Dafydd Llewellyn

No, Turbs; whilst the ongoing endless repetition of the various arguments is getting tiresome, there has to be a reason for the bitterness. I've come across the argument that religious irrationality (for want of a better or more accurate term) may be a form of PTSD; and I thought the suggestion to look at this aspect might help. When somebody has such a head of steam up, he's not doing himself any good. The argument I'm seeing in this thread isn't doing anything to reduce that; and laying awake wondering about this led me to that thought. If you find that disgusting, that's your problem.

No, none of that; I suggest the man is mentally disturbed, and in great pain. The condition is becoming recognised - see, for example, http://new.exchristian.net/2011/06/religious-trauma-syndrome-its-time-to.html . The fact that he started this thread, and is so stubbornly sticking to irrational arguments shows that; and we aren't helping him. One of my nieces has a similar problem. She's starting to write aggressive internet articles, too. He may perhaps need to get medical advice re some tranquilizing prescription to ease the stress whilst he's dealing with this - see http://www.helpguide.org/articles/ptsd-trauma/post-traumatic-stress-disorder.htm#getting_help I'm NOT trying to be sarcastic or funny about this; it's no laughing matter.

Well, I'll tell you what I believe: I believe this thread has become nauseatingly boring.

And tax evasion - don't lose sight of that Mastodon.

And they teach their children to hate. Why do you think the "Irish problem" has persisted so long?

I thought he did a great deal more good than that; made Edison look silly, actually. (For anybody who doesn't recognise Tesla's name, he invented alternating current). Anyway, he was doing that well before the commercial oil industry got to be the monster it is today.

Oh; I thought you were referring to atheism as a movement. Buy a church, start a religion - good way to evade taxes. No, I agree with FT on this one; just get the churches to leave the kids alone, and start paying taxes like the rest of us, and people can vote with their feet as to whether they want to be told what to believe. If they start killing unbelievers, they'll get stomped on; but if they leave other people alone, other people will leave them alone. Live & let live applies.

More to the point, who cares?

"This one"? What movement? Do you mean that being allowed to think for one's self is a "movement"? I don't know of any atheist movement - or are you seeing Dawkins as (evidently) GG sees him, as something equivalent to the Ayatollah Khomeini? There's a difference by which one can distinguish them - the Ayatollah told people to revert to religious fundamentalism, with all the repression that goes with it - like shooting women who seek education, marrying nine-year old girls, that sort of thing. Dawkins merely tells people to think for themselves. And no, I'm not the least interested in rushing off to listen to him.

Well, he missed the gold watch and chain, didn't he?

Yes - it's a form of psychological blackmail used by the Church.

Mike, are you meaning to imply that atheists are lacking in ethical and/or moral principles? If so, I don't think you are correct; the most fundamental principles are, to my understanding, "everybody deserves a fair go" and "do unto others as you would have others do unto you". Those principles are not the exclusive prerogative of religions (quite the opposite, actually; Jihad or the old testament principles of murdering the unbelievers are as far away from this as you can get.) Atheists have to live with themselves; they can't go and confess and be forgiven.

We used to get that sort of thing in our twice-moved old QLD high-set house - until a large bush python moved into the ceiling. It used to move in at the start of winter; the cats were VERY polite to it.

Well, I won't say GG is excessively biased - but if he were a bowling ball, I expect he'd leave the ground once every revolution . . .

I don't want to escalate this into WW3; however, I learned early in my driving history, that children, cyclists, horses etc can be counted on to move suddenly; I was driving (on L plates) quietly past a string of horses being ridden along the verge, when one of them chose to swing and rear - my car passed under its front hooves. We all, I think, have dire learning experiences, especially in our early driving days, and it's sheer luck if they do not cause an accident; but the essential thing is to learn from them. A horse can move or a bicycle rider can sprawl, up to about four metres sideways if something goes wrong, so I reached the conclusion that it pays to allow that much clearance when one passes them.