Comment

Comment by Geraldo Cienmarcos on July 27, 2010 at 9:39am

Holder vs. Humanitarian Law Project

Analysis

For the first time in nearly nine years of what the government has called a "war on terrorism," the Supreme Court on June 21 [2010] ruled decisively in the government's favor — but still stopped short of providing an unqualified victory. The Court ruled, by a 6-3 vote, that IT DOES NOT VIOLATE THE CONSTITUTION FOR THE GOVERNMENT TO BLOCK SPEECH AND OTHER FORMS OF ADVOCACY SUPPORTING A FOREIGN ORGANIZATION that has been officially labeled as terrorist, EVEN if the aim is to support such a group’s peaceful or humanitarian actions.

Holder v. Humanitarian Law Project - ScotusWiki
Brief of the Carter Center, Christian Peacemakers, Human Rights Watch, et al. in Support of Humanitarian Law Project, et al. ...
http://www.scotuswiki.com/index.php?...Humanitarian_Law_Project

Holder v. Humanitarian Law Project | Center for Constitutional Rights
Jun 21, 2010 ... CCR's plaintiffs include the Humanitarian Law Project, a human rights organization that seeks to provide training in human rights ...
http://ccrjustice.org/holder-v-humanitarian-law-project

Comment by Fred Edwords on July 9, 2010 at 1:10pm

Well Susan, I viewed your profile, learned about the group "Science Fiction/Fantasy Atheists" there, joined it, and posted a comment. Thanks for posting that lead.

Comment by susan thomason on July 9, 2010 at 12:43pm

fb stresses me out i have to watch what i'm into ( i'm still in the closetwith most people)

Comment by Fred Edwords on June 30, 2010 at 2:33pm

Great to have you on board, Larry!

Comment by Geraldo Cienmarcos on June 28, 2010 at 3:25pm

an article (not by me)

A Nation Divided: Rationalists and A-rationalists in America
by Jeff Schweitzer

Huffington Post
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeff-schweitzer/a-nation-divided-rati...

Before imploding in the face of his sordid extramarital trysts, presidential candidate John Edwards based his campaign on the idea of two Americas: one rich, the other poor. He was right about the idea that American is divided, but wrong about the nature of the division. The deeper and more important split is defined by religiosity, not riches.

The nearly even distribution of votes between conservatives and liberals in the presidential elections of 2000, 2004 and 2008 reveals clearly a lasting and deep chasm in American society. Heated rhetoric, vitriol, excessive passion and closely contested elections expose the existence of two societies with little in common, living side by side but miles apart.

The barrier separating us is defined by the unbridgeable gulf between god and rationalism. This is not a culture war, but a cosmic battle between theism and humanism.

The conflict between these two world views is made apparent in the voting booth. The closest election in American history offers plenty of evidence for the religiosity divide. Of those voters who attend church more than once per week, 68% voted for Bush and 32% for Gore. Of those who never attend church, 35% went for Bush, 65% for Gore. Religiosity alone is the most important, obvious and conclusive factor in determining voter behavior. Simply put, church goers tend to vote Republican. Those who instead go the hardware store on Sunday vote Democrat by wide margins. The divide in our society is not between rich and poor, or Catholic and Protestant, or Christian and Muslim, but between those have faith and those who have reason. Obama's election does not negate that calculus. Forget not that 50 million Americans voted for the other ticket.

Rationalism and Theism

Those who accept the idea of god tend to divide the world into believers and atheists. Yet that is incorrect. Atheist means "without god" and one cannot be without something that does not exist. Atheism is really a pejorative term that defines one world view as the negative of another, as something not what something else is. The word atheist is analogous to the denigrating word "colored" to describe African Americans, which was meant to say they are colored relative to the "pure standard" of white. Atheism is similarly meant to describe rationalists against the "pure standard" of belief. Both terms are the result of ignorance and bias about what constitutes the baseline for comparison. Just as we thankfully no longer use the world colored, we should abandon the term atheist. ...

complete article on line:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeff-schweitzer/a-nation-divided-rati...

-- -- --
posted by Gary, Los Angeles
> REAL HEALTH CARE REFORM IS UNIVERSAL

Comment by James Croft on June 1, 2010 at 1:12pm

Great! Excited to meet some people!

Comment by Fred Edwords on June 1, 2010 at 1:01pm

Well, you'll see me there. And in reading your profile comments on the arts, and seeing that you sing and act, I hope we can connect. The humanist movement could use more people like you. Perhaps you should meet with the conference organizers who are planning next year's event at Harvard!

Comment by James Croft on June 1, 2010 at 12:50pm

Anyone attending the AHA conference this year in San Jose? Meetup?

Comment by Aaron Harmon on April 28, 2010 at 10:20am

I don't know. I like the idea that "divine" guidance be put on the same plane as "human" guidance (considering they are the same thing anyway).

@GBM Harper: You mean a "non-prophet"?

@John D: Actually "good" and "god" are not etymologically linked. "Good" comes from the meaning "to have desirable qualities" from "to be put together properly"; "god" comes from the meaning "supreme diety" from "to invoke" (although it may also be linked to "to pour").

The "good = god" idea is one I have heard often. It is similar to the "history = his-story" folk etymology I have heard from preachers.
OK, I'm done. :P

Comment by Jonathan P. Figdor on April 28, 2010 at 10:03am

Don't worry - I'm not a divine. To be honest, my clearly atheistic friend, I think we need more atheists in divinity school to put some theological pressure on our conservative religious colleagues. For three years I brought the fight to fundamentalism at Harvard. Next year, three Humanist MDivs will follow the path I blazed, making the Humanist/Atheist voice even more significant.

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 40
• 41
• 42
• 43
• 44
• 45
• Next ›
• Page