Pardon me, boy, is this the lair of great Cthulhu?

Cthulhu Tract.

(h/t to A Division by Zer0)

Bollywood goes terribly, terribly wrong

(h/t to Pharyngula; PZ has his own reasons for admiring the film.)

On bigotry

vjack nails it:

In a nutshell, bigotry involves two ingredients: falsehood and unwarranted generalization. A false statement is applied to the victim of bigotry, often involving condemnation, by the bigot solely for belonging to a particular group. The bigot generalizes from an individual case (e.g., one lazy African American) to an entire group (e.g., African Americans).

The key is that to conclude bigotry you have to find falsehood and fallacy, not merely lack of ethical justification, as Ryder asserts in his labeling of speciesism as bigotry.

Cectic on tolerance

Cectic on tolerance

"Sophisticated" religion

The Celtic Chimp's take on sophisticated religion:

So what exactly is the [religious] view that is so sophisticated and advanced?

No idea. I have not a clue. What it took me a while to realize was that the theists themselves don’t have a clue either. They will happily tell you what they don’t believe. They will discuss all day what is wrong with the fundamentalist approach or the Atheist position but if you ask them what they actually believe themselves, you get nothing. You generally get a whole lot of nothing containing lots of big words, flowery metaphors and hippy sounding pseudo-profundity.

Dr. Horrible

Dr. Horrible's Sing-Along Blog, a musical melodrama in three acts.

Today's reading

The LA Times raises their editorial standards a notch, joining the ranks of Fox News and ABC. [Update: I stand corrected; he really did give her The Finger]

Sara at Orcinus argues persuasively that the FLDS women really are being brainwashed, i.e. coerced.

My friend Kelly is having a baby! I hope she's had enough sex and sleep.

Ben Stein courageously defends a controversial alternative to mainstream "scientific" dogma. [h/t to the atheist blogosphere]

There's a new Web 2.0 hangout for atheists.

Jonathan Yeo has created an interesting portrait of George W. Bush. The detail views are NSFW.

Russell Blackford defends Expelled for using John Lennon's Imagine, calling it fair use.

Carnival of the Godless

The 87th Carnival of the Godless is up at Ironwolf.

Today's Reading

Everyone's talking about poor Eliot Spitzer.

The Apostate on The Silly Spitzer and Ph.D.’d Porn Models

The Rude Pundit discusses lessons learned and the religious right's reaction to the scandal.

Jon Swift thinks that Spitzer could save himself by standing up for the rights of whoremonger-Americans.

James F. Elliott gives us the definitive name for the scandal: Spitznotswallowsgate.

[Personally, I don't see what all the fuss is about. I'm shocked, shocked! to learn of hypocrisy in politics. Give me a break. If a Democrat does it, it's a major scandal and he's busted down to janitor. If a Republican or religious leader does it, everyone yawns and the guy keeps his job.]

In other news...

Badtux the Snarky Penguin talks about the disconnect between reporting the truth and transcribing the statements of those in power.

Greta Christina discusses the positive moral message of American Pie.

Chuck Shepherd reports Pope Ratzo's problems canonizing Padre Pio.

Geoff Arnold notes Mukasey's Mikado legal theories.

Today's reading

James F. Elliott on Damned intransigence in anti "New Atheist" discourse.

The College Callgirl was Hot for Jesus. (h/t to Friendly Atheist)

Mike the Mad Biologist quotes Schuelbusch on why (contra Goldberg) FDR wasn't a fascist.

Learning from the Cultural Conservatives

Sara Robinson's excellent series on the Cultural Conservative movement is a must-read.

Part I: Messing With Their Minds

Every facet of our looming disaster was dictated by bankrupt conservative ideas; yet our very ability to visualize fresh alternatives has been constricted by the frames they deliberately laid around our language and discourse. Most of the country finds it hard to even contemplate or discuss our predicaments in anything but conservative terms. It's clear they've done more than merely mess up our country; they've also, quite intentionally, messed with our minds.

Part II: Talking Up The Worldview

[Conservatives] understood from the start that their ideas (which, frankly, don't stand up nearly as well in the face of clear rationality) would need to be aggressively promoted and sold, using emotional appeals that went to the heart of human beings' deepest desires and motivations. People don't commit their time, energy, and fortunes to a movement because it's all so logical and sensible. They join up because they've taken the movement's worldview deep into their hindbrains as their basic model of reality, and made an emotional connection to the ineffable feelings the movement deliberately stimulated -- in this case, fear, hate, and xenophobia as well as solidarity, reverence, hope, and security. In this model, the ideas only exist to provide a way to rationalize and express the deeper feelings the movement has already activated through other appeals.

Liberals operate from a position of strength on the battlefield of ideas -- and this may be why we consistently overvalue reason and undervalue emotional appeals. Our ideas do have a strong intellectual appeal. But we tend to forget that they also have a far healthier emotional appeal, since we don't have to resort to stimulating fear and hate to get people to buy into them. Still, we've been notoriously terrible at stirring people's more positive and hopeful emotions, and getting them to resonate on a soul-deep level with the values that define our worldview. Clearly, we could stand to learn a thing or two from the conservatives about how they did this.

Part III is due on Monday (presumably 10 Mar 08).

(h/t to Orcinus)

Only in America

If you're not reading Only in America every day, you're missing out on Himself's trenchant and thorough summary of the news showing the hand-in-hand march of Islam and Western civilization towards violent totalitarianism, with the United States in the lead and Britain not far behind.

Carnival of the Godless

The latest dirty version of the Carnival of the Godless is available at Greta Christina's blog. She also posts a clean version. The dirty version is better.

Today's reading

Jon Swift worries (hopes?) that Obama supporters will be disappointed when it turns out that Obama does not actually have supernatural powers. Sara, however, is not worried: Obama's campaign lacks most of the markers of actual cultism. [Obama supporters are just excited at having someone other than a stiff as the Democratic nominee. Besides, as Jon Swift reminds us, the election will be decided not by thoughtful, intelligent people who have carefully considered the issues, but by Scared High-strung Easily-manipulated Egocentric Pinheads. Ain't democracy wonderful?]

Sara further rebuts the Obama won't be Clintonized idiocy.

The Stupid Evil Bastard points us to the Atheist who sees an image of the Big Bang in a piece of toast. [mirror]

The magnificence of Plognark's commentary rises to that of his art when he complains The Stupid, It Burns (like the heat of a thousand suns).

I'm turning the Religious Idiots meme over to arthurvandelay.

In closing, PZ Myers highlights this video showing how we can further intelligent, thoughtful discourse with those unhappy with scientific knowledge.

Today's reading

Techskeptic introduces the concept of Fractal Wrongness.

PhysioProf gently chides Colin Powell.

James likens religious thought to intellectual dodgeball and observes that

The unavoidable result is that religion becomes little more than a choice, subject to the same social, cultural, historical, and economic pressures as any other. It ceases to have truth-value in any objective sense and must be relegated to whence it came: the realm of the socially political.

Jen Sorensen shares my disdain for the present crop of moderate conservative Democratic candidates.

Tim Kreider shares his horrible, horrible thoughts.

No, the Ku Klux Klan has not endorsed Barack Obama.

The Democratic Senate shows some spine on civil liberties. Well, if by "spine" you mean "craven cowardice".

Dave Johnson thinks the right is exploiting the Clinton vs. Obama wars to drive a wedge in the Democratic primary. (h/t to skippy)

I agree with PZ Myers: Threaten to kill us, and we'll mock your god.

ronbrown locates the Objective Moral Standard. Heh. Indeed.

A week from tomorrow, Matt Taibbi will excoriate the Democratic Chicken Doves for sacrificing an end to the war in Iraq for at best temporary and at worst illusory partisan advantage. (h/t to Mike the Mad Biologist)

Disgusted Beyond Belief justifies the million dollar lawsuit. Spot on, DBB.

Today's reading

The Apostate considers class privilege. She's also recently become eligible for American citizenship.

According to the barmaid wisdom starts with knowing that you don't know.

Bush Prays, Jesus Pukes at the Rude Pundit.

Jon Swift hopes crypto-socialist John McCain can be stopped.

PhysioProf criticizes the myth that Obama will be immune to right-wing smear propaganda.

There's been a lot of good stuff at Orcinus lately. Sara has a two-part (so far) series on crazy dangerous extremist groups (most of them, quelle suprise, religious). Dave continues to hammer home the notion that if conservatives don't want to be called fascists, they shouldn't act like fascists.

James F. Elliott reports that some Orthodox Jews appeared to be annoyed that they've been been left out of the batshit crazy religious nutjob community. It's not a sin to beat up defenseless women, it's a sin to beat up defenseless women for the wrong imaginary friend.

Himself shows us everything we need to know about Ann Coulter.

Geoff Arnold efficiently demolishes mystical mumbo-jumbo and philosophical bullshit about consciousness dualism and "qualia".

Daniel Brooks attends an (un)Intelligent Design conference and demolishes their cargo-cult pseudoscience in gory detail (via Pharyngula).

More later.

Today's reading

Ted Rall illustrates metaphysical differences between Obama and Clinton.

Jesus and Mo discuss Islamic human rights.

I think Scott Meyer and I share a few of the same critics.

Jen Sorensen puts a new spin on Two Americas.

Tim Kreider offers a novel economic stimulus package.

Don Asmussen reveals some of the more obscure effects of the looming economic depression.

The Apostate admires iconoclastic rule-breakers. Quelle suprise.

The Rude Pundit descends into horse-race campaign reporting. I think he's mistaken and misguided.

Shalini Sehkar is still MIA.

James eviscerates theistard Edward T. Oakes anti-atheist bullshit and Oakes' inability to read or comprehend simple declarative sentences.

I'll be posting later on Geoff Arnold's inquiry into the ethics of belief and persuasion, responding to Mark Rowland's article.

Mike the Mad Biologist connects health care and wages. I may write on this topic myself, as time permits.

Today's reading

The Rude Pundit thinks Hillary Clinton is too vulnerable to right-wing propaganda. I think he's mistaken; as Orcinus reports, Obama is just as vulnerable. (David Brin makes the same mistake.)

James has a funny picture.

Himself reports on Christian "Zionism" (supporting Israel for its part it will play in the Christian Armageddon) and raises suspicions about four internet cable outages in the Middle East: Once is happenstance, twice is coincidence, thrice is conspiracy.

Kelly takes Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid to task.

Chuck gives us our Tuesday dose of weirdness including Female Muslim doctors who refuse to wash their hands past their wrists.

PZ justifies calling ignorant liars "ignorant"; respect for your opponent is an effective debating tactic only if your opponent is arguing in good faith, which Christians in general rarely do, and cretinists never do.

See the next thrilling episode of God Man and Human Man at Tom the Dancing Bug.

The latest Carnival of the Godless is up. Your humble blogger is, sadly, not represented.

Read DagoodS on why God wants exactly what you want.

Uncle Ghastly is the source for today's motto on the header.

The Political Crank denounces our drug-like addiction to easy credit. The rich are tied at the ankle to the middle class, who are tied to the working class, who are tied to the welfare class. Throw one of them over the side of the boat, and the rest will soon follow.

The Sacred Slut mourns her friend; atheist and philosophical blogger Infidelus Maximus has died.

If you're frustrated at work Micah Cowan has the video for you.

PhysioProf has kind words to say about Atrios, if by "kind words" you mean stopping short of calling Atrios a self-important scrotum-licking slacker. Oh wait, he doesn't stop short. (Personally, I found both Atrios and Kos completely unreadable long before they turned out to be assholes.)

Best of the Blogosphere

Vatican Condemns Harry Potter: I won't spoil Jared's excellent quip. Go read it for yourself.

Order and chaos in chess:

Is chess ultimately governed by fixed rules and logic, or is it just a ‘random’ game? A comparison with science. ...

Sure, we have many practical rules of thumb (”put rooks on an open file, develop your pieces, etc.”) but because they don’t always work, they’re not real formulas, like E=mc^2 or V=(4/3)*pi*(r^3). Are such formulas in principe possible in chess, even though they may look entirely different? Is chess ultimately a game of order, or a game of chaos? What do you believe?

Best of the atheosphere

Getting In Touch with Your Inner Fish:

Take the body plan of a fish, dress it up to be a mammal, then tweak and twist that mammal until it walks on two legs, talks, thinks, and has superfine control of its fingers—and you have a recipe for problems. We can dress up a fish only so much without paying a price. In a perfectly designed world—one with no history—we would not have to suffer everything from hemorrhoids to cancer.

What's the Harm in a Little Woo?

I'll say this right upfront: While I do think woo is harmful, I certainly don't think it's as harmful as mainstream religion. Mostly because it's not as powerful. It's not as widespread, as wealthy, as symbiotically intertwined with governments -- either subtly or overtly -- as, say, The Big Three, Christianity and Judaism and Islam. So please don't come back at me in the comments with, "How can you compare Wicca to Christianity?" I'm not. There is a difference of degree, and it's a big one.

But the fact that it's not as harmful doesn't mean it's not harmful at all.

Jesus and Mo:

Can you really justify such faith in yourself?