Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Really? (Score 1) 412

by njen (#42284307) Attached to: Atheist Blogger Sentenced To 3 Years in Prison For Insulting Islam
It doesn't require an act of faith to assert there is no such thing as the tooth fairy.
It doesn't require an act of faith to assert there is no such thing as Santa.
It doesn't require an act of faith to assert there is no such thing as the FSM.
It doesn't require an act of faith to assert there is no such thing as a god named Thor.
It doesn't require an act of faith to assert there is no such thing as (insert any god here).

Atheism employs no belief or faith. None. Zip. Nada. If it did, it wouldn't be atheism. Stop propagating an incorrect statement.

Comment: Re:Really? (Score 5, Insightful) 412

by njen (#42269913) Attached to: Atheist Blogger Sentenced To 3 Years in Prison For Insulting Islam
Ok, let's get something clear: giving to your church =! giving to a charity.

A christian giving 10% of the money they earn to their church is most definitely not a definition of charity, but more akin to giving money to a club that you are a part of. I give various percentages on my money to different things I am a part of too but that doesn't make it charity. Since church "donations" are essentially a black hole, it is almost impossible to actually know how much really goes to charity, and how much goes to increasing the wealth of the church. But as someone who used to be a part of a church, from what I saw, I'd estimate less than 5% of the money the church received actually went to true charitable activities such as feeding the poor, etc.

I wonder what the actual percentages christians giving to charity are, and whether it is more or less than atheists. As an atheist I donate to charitable activities, and I certainly know others who do as well. But of course that is anecdotal.

Comment: Re:Moral relativists contradict themselves (Score 1) 840

by njen (#41043645) Attached to: Genetically Engineering Babies a Moral Obligation, Says Ethicist
Moral absolutism is even more absurd...the idea that everyone around the world in all different cultures over the entire history of humanity somehow follows the same set of morals is such a leap of the imagination, that it stands out as fiction.

Human societies have been defining relative morals since there were societies of humans, whether you like it or not.

Comment: Re:Only 53% of South Koreans claim any religion (Score 5, Interesting) 286

From what I've seen, Korean Christians are a lot more full on than Christians I have encountered in other countries. Example:

* First a disclaimer: I lived in Korea for 4 years, and I am married to a Korean.
One of my wife's relatives passed away while we were living in Korea, so we went to attend the funeral. Approximately half of the family was devout Christian, and the other half were mild Buddhists / agnostics. Because the person who died was Buddhist, it was decided by the Buddhist side of the family to have the funeral in a Buddhist format, which might I add, has been practically the cultural standard for hundreds of years in Korea.

But the Christian side would have absolutely none of it, not even to be respectful to the Buddhists, which was a source of contention at the funeral. They waited until the end of the ceremony, not taking part in any of the prayers, or even the the respectful bows that are common enough, then begun their loud prayers and other Christian themed actions.

I am an atheist, but I knew better than to shove my (lack of) beliefs upon others, and just go with the flow at the funeral, why can not others do the same? To this day that funeral is still a source of discontentment between the two sides.

Comment: Re:Post PC (Score 5, Interesting) 636

by njen (#40581697) Attached to: Preparing For Life After the PC
I was thinking the same thing. I work in the VFX industry, and I can see absolutely no future without PC's in this industry alone. Personally, for my last piece of new hardware, I moved back from an uber powerful laptop (heavy weight, 17" screen, etc.), to a desktop at roughly half the price with almost twice the specs, then I threw two 24" monitors in for good measure. I know others who have also recently made a similar move back to the PC (or PC like device).

Comment: Re:Nature (Score 2) 759

by njen (#40253585) Attached to: Earth Approaching Tipping Point Say Scientists
I am glad someone else is thinking like this, as I agree wholeheartedly with the notion that humans are a part of nature, thereby whatever we do is natural in itself.

If we pollute this planet and kill ourselves (and a good deal of the species on this planet), then so be it. The earth will continue without us, and new types of life will take our place. It is all part of nature balancing itself out.

Now that is not to say that we should pollute as much as we want, on the contrary, I am hugely in favour of renewable energy, reducing waste, maintaining clean air and keeping our parks green. But when people constantly label what humans do as non-natural processes, they miss the point that they are a part of nature too, and this creates a distance to the notions of maintaining a healthy environment for many generations to come.

Comment: Re:Blocked for being post-mediaeval (Score 1) 226

by njen (#40058857) Attached to: Pakistan Blocks Twitter Over 'Blasphemous' Images

>Disbelief is having a belief, in an atheists case, the active belief that there can be no god in a traditional sense.

This sentence is fundamentally incorrect. The dictionary meaning of the suffix "dis" is "the opposite or absence of". Therefore "disbelief" is the opposite or absence of belief. "Absence" can be described as a lack of something. Thus "disbelief" is essentially "a lack of belief".

The dictionary meaning of the word "disbelief" is the rejection of belief. How you think that disbelief is a belief is beyond me...

Comment: Re:Blocked for being post-mediaeval (Score 1) 226

by njen (#40058435) Attached to: Pakistan Blocks Twitter Over 'Blasphemous' Images
I am not confusing anything.

You talk of "maybe this", or "maybe that", but until there is proof of evidence for what ever you want to assert is true, then it is not, no belief required.

It is not up to the person to prove something is untrue, it is up to the person to prove something is true.

(1) Never draw what you can copy. (2) Never copy what you can trace. (3) Never trace what you can cut out and paste down.

Working...