Slashdot Mirror
Search
Search the archive with full-text matching across story titles, bodies,
and comments. Phrases are quoted; or, -word,
and parentheses behave as in a web search. Queries must be at least
3 characters.
Search the archive with full-text matching across story titles, bodies,
and comments. Phrases are quoted; or, -word,
and parentheses behave as in a web search. Queries must be at least
3 characters.
"... but wait unti another country wants do do tests like that!"
You mean a godless terrorist nation ?
In high school I spent about a three years working in fast food and it made a distinct impression on me. I worked at Popeye's, then McDonalds, and finally Chick-Fil-A and the only one of the three I'll go anywhere near now is Chick-Fil-A.
The one I worked in was fanatically spotless. I don't know if it's all of them but a great many are owned by Uber-Christian franchise owners who are crazy about the clean and the lord. I didn't fit in with the majority of the crew there being a godless heathen and all but I'll give them points for being obsessively clean.
I don't even want to think about, much less mention what I saw at Popeye's and McDonalds. I've tried hard to black those months out of my mind.
Maybe if I said "godless communists" my sarcasm would have been a little more obvious. I'll keep that in mind for next time.
even moral support all count as "involvement"
Yeah. Communism is the same way. If you support welfare or subsidized housing for the elderly then you are supporting the communist regime. The Reds are trying to kill every one of us, because they are jealous of, and hate our freedom. If your parents or spouse or friends support communism, then you are guilty of supporting the evil empire by not informing the house un-American activities committee. If you aren't one of us, then you are part of the cancer that is infecting our nation. Those damn, evil, godless commies are trying to kill us all. The Russians would love to stomp on the heads of every free American baby and squish their brains....what? Oh we're against the Muslims now? Sorry, I have not been keeping up. I'll start over.
If you support anti-globalism or free speech and rights for "suspected" terrorists then you are supporting the terrorist regime. The Muslim fanatics are trying to kill every one of us, because they are jealous of, and hate our freedom. If your parents or spouse or friends support Islam, then you are guilty of supporting the evil empire by not informing the republican party and department of Homeland Defense. If you aren't one of us, then you are part of the cancer that is infecting our nation. Those damn, evil, godless terrorists are trying to kill us all....
Because, by definition, any Christian is a sinner and does not become perfect until after they are dead. Therefore they still do things wrong like hate people. Hating other religions however would be perfectly right as they are offensive to God, constituting a lie about him and dangerous to people, as they mislead them about how to be saved.
Most Christians I know are teachers, doctors, lawyers, scientists, mathematicians and engineers, in both Oxford and Northern Ireland. No problems with science. That includes a number of 6-day creationsists. They have no problem with science at all. There's nothing about Christianity that demands or encoruaged a hatred of science. In fact, it encourages an examination of the physical world as it says it is ordered and by looking at God's creation, we can give him glorify for it.
Oh and it's history, not science, that provides the evidence for the Bible. You'd turn to a historian, not a physicist to find out what Julius Caesar did, wouldn't you?
Before, during and after my university education, I was quite aware that I myself was evil and godless prior to God intervening and that I should love everyone else in the same situation. The best way to do that is to show theme the way out, so that they can be saved.
Had to get that out. I live in KY.
Yer can't do them acry-nims with all that packerstani writing, its just a load of squiggles, kinda like them Eye-giptyan hiroglyphicals. Anyways, if English was good enough fer our Lord and saviour, it's too darn good for them godless towelheads.
Uh... If you think American policy is actually christian fundamentalist to any significant degree, I suggest you never, ever even visit another country, as we are quite definitely the most godless heathens on the face of the planet :)
I hope Bill Gates crushes these godless communists like a bug.
Open source. Bad smelling hippies, command line interfaces, slashdot... the very worst of the computer world.
---
Please stop the mindless moderation!!!
I hope Bill Gates crushes this godless communist like a bug.
Open source. Bad smelling hippies, command line interface, slashdot... the very worst of the computer world.
For the record, I myself am one of those Godless liberals GWB dislikes so much, but I do recognise that people have a right to their history and have a right not to have the names of their sacred objects abused. And Zion is a name of deep resonance in our culture, whether it is part of the demand for a Jewish homeland or whether it is referred to in Milton or the Requiem Mass. Nowadays, we are just getting to be culturally sensitive enough not to use the word Mecca out of context, and I doubt if the makers of the Matrix would have been stupid enough to do that. Or that they would have called their holdout The Vatican. Or Canterbury Cathedral. Or...I hope you get my drift.
But then, the people who made the film obviously don't even know what Matrix actually means. Goodbye Western culture, it was nice having you.
Welcome to the godless society. Without God, orginal sin, accountability to the creator, we have no basis for morality except what is the desire of the human kind and what we are willing to tolerate.
Civilization began long before Christianity. The desire of humankind, and what a society is willing to tolerate, is a fully sufficient basis for morality.
When you catch yourself being rude, do you stop because you are pissing off other people, or because you are pissing off God? Do you mow your lawn on a regular basis to be considerate towards your neighbors, or to live in accordance with that one Bible verse about mowing lawns? Society's expectations are enough to curb your behavior in those, minor, things.
But what about something more serious, like speeding? Maybe God cares about speeding, maybe he doesn't. But the cops do. And, when you don't speed, you are worrying about the cops, not God. The cops are enforcing a law passed in accordance with the will of the people. Now, of course, the people in general don't care quite so much, but the law remains from inertia. But the point is, society provided a basis for that particular bit of morality.
Now, off-hand, I can't think of anything more serious than speeding, that God doesn't care about but society does. But doesn't it stand to reason that society's punishment for more serious things would scale up, enough to discourage the behavior? So you see, God isn't necessary for a moral standard.
Welcome to the godless society. Without God, orginal sin, accountability to the creator, we have no basis for morality except what is the deire of the human kind and what we are willing to tolerate.
If we were to even allow the possibility for God to exist, then we put ourselves intoa realm where we are unconfortable with the idea that our actions have implications beyond the mechanical.
If it is your contention that city dwellers should subsidize land consuming industrial farms that burn fuel and generate waste in order to buy more subsidies, it truly is time for NYC to declare independence. We've got ports - I'll happily rely on imported food to be done with the rest of this nation. We've got the largest intelligence and civillian police force in the nation. We've got all the capital generation we need. The money we'd stop exporting to fools like you would be more than enough to cover the rest.
Long thrive the Godless Heathen's Republic of NYC!
Want to bomb us? That already happened, and is being used as an excuse for the last few years of insanity, funded with our money.
Nearly snarfed my tea :-)
I definitely want this on a t-shirt...
T: Time since Christmas
Well, as an observant Jew, I suppose I'll need to re-calculate this using a religious-orientation-appropriate substitute.
Any others of the tribe lurking? If so, any suggestions? Maybe Tisha b'Av?
Those of other religious persuasions, feel free to chime in with your own sectarian-oriented suggestions as well.
And, I guess this gets the atheists completely off the hook...enjoy your Monday, you Godless unbelievers!
Sorry, I heard of that one from Slashdot, should have known better and checked first. Now corrected, and I blame my godless Canadian education system for not teaching more American president quotes.
It's an interesting statement because at first glance the implication might be that the speaker is referring to him/herself, but that's not what it really means. Replacing "you" with "one" works better but doesn't have the same impact on the reader.
Just another try at a godless heaven-on-earth.
None of the statements made were sexist, you simply happened to project a sexist agenda onto them which may have been there originally and may not.
:-)
:-)
If these same statements had been made by a woman would you have leapt to the same conclusions so readily or are you perhaps acting on your own (subconcious) predjudice that a white middle aged male university president must have a sexist agenda to be contemplating such things. IMHO just because a subject may be politically sensitive doesn't mean you should refuse to discuss it - that's going to perpetuate in culture a lack of understanding and any problems surrounding the subject.
Non sexist reasons for studying gender differences and intelect:
*) many applications in psychology - how do we learn about the brain without studying it?
*) curiosity
*) education - if we can discover that there is a gneder difference we can look at why. It may be that the approach taken in education is better suited to one gender than another and this can be rectified or even possible taken advantage of so that both gender groups get better education that is more suited to their needs.
I'd say that the last one is an obvious and very sensible reason for a university executive to be interested in the science behind intelectual gender differences and the aim one of increaced equality rather than exclusion.
It's also evident that the univerisy doesn't have balanced enrolement in maths or science and again it's the role of the university to find out why and if possible address the balance.
As for the lack of evidence being sited, that's consistant with his view that we need to investigate this further, which was what he said - not that he subscribed to any theories, just that they exist.
It's just like I'm familiar with both the creationist theory and Darwinian evolution and can explain them both in laymans terms without expressing a personal view - I could believe in a different theory entirely and it neither makes me a 'godless heathen' or a 'loony christian', just someone who is prepared to discuss a subject openly (which I guess is heresy in some religions so perhaps not the best example).
I personally have experienced big gender differences studying my degree. I studied a joint honours course in cs and psychology - the cs course was 95% male and the psych 95% female. Infact most of the people who were in the minority group for either were on the same joint honours course as me. Interestingly the cs department were working incredibly hard spendinding resources trying to get a more balanced intake (at one point women would be accepted onto the course with lower grades than men even). Also it was virtually impossible for a woman to be kicked of the cs course - the department was more interested in the gender balance.
The psychology department on the other hand appeared almost completley unconcerned, even though of the two departments the psych department is the one you would expect to be able to study such occurances. My guess it's because despite most of the students being female nearly all the lecturers were male and so weren't so keen on having less girls to teach [grin]