Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Justice Sotomayor... (Score 1) 256

But there are some evidences and arguments that many intelligent people judge to be persuasive.

Then those so-called "intelligent people" are irrational.

I disagree. I think if you're honest with yourself, you'll find that a lot of the evidence for and against Christianity is a judgment call. For example, since we don't have a time machine, none of us can go and see whether or not someone named Jesus really was crucified, and really was alive three days later. And so we're left trying to weigh the plausibility of the historical accounts, but in terms whether or not the authors seem believable, as well as whether or not the documents really are authentic.

The same thing goes for answered prayer, and/or hearing what might be God's voice. The theoretical problems with testing this empirically are widely known, and I'm not going to try covering them here. And so, without the assurance of our normal scientific / mathematical tools for looking into these things with certainty, we're left making a judgment call.

You may have also noticed that all of us, atheists not excepted, sometimes make mistakes in our reasoning. Even more frustrating is that our reasoning and our acceptance of what constitutes evidence can be biased by the conclusion we think will make us happiest to reach. I think it's safe to say that for most people, if they want to find a reason to believe or disbelieve Christianity, they'll find a way to make logical constructs to support their conclusion. You and I are probably no exception to that.

So getting back to your original claim that Christians are irrational. I agree. Because I think we all are cursed with a strong streak of irrationality. But we only have so many years on this earth, and so we're stuck with making our best guess and running with it, hopefully also being open to changing that belief if/when there's a good reason to.

Comment: Re:Justice Sotomayor... (Score 1) 256

I think we'd all agree that believing in imaginary things is foolish, and no leader should do that. But your characterization of Christian beliefs fails to mention the reasons that many thinking Christians have for holding them.

I doubt that there's any currently available evidence or argument that provides a slam-dunk case for Christianity being true. But there are some evidences and arguments that many intelligent people judge to be persuasive. Therefore I don't consider being Christian as a sure sign of irrationalism or stupidity such that it should disqualify one from office.

Comment: Re:Not really needed anymore. (Score 1) 256

This "White Flight" destroyed the Suburb I grew up in (Redford Township) and at the beginning for no reason at all.

While choosing a place to live, I've twice pushed aside apprehension about the race of my neighbors and suffered for it.

I won't make that mistake a third time. Life is too short.

I think your point is that, at least in your experience, sometimes racism is statistically justified.

I think that's the elephant in the room about which no one here is talking.

Comment: Verizon FiOS (Score 2) 178

by DoofusOfDeath (#46814431) Attached to: Netflix Plans To Raise Prices By "$1 or $2 a Month"

I'm a Verizon customer, and Netflix streaming has become less useful to me since the whole monopoly shakedown business happend.

I'm willing to pay a few dollars more per month to Netflix, if it returns streaming to its previous glory on Verizon.

Bonus points if they use the money to buy a law that makes being a Verizon executive a capital offense.

Comment: Re:Joke about lawyers (Score 2) 88

by DoofusOfDeath (#46804563) Attached to: General Mills Retracts "No Right to Sue" EULA Clause

Not all lawyers are evil or bad, By far the worst kind is the "Corporate Lawyer". Get rid of those and the world would be a better place.

The problem with lawyers is that they're often seen as the agents of injustice.

Our legal system has scant consideration for the costs of participating in it. Somehow the SCOTUS sees no problem in letting prosecutors or private torte lawyers force others to choose between potentially bankrupting themselves in legal fees, or simply acquiescing to their demands.

And the courts also see no shadow of "ex post facto" in a legal code that's so complex that not only do regular citizens need a lawyer to understand it, but the meaning of the law isn't even fixed until some appeals court "discovers" it.

So from that perspective, lawyers are like government-sanctioned for-hire thugs. One can only hope that if one encounters a lawyer, he's either well-disposed to you or is less-well funded.

This is not justice.

You can not get anything worthwhile done without raising a sweat. -- The First Law Of Thermodynamics

Working...