Ateisme

Du browser i øjeblikket artikler tagget Ateisme.

Jesus really doesn't love youStewart Lee, engelsk komiker, stÃ¥r bag en lille times udsendelse om religion og det stigende religiøse pres mod ytringsfriheden… Udsendelsen ligger - i seks klip - pÃ¥ youtube, og er et kig værd: første del. Den er bÃ¥de tankevækkende og ustyrligt morsom!

Udsendelsen tager udgangspunkt i kristnes protester over tv-visningen af af “Jerry Springer - The Opera” - men nÃ¥r (naturligvis) ogsÃ¥ at slÃ¥ et smut over Jyllandspostens infantile tegninger.

Jeg står ved mit indlæg fra januar - jeg synes faktisk stadig at muhammedkarikaturerne var en unødig provokation som, bortset fra en enkelt perle eller to, var helt og aldeles u-morsom. Men det betyder ikke, at JP ikke havde ret til at trykke dem. En britisk journalist udtaler i udsendelsen:

One of the problems about censorship has always been that you end up defending rubbish - i.e. rubbish porno movies. Polly Toynbee, Guardian Columnist

 

Og det er svært. Det er ikke en nem position at forsvare: At jeg synes at JP’s aktion var tÃ¥belig - men at de selvfølgelig havde lov til at trykke tegningerne. Ligesom de, der fik deres tro udsat for hÃ¥n og latterliggørelse selvfølgelig havde ret til at blive stødt. Evan Harris siger det meget godt (i samme udsendelse, 2. del)

I don’t see why I should be forced by criminal sanction to think before I speak - when I’m not inciting violence, when I’m not defaming people… I think we should all be polite and careful, but I don’t think that it should be adviced back by criminal law. Evan Harris, MP Liberal Democrats

 

Religionens indflydelse har længe været for nedadgående, men præster og imamer og alskens religiøse mørkemænd og -koner er i de seneste år begyndt at fremture mere og mere - og at få mere og mere indflydelse. Det gælder præstebrødrene i Dansk Folkeparti, det gælder den offentlige debat, hvor præster og teologer i stigende grad bruges som kommentatorer, det gælder (tilsyneladende) i de muslimske miljøer, som (igen tilsyneladende, jeg har det kun fra pressen) radikaliseres.

Der er al mulig grund til at tage debatten. Og al mulig grund til at grine af det, vi synes er sjovt. Ateistisk Selskab (som jeg har været medlem af et lille halvt års tid) kører i øjeblikket en kampagne for at få folk til at melde sig ud af folkekirken. Hvis folk faktisk tror, og får noget ud af at være medlem, så har jeg svært ved at se det problematiske i, at de er medlemmer. Jeg vil blot opfordre folk til at overveje, om en Gud virkelig er den bedste forklaring på vores vidunderlige verden. Douglas Adams (genial, men nu afdød forfatter) udtaler i et interview i tidsskriftet American Atheist:

I don’t accept the currently fashionable assertion that any view is automatically as worthy of respect as any equal and opposite view. My view is that the moon is made of rock. If someone says to me “Well, you haven’t been there, have you? You haven’t seen it for yourself, so my view that it is made of Norwegian Beaver Cheese is equally valid� - then I can’t even be bothered to argue. There is such a thing as the burden of proof, and in the case of god, as in the case of the composition of the moon, this has shifted radically. God used to be the best explanation we’d got, and we’ve now got vastly better ones. God is no longer an explanation of anything, but has instead become something that would itself need an insurmountable amount of explaining. So I don’t think that being convinced that there is no god is as irrational or arrogant a point of view as belief that there is. I don’t think the matter calls for even-handedness at all.Douglas Noel Adams i American Atheist

 

Og husk nu: brug en lille times tid pÃ¥ at se Don’t Get Me Started.
(link fundet på New Humanist)

For Humanist, det er jeg selvfølgelig… I følge New Humanist er jeg en ‘Haymaker’. Med lidt hjælp fra gode kolleger og thefreedictionary.com oversættes det vist bedst til ‘opportunist’ - pÃ¥ den gode mÃ¥de ;)

Haymaker

You are one of life’s enjoyers, determined to get the most you can out of your brief spell on Earth. Probably what first attracted you to atheism was the prospect of liberation from the Ten Commandments, few of which are compatible with a life of pleasure. You play hard and work quite hard, have a strong sense of loyalty and a relaxed but consistent approach to your philosophy.
You can’t see the point of abstract principles and probably wouldn’t lay down your life for a concept though you might for a friend. Something of a champagne humanist, you admire George Bernard Shaw for his cheerful agnosticism and pursuit of sensual rewards and your Hollywood hero is Marlon Brando, who was beautiful, irascible and aimed for goodness in his own tortured way.
Sometimes you might be tempted to allow your own pleasures to take precedence over your ethics. But everyone is striving for that elusive balance between the good and the happy life. You’d probably open another bottle and say there’s no contest.

What kind of humanist are you? Click here to find out.

endnu engang tak til shevy.dk for linket ;)

Er der nogen der tror, at Islam og muslimer skulle være mere kvindeundertrykkende end fx visse kristne kulturer?
Læs Mark Morford’s kommentar og fortvivl:

Very Well. Let us now trace the path of imminent cultural destruction: Virgin girl has zero experience with the joys of her own body, with orgasm, with men, with sex toys or shower heads or good gynecological gizmongery. She then marries a man who will very likely have not the slightest clue (as he has had the same dreadful sexual miseducation as our fair virgin) as to what to do with a woman’s body, who will, by most all accounts, be unable to tell an erogenous zone from an elbow, a clitoris from a belly button. Mark Morford, San Fransisco Gate Columnist

Two wrongs doesn’t make a right… Men nogen gange hjælper den ene trosretnings idioti med at sætte den andens i relief… Problemet er ikke Islam. Problemet er idioti. Hvor ville verden dog være et bedre sted hvis flere tog Douglas Adams‘ ord til sig:

First of all I do not believe-that-there-is-not-a-god. I don’t see what belief has got to do with it. I believe or don’t believe my four-year old daughter when she tells me that she didn’t make that mess on the floor. [...] I also believe that England should enter the European Monetary Union.[...] These seem to me to be legitimate uses for the word believe. As a carapace for the protection of irrational notions from legitimate questions, however, I think that the word has a lot of mischief to answer for. So, I do not believe-that-there-is-no-god. I am, however, convinced that there is no god, which is a totally different stance and takes me on to my second reason.
[...] God used to be the best explanation we’d got, and we’ve now got vastly better ones. God is no longer an explanation of anything, but has instead become something that would itself need an insurmountable amount of explaining. So I don’t think that being convinced that there is no god is as irrational or arrogant a point of view as belief that there is. I don’t think the matter calls for even-handedness at all. Douglas Adams i interview af David Silverman

- og skulle du være blevet inspireret til modtagelse af fornuft, så kan du altid kigge forbi Ateistisk Selskab og/eller Ateistisk Forum.

Nyere indlæg »

Bad Behavior has blocked 987 access attempts in the last 7 days.