These are far from the only ones out there. If only you could be bothered to look.
And just for a bonus, here's a citation (from those same four simple words you can't be bothered typing into Google) that shows racism biasing hiring in the same pervasive, insidious ways sexism does. https://selfuni.wordpress.com/...
Nor do most of the people who profess a belief in God, Allah, or Jehovah. What's your point?
Oh you silly little anonymous coward you. You're not seriously arguing that religions don't think that being religious is morally superior to being atheist? Seriously? I could start quoting chapter and verse from various "holy" books, but I'd wear out the keyboard. And I do have this thing called a life, which is why I won't be bothering with any further replies. (I don't usually feed anon!trolls, but just this once, since I'm having a quiet few minutes for a change...)
And it's perfectly possible to hold a high political office without believing in God. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L... [wikipedia.org]
*dying of laughter* Oh really? Get back to me when there actually IS an atheist US President. FYI, I only had to go 3 entries down your US list to see someone "who was nearly denied his position because of his atheism" (Yes I'm talking about the US, I'm in the US, as I'd be willing to bet that the US has the largest number of Slashdot readers/subscribers.) Name one person who was ever even nearly denied US political, legal or other public office because of their Christianity. And a similar list of "Religionists in politics and law" would be long enough to choke any browser cache: could that be any more of a comprehensive category?
And you and I both know that it is a remarkably small minority of Christians[/Muslims] who are doing anything of the sort.
I see even you don't deny that religious extremism is the motive that drives religious extremists to extreme actions to restrict others' rights - up to and including murder. (Yes I do hold similar opinions of Muslims as I do of Christians: fundamentalists of any religion are all irrational and destructive as each other.) And the lack of impactful, action-backed condemnation of extremists' crimes (as opposed to the bare minimum of meaningless lip-service) by their co-religionists speaks volumes.
BTW, nice attempt to shift the goalposts, little anonymous coward. Since your reading comprehension is obviously so abysmal, I'll spell it out for you. I wasn't talking specifically about the WSJ article; I was replying to the previous poster's question, the one I quoted at the beginning of my answer. Do at least try to keep up!...Aaand that's my annual anon!troll feeding over. *yawns, shrugs and ambles off*
Why is it only religious people who get singled out for so much disdain, simply for expressing something irrational? Billions of people around the world do irrational shit every day, but I don't see you rushing to single them out for ridicule.
That's easy.
Because people who are irrationally afraid of flying don't condemn those who aren't afraid of flying, as somehow being "morally inferior". It is perfectly possible to hold a high political office without being afraid to fly.
People who are irrationally afraid of flying aren't actively working to strip everyone else of the legal right and the physical means to fly. They aren't willing to close down airports or shoot pilots.
Religion is the only type of irrationality that has ever received that much of a free pass.
This isn't surprising, in light of 2008 research that showed that the same blue light dentists use to cure filling material slows the growth of tumors in mice.
Haven't you noticed? Wyverns (mythological term for 2-legged dragons) are all the rage in recent years.
I blame Skyrim: I think that was the first piece of mass media entertainment that started that trend. Then Game of Thrones etc. hopped on the bandwagon (or is that banned-dragon?)
You know what's weird? If this guy existed, why was there NOT ONE SINGLE WORD written about him DURING HIS LIFETIME? Not by the Romans and not by the Jews: two peoples notorious for the extent of their record-keeping? Why all those years and years of total and absolute silence?
I won't even go into the more obvious bullshit like tombs opening and dead walking. As if THAT wouldn't have set a few quills to wagging.
You predict with a very high but NOT 100% amount of confidence that the pitcher will throw. Because, being human, you are not 100% certain, there is always the possibility (tiny but greater than 0%) that the pitcher might drop the ball, die of a heart attack, etc. etc.
You cannot know with 100% absolute certainty that the pitcher will throw.
In any universe where it is possible to know someone MUST do X with 100% absolute certainty, then by definition, there is ZERO possibility that that person will choose to do Y instead.
Slashdot Mirror
Thar she blows! Typo off the starboard bow! Give it the trusty nitpick, er, harpoon...
When no one was looking, Lex Luthor
shook forty quakes. He shook 40 quakes.
That's as many as four tens.
And that's terrible.
Prison?
Gee, I wonder why you didn't just type "resume female name acceptance" into Google. That'll get you a whole slew of citations.
Why didn't you do that utterly trivial task, instead of shooting, er, downmodding the messenger?
It couldn't possibly be because you can't handle the truth? Naaahhh....
Here, silly little AC, since you'd rather go LA LA LA I CAN'T HEAR YOU than type four measly words into Google, have some citations.
http://blogs.scientificamerica...
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/bu...
These are far from the only ones out there. If only you could be bothered to look.
And just for a bonus, here's a citation (from those same four simple words you can't be bothered typing into Google) that shows racism biasing hiring in the same pervasive, insidious ways sexism does.
https://selfuni.wordpress.com/...
Nor do most of the people who profess a belief in God, Allah, or Jehovah. What's your point?
Oh you silly little anonymous coward you. You're not seriously arguing that religions don't think that being religious is morally superior to being atheist? Seriously? I could start quoting chapter and verse from various "holy" books, but I'd wear out the keyboard. And I do have this thing called a life, which is why I won't be bothering with any further replies. (I don't usually feed anon!trolls, but just this once, since I'm having a quiet few minutes for a change...)
And it's perfectly possible to hold a high political office without believing in God. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L... [wikipedia.org]
*dying of laughter* Oh really? Get back to me when there actually IS an atheist US President. FYI, I only had to go 3 entries down your US list to see someone "who was nearly denied his position because of his atheism" (Yes I'm talking about the US, I'm in the US, as I'd be willing to bet that the US has the largest number of Slashdot readers/subscribers.) Name one person who was ever even nearly denied US political, legal or other public office because of their Christianity. And a similar list of "Religionists in politics and law" would be long enough to choke any browser cache: could that be any more of a comprehensive category?
And you and I both know that it is a remarkably small minority of Christians[/Muslims] who are doing anything of the sort.
I see even you don't deny that religious extremism is the motive that drives religious extremists to extreme actions to restrict others' rights - up to and including murder. (Yes I do hold similar opinions of Muslims as I do of Christians: fundamentalists of any religion are all irrational and destructive as each other.) And the lack of impactful, action-backed condemnation of extremists' crimes (as opposed to the bare minimum of meaningless lip-service) by their co-religionists speaks volumes.
BTW, nice attempt to shift the goalposts, little anonymous coward. Since your reading comprehension is obviously so abysmal, I'll spell it out for you. I wasn't talking specifically about the WSJ article; I was replying to the previous poster's question, the one I quoted at the beginning of my answer. Do at least try to keep up! ...Aaand that's my annual anon!troll feeding over. *yawns, shrugs and ambles off*
Why is it only religious people who get singled out for so much disdain, simply for expressing something irrational? Billions of people around the world do irrational shit every day, but I don't see you rushing to single them out for ridicule.
That's easy.
Because people who are irrationally afraid of flying don't condemn those who aren't afraid of flying, as somehow being "morally inferior". It is perfectly possible to hold a high political office without being afraid to fly.
People who are irrationally afraid of flying aren't actively working to strip everyone else of the legal right and the physical means to fly. They aren't willing to close down airports or shoot pilots.
Religion is the only type of irrationality that has ever received that much of a free pass.
This isn't surprising, in light of 2008 research that showed that the same blue light dentists use to cure filling material slows the growth of tumors in mice.
Not again!
BULLSHIT
http://www.businessweek.com/ar...
Exactly.
Otherwise, there'll be a whole new class of assassination: Death-By-Driverless.
I think you mean:
'income inequality is a necessary result of unchecked capitalism'
Force the manufacturer to take them back
Sooo, you mean shovel all the shit back in the baby?
All jokes aside, that'd be about as easy and practical as forcing manufacturers to take back and sustainably recycle used products.
"undisputed skew in the gender of gamers"? Are you really still trying to flog that dead horse?
Too bad for you that the Entertainment Software Association (for one) disputes the hell out of that tired old pile of bull.
FYI, 48% of gamers are female. http://www.theesa.com/facts/ga...
Haven't you noticed? Wyverns (mythological term for 2-legged dragons) are all the rage in recent years.
I blame Skyrim: I think that was the first piece of mass media entertainment that started that trend. Then Game of Thrones etc. hopped on the bandwagon (or is that banned-dragon?)
And yet, even with this painfully obvious attempt to signal that the title was a joke, another AC upscreen still failed to realize that it was a joke.
Obviously, I'm damned if I do, and damned if I don't.*
* Yes, that's another use of irony-as-humor. Nobody faint.
Ahh, wouldn't it be lovely...
I see. According to you, "liberty" = "attempts to pass off blatantly unscientific bullshit as science".
No doubt your other definitions include "war" = "peace", "freedom" = "slavery", and "ignorance" = "strength".
Ironic indeed! I say, well spotted, that AC!
Next thing you know, you'll be noticing sarcasm!
A beautiful victory for intelligence (as opposed to intelligent design (TM)(R)(C))
INB4 endless butthurt from Cretinists, er, Creationists.
You know what's weird? If this guy existed, why was there NOT ONE SINGLE WORD written about him DURING HIS LIFETIME? Not by the Romans and not by the Jews: two peoples notorious for the extent of their record-keeping? Why all those years and years of total and absolute silence?
I won't even go into the more obvious bullshit like tombs opening and dead walking. As if THAT wouldn't have set a few quills to wagging.
Wrong.
You cannot predict with 100% certainty. 99% maybe. But only if you're a LOT more knowledgeable about basketball than you obviously are about logic.
Or are you actually claiming to be omniscient?
*keels over laughing*
*applause* I wish I had mod points. Great references!
Rubbish. If anyone can know with 100% certainty that people will do X, by definition there must be 0% possibility of them choosing to do Y.
Omniscience and free will cannot coexist in the same universe. It's simple probability.
No, you're the one spouting nonsense.
You predict with a very high but NOT 100% amount of confidence that the pitcher will throw. Because, being human, you are not 100% certain, there is always the possibility (tiny but greater than 0%) that the pitcher might drop the ball, die of a heart attack, etc. etc.
You cannot know with 100% absolute certainty that the pitcher will throw.
In any universe where it is possible to know someone MUST do X with 100% absolute certainty, then by definition, there is ZERO possibility that that person will choose to do Y instead.