
Aj

I agree with some of your post, AJ. However, as with many things, change is afoot. There is a Center for Science and Religion in Berkeley, and similar institues elsewhere. People are talking WITH each other and listening.

[dreadgeek]

Originally Posted by waxnrope

I agree with some of your post, AJ. However, as with many things, change is afoot. There is a Center for Science and Religion in Berkeley, and similar institues elsewhere. People are talking WITH each other and listening.

Certainly things are changing but here's the thing, Wax, religion would--in my opinion--be FAR better off if it fled as far away from subjects covered by the sciences as fast as possible. Let's say, for instance, that someone is arguing that evolution is the way that God created all the diverse life forms. Okay, as far as it goes. But then some nasty biologist like me comes along and asks the question "what does God have against caterpillars?" The question is relevant because there's a species of wasp where the female stings a caterpillar which paralyzes it but doesn't kill it. She then lays her eggs in the body of the *still living caterpillar*. When the eggs hatch the larvae eat their way out. Caterpillars can feel pain. Imagine being alive and being eaten, quite literally, from the inside out.

Now, if both the wasp and caterpillar are the results of blind forces that don't *care* about either then, as gruesome as it is, it at least makes sense. But if an intelligent entity *designed* things that way, that's messed up! At least it could have made caterpillars incapable of feeling pain. That would at least show some mercy.

There's a scene in Terry Pratchett's book, "Unseen Academicals" where the Patrician, Vetinari--who is ruthless and Machiavellian--relates a story from his youth where he sees a mother otter catch a salmon, the mother otter splits the salmon open and eggs spill out which are then devoured by the baby otters. At the end of this story, he says, "if there is a divine being, it is our job to be his moral superiors".

The universe is too heartless, too pitiless, too completely comfortable with misery, pain and fear to be the product of any entity that could be called 'loving' or 'kind' or 'merciful' by even the most generous definition. Think about the last second of a gazelles life just before it is brought down by a leopard. Imagine its fear, it's pain. Now, imagine the pain of starving for the lion (and her cubs) if she *doesn't* get the gazelle. No matter what, someone has a horrific experience--either the gazelle dies quickly, painfully and in terror or the lioness and her cubs die slowly, painfully, in a lingering fashion. Religion should want no part of that and would be best served if it didn't try to explain why that happens.

Cheers
Aj

[dark_crystal]

i realize the "Breaking News" thread has now been off-topic for like 3 pages, but i did want to add one last note regarding religion:

One of my favorite scriptural passages is The Parable of the Sower from Mark chapter 4:

A farmer went out to sow his seed. As he was scattering the seed, some fell along the path, and the birds came and ate it up. 5Some fell on rocky places, where it did not have much soil. It sprang up quickly, because the soil was shallow. But when the sun came up, the plants were scorched, and they withered because they had no root. Other seed fell among thorns, which grew up and choked the plants, so that they did not bear grain. Still other seed fell on good soil. It came up, grew and produced a crop, multiplying thirty, sixty, or even a hundred times."
Then Jesus said, "He who has ears to hear, let him hear."

When he was alone, the Twelve and the others around him asked him about the parables.

Then Jesus said to them, "Don't you understand this parable? How then will you understand any parable? The farmer sows the word. Some people are like seed along the path, where the word is sown. As soon as they hear it, Satan comes and takes away the word that was sown in them. Others, like seed sown on rocky places, hear the word and at once receive it with joy. But since they have no root, they last only a short time. When trouble or persecution comes because of the word, they quickly fall away. Still others, like seed sown among thorns, hear the word; but the worries of this life, the deceitfulness of wealth and the desires for other things come in and choke the word, making it unfruitful. Others, like seed sown on good soil, hear the word, accept it, and produce a crop—thirty, sixty or even a hundred times what was sown."

We have it from Jesus's own (alleged) mouth that we can expect 75% of Christans to be completely clueless.

i actually live by an over-extrapolation of this parable called Jenny's 75% rule, which states that three-quarters of the people one meets are going to be idiots. This then has to be tempered with the Golden Rule, which requires that i expect this while still giving the benefit of the doubt to whoever's in front of me at any moment

oh yeah and regarding morality outside of religion, the categorical imperative still applies, i think

[Toughy]

waxnrope...........I was not directing my comments about hate to you personally. I don't believe you said anything about me and hate.........

---
Aj......I have hope that theists and scientists can come together and stop this adversarial either/or rhetoric. Change comes mostly slowly as time and evolution teach. There are baby steps being made.

Although........laughin.........Stephen Hawkings has certainly made a whole bunch of people go . I am actually gonna go by the book. I will have to check local booksellers first..........if they don't have it, then it's order from Powell's.

(I don't buy from chain bookstores....one form of social justice that is easy to do )

[SuperFemme]

Family indicted after thrice kidnapping gay relative

By JPOST.COM STAFF
09/02/2010 13:41

The crimes were committed after victim published pictures in drag on Facebook; he was chained and locked up by relatives.

A family from the Arab village of Tamra, including one minor, have been indicted on Thursday for kidnapping a relative after finding pictures of him in drag on Facebook.

The indictment includes contact in order to commit a crime, kidnapping with intent to imprison, kidnapping with intent to threaten, imprisonment, threats and attacks, all because of the man's sexuality and photographs he published online, in which he is wearing a bridal gown.

The crimes were allegedly committed four times over the past four months, in order to "defend the family's honor," according to the indictment.

The first kidnapping attempt occurred in May. The accused told their victim that him mother is sick, and they should visit her in Tamra. When he refused, they dragged him into the car, and brought him to his parents' home, where they beat and slapped him, tied him up, and locked him in the room. The victim's brother released him, after the victim told a friend to call the police.

He was attacked again at a family wedding, during which he ran into the woods and did not come out until police came. Three weeks before the wedding, his mother called and warned him to remove the pictures in which the victim is in drag, saying "the family will come get you, and that'll be the end of you."

On August 23, the family members came to the victim's Tel Aviv apartment, sprayed pepper spray in his face, and pushed him into a car that was waiting for him outside. They tied his hands with belts, blindfolded him with scotch tape and threatened to stab him if he resists. Once they arrived in Tamra, the accused chained him to a window and locked him in a room.

http://www.jpost.com/Israel/Article.aspx?id=186841

[AtLast]

Originally Posted by waxnrope

I agree with some of your post, AJ. However, as with many things, change is afoot. There is a Center for Science and Religion in Berkeley, and similar institues elsewhere. People are talking WITH each other and listening.

I find these kinds of organizations to be very important in combating what I call intellectual benign neglect. Question, question, question... replicate, replicate, replicate!

Accepting anything, including scientific claims, blindly, is not a good thing to me. This certainly bothers me with theism. Without sound research methods and replication of theory, science is not trustworthy either. Put the lack of funding for scientific inquiry in the US in the equation as well as the corporate mega-bucks for certain kinds of scientific inquiry, and there is a big problem. When new research such as this comes out, the first thing I want to know is how it was funded and where.

Unfortunately, there are at times, people behind scientific investigation that are not interested in pure science and have ulterior motives. Seems like that can be said for those in many forms of theology. In fact, there is scientific study into a God Gene that can be viewed as part of this group. On the other hand, that science is revolutionary in terms of neuropsychological interpretation and applications. It has it's place in scientific investigation because science delves into all.

Many scientific discoveries that are simply brilliant have been used in horrible ways- the atomic bomb is certainly one. Reading how Oppenheimer felt about his work and how it ended up being used is very interesting and heartbreaking. The guy had so may other ideas for how this science could be used that would have had such different social consequences that were positive.

For me, a state of spiritual awareness is indeed based upon molecular variables within the bio-neuro- physiological realm of sensation, perception and cognitive underpinnings. Paranormal investigation is something that is advancing in our scientific world and has a place in all of this. I can't define this for anyone else. I don’t even care to.

I do know that accepting science at first glance without checking the methods obtained and not seeing replication is not being a good scientist. If I had done this as a professional, I would have been neglectful as well as unethical. In terms of professional ethics, simply taking scientific research at face value can be a deadly mistake.

Hawkins has demonstrated a history of solid scientific inquiry. He is well respected among his peers (and that is something to consider as well- prominent scientists do exist in an Ivy League elitist vacuum mostly). I will certainly take his theory into consideration. Although, I don't consider creationism to be valid, anyway. I see other applications for what Hawkins is bring to light (no pun intended). But, his work will have to stand the test of time and further scientific study and criticism to earn validity. And Hawkins, as a phenomenal scientist knows this.

This work is a significant contribution in science, but, it needs to be treated as all good science is, with continued and un-biased scientific inquiry. The idea is to build on theory from the past and into the future. That is what good scientist’s do- they keep asking questions and refining their research. Keep going at ideas.

Who knows, Hawkins work might lead to another Scopes Trial and change the course of educational curriculum. I for one wouldn’t mind this at all. I do agree that creationism theory just does not stand as a bona fide theory to be taught in our public schools (public being the operative- let alone separation of church and state).

[SuperFemme]

Montana Tea Party President Condones Violence Against Gays in Facebook Post Supporting Traditional Marriage



This seems to have been posted in late July, but several people have brought it to my attention today. Tim Ravndal, the President of Montana's Big Sky Tea Party Association, expressed his views that marriage should be between a man and a woman in a Facebook posting. The post was in response to an ACLU lawsuit in Montana brought by seven gay couples who want to get married.

Then Ravndal expressed support for a commenter who (in apparent reference to the Matthew Shepard murder) said, "I think fruits are decorative. Hang up where they can be seen and appreciated. Call Wyoming for display instructions."

Answered Ravndal: "Where can I get that Wyoming printed instruction manual?"

In related news, the Montana GOP Platform calls for making homosexual acts illegal

http://www.towleroad.com/2010/09/mon...%23gay+news%29

[SuperFemme]

Springfield Cathedral High School athletic director Christine Judd loses job after same-sex marriage

Published: Thursday, September 02, 2010, 4:41 PM Updated: Friday, September 03, 2010, 9:28 AM


Cathedral High School athletic director and dean of students Christine Judd lost her job at the Catholic school after marrying her partner.

SPRINGFIELD - The athletic director at Cathedral High School lost her job this week, saying she was pressured to leave after marrying her female partner in August.

Christine M. Judd, who served as athletic director and dean of students, said she is no longer an employee of the Roman Catholic Diocese of Springfield school system after a meeting Wednesday with administrators of the Catholic high school.

The diocese listed her departure as a resignation, but Judd said she is still exploring her legal options.

“I was given a choice of termination or resignation,” Judd said. “I’m hurt, but I wish nothing but the best for Cathedral, its students, the parents, the athletic teams, administration and faculty. I bleed purple (the school’s color).”

Judd, a Springfield resident, worked for the Catholic school for 12 years, beginning as a science teacher in 1998. She became dean of students six years ago and was given the added duties of athletic director three years ago.

“I married my partner this summer,” Judd said. “I was hoping that my loyalty, my professionalism the last 12 years would supersede the current hypocrisy that has already been shown with the Diocese of Springfield.”

Asked to elaborate on her claim of hypocrisy, Judd said she questions if there are lay persons who work for the Catholic diocese who divorce and remarry without an annulment, or employees who use birth control, or men who have had vasectomies, or individuals who are pro-choice on abortion.

Same-sex marriage became legal in Massachusetts in 2004.

Mark E. Dupont, a spokesman for the Roman Catholic Diocese of Springfield, said Judd did resign, but declined to respond to Judd’s comments, or on the issue of her marriage in August.

Related stories

• Coen: Springfield Diocese should be ashamed

“Because it’s an employment matter, we are not at liberty to discuss the specifics,” Dupont said.

Judd said she knows she will find new employment.

She said state law gives her the right to same-sex marriage, but it is not allowed under diocesan policy, leading to her job loss.

“Cathedral had nothing to do with this,” Judd said. “This was a diocesan decision. In the end, the timing of this issue really affects the kids. That is where it has the most effect.”

Cathedral's website describes Judd as "one of the key members of the faculty and staff who serve as positive role models for the students."
Farrand Violette, who is the new football coach at Cathedral, has been named interim athletic director for the rest of this year, Dupont said. Violette has past experience as an athletic director at the New Leadership Charter School.

No decision has been announced yet regarding the dean of students position.

Judd said her decision to leave the school followed a meeting with the school principal, John Miller, and the business director.

“Without being specific to this matter, it should be clear that all employees of our Catholic schools are made aware of our policies and regulations,” Dupont said. "This includes language that clearly states that whenever by public example, an employee engages in or espouses conduct which contravenes the doctrine and teaching of the Catholic Church, that employee may be subject to disciplinary action. To do otherwise would be in contradiction to the values we believe in and are teaching in these same schools. So while we certainly want to be compassionate and understanding, we must be true to who we are.”

“We are certainly thankful to Ms Judd for her past service at Cathedral High School and wish her the best in the future,” Dupont said.

http://www.masslive.com/news/index.s..._high_sch.html

[Soon]

Originally Posted by SuperFemme

[B][SIZE=3]

“Without being specific to this matter, it should be clear that all employees of our Catholic schools are made aware of our policies and regulations,” Dupont said. "This includes language that clearly states that whenever by public example, an employee engages in or espouses conduct which contravenes the doctrine and teaching of the Catholic Church, that employee may be subject to disciplinary action. To do otherwise would be in contradiction to the values we believe in and are teaching in these same schools. So while we certainly want to be compassionate and understanding, we must be true to who we are.”

l[/URL]

And like Ms. Judd said, they DO NOT go after the employees who are divorced, or living together, use birth control etc. It is only members of the LGBT group that lives openly that these Catholic Boards go after.

[SuperFemme]

Originally Posted by HowSoonIsNow

And like Ms. Judd said, they DO NOT go after the employees who are divorced, or living together, use birth control etc. It is only members of the LGBT group that lives openly that these Catholic Boards go after.

right.
but all they do is transfer the priests who sexually abuse parishoners.
they are not defrocked, are they? at least i know that in the past the
diocese would just move the offender from place to place with no warning
to the new place of what may come to pass.

it is EXACTLY these kinds of situations that make the GLBTQ community wary of religious organizations.

[waxnrope]

Originally Posted by Toughy

waxnrope...........I was not directing my comments about hate to you personally. I don't believe you said anything about me and hate.........

---
Aj......I have hope that theists and scientists can come together and stop this adversarial either/or rhetoric. Change comes mostly slowly as time and evolution teach. There are baby steps being made.

Although........laughin.........Stephen Hawkings has certainly made a whole bunch of people go . I am actually gonna go by the book. I will have to check local booksellers first..........if they don't have it, then it's order from Powell's.

(I don't buy from chain bookstores....one form of social justice that is easy to do )

Toughie, c'mere and let me give you a butch hug
I saw the announcement, and am interested in what he had to say. Let's face it, no one is likely to change their podition, but having respect for one another's ideas, sharing our stories like SF, that shit is holy to me. So thanks.

[waxnrope]

AtLast, I can't quote your post on my phone ... its too long ... but want to thank you for putting things in perspective.

Don't get me started on the absolution of science, and the oops! never mind, or atrocities commuted in the name of. Cornell West does a masterful job with respect to race, for one. Michel Foucault and Anon are others. There is a history of abuse in most, if not all, disciplines. How do we elicit thought and behavior change so that we all flourish is, IMHO, the key.

Each of us posting these past pages have the "good" in mind. We need be more than tolerant, because tolerance implies superiority. We need to agree that there are some points that we do not agree, some points that, because our learning is narrowly focused, we don't understand. We need to realize that our experience of a specific area may be true for that instance, but not expect everything within a broader umbrella may be true as well. The contradictions are inherent in nature.

Dang phone won't allow multiple quotes, and I apologize for this as well as any typos that make you go "huh" because there is a self correcting thingy.

SF, thanks for posting. You have, in the way only you can accomplish, presented the various sides of these discussions through your own lived experiences. I'd like to say more, but won't press my luck on the phone in one long post. It's never let me go so long before.

AJ, yore post is brilliant. However, Process Theology, started by a physicist, Alfred Lord Whitehead, says simply that G-d does not intervene because G-d cannot. G-d, Process Theologians say, acts by luring us to do good. We have free will, however, and can chose not to listen ...

Ok, I'm gone ...

[Cyclopea]

Hawking writing religious texts now? How strange...

Now that he's disproved the existence of god maybe he will disprove the existence of bigfoot or the loch ness monster.

[Toughy]

Terry...............<<<<doing the dual butch hand grasp to the chest with other hand pat on the back>>>>> We need to have coffee soon.

Tolerance. I have always had trouble with being 'tolerated'. It somehow implies something is wrong, but can be dealt with at an arm's length.

Acceptance. That is what I strive for and what will move evolution of humans forward. Acceptance implies the concept of 'Namaste' or 'I See You'.

[Nat]

Originally Posted by Cyclopea

Hawking writing religious texts now? How strange...

Now that he's disproved the existence of god maybe he will disprove the existence of bigfoot or the loch ness monster.

I hope not - then I'd have to cry

[Cyclopea]

Originally Posted by Nat

I hope not - then I'd have to cry

*chuckle* Don't cry! Here's some chocolate:

[Toughy]

Originally Posted by Cyclopea

Hawking writing religious texts now? How strange...

Now that he's disproved the existence of god maybe he will disprove the existence of bigfoot or the loch ness monster.

I have not read this new book. What I get from the one big quote I read and could not quickly find is this: There is no NEED for a creator diety for the universe to come into existence. What I read does not make a comment on the existence of a deity, but rather comments on the need of a deity.

I await further comment on this new book until I have read it. My understanding is the book is NOT about religion. Rather it is about how the universe came into existence. Context is everything and he certainly could have said a creator deity does not exist.

ps............I hate koolaid and I rarely if ever drink it.