Tragic death. You guys and your "natural selection ftw", have some compassion for once.
- Index »
- Community »
- Debate and Serious Talk »
- Richard Dawkins reaches through book to kill a veteran.
Christ Illusion*TheAussieReaper wrote:
No, it was The God Delusion and Slayer.KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
Maybe it was Marilyn Manson, Ozzie Osbourne, GTAIV and The God Delusion
He listened to their album God Illusion.
It was a play on words.Hurricane2k9 wrote:
Christ Illusion*TheAussieReaper wrote:
No, it was The God Delusion and Slayer.KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
Maybe it was Marilyn Manson, Ozzie Osbourne, GTAIV and The God Delusion
He listened to their album God Illusion.
Us liberals show compassion by giving your money to people who don't deserve it. We care about the living, not the dead.Stingray24 wrote:
Tragic death. You guys and your "natural selection ftw", have some compassion for once.
My argument here revolves around what is appropriate for teaching in a science class vice a theology class.PureFodder wrote:
Plenty of intelligent design versions have an intelligent designer actively controlling the evolution of life, from the new Earth types to those who believe that someone/thing actively controls how evolution works. Obviously we don't know what this guys exact beliefs were, but there are plenty of beliefs that go against scientific understanding fundamental to understanding biology. Some however do believe that God made the very first bit of life and then let it run it's own course, which would actually fit in with any biology arguments.FEOS wrote:
They meet (and diverge) at the beginning of life. Everything after that is essentially identical. They both adhere to the concept that lifeforms change (evolve) over time. One says it is happenstance, the other that it is purposeful. Either way, the science of evolution beyond the creation of life is exactly the same.TheAussieReaper wrote:
It's both.
Intelligent design pushes the idea in a designer. Evolution does not.
Blind watchmaker theory.
Thus, it is a theological debate, not a scientific one--and has no place in a biology class.
Without knowing more about the situation we can't really fault the lecturer.
I fault the lecturer for assigning that book as part of his syllabus. It's not appropriate for a biology class. Period. Can't make it appropriate, regardless of the rationale. It just isn't.
However--(Obama voice) "Let me be clear"--that doesn't mean that the lecturer is responsible in any way for this kid's death.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
Or perhaps it was intended to make one wonder if his military service played a role in his suicide?oug wrote:
btw notice how the fact that he was a veteran comes into play in the OP - to suggest that he was no ordinary puny gay civilian.
At least that's how I read it.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
Braddock wrote:
Fuck him, he was a weak minded idiot sheep who couldn't handle reality. Darwinism in action baby.
Perhaps if he hadn't been brainwashed into adopting the psychological crutch that is Christianity as a mindset for life he might have been tough enough to handle the shit life throws at you.
Not really.FEOS wrote:
Intelligent design vs evolution is a theological point, not a biological point.
If a biology class can show evolution is a plausible theory its a biology issue and appropriate for a biology class.
Still waiting for a theology class to show anything is plausible.
Really kids shouldn't be exposed to religion, when they are adults they can make up their own mind, but brainwashing kids with your dogma shouldn't be allowed.
Last edited by Dilbert_X (2009-02-10 05:07:41)
Fuck Israel
I agree, but you'd have to close Jewish, Christian, Muslim etc schools.Dilbert_X wrote:
Really kids shouldn't be exposed to religion, when they are adults they can make up their own mind, but brainwashing kids with your dogma shouldn't be allowed.
FEOS wrote:
My argument here revolves around what is appropriate for teaching in a science class vice a theology class.PureFodder wrote:
Plenty of intelligent design versions have an intelligent designer actively controlling the evolution of life, from the new Earth types to those who believe that someone/thing actively controls how evolution works. Obviously we don't know what this guys exact beliefs were, but there are plenty of beliefs that go against scientific understanding fundamental to understanding biology. Some however do believe that God made the very first bit of life and then let it run it's own course, which would actually fit in with any biology arguments.FEOS wrote:
They meet (and diverge) at the beginning of life. Everything after that is essentially identical. They both adhere to the concept that lifeforms change (evolve) over time. One says it is happenstance, the other that it is purposeful. Either way, the science of evolution beyond the creation of life is exactly the same.
Thus, it is a theological debate, not a scientific one--and has no place in a biology class.
Without knowing more about the situation we can't really fault the lecturer.
I fault the lecturer for assigning that book as part of his syllabus. It's not appropriate for a biology class. Period. Can't make it appropriate, regardless of the rationale. It just isn't.
However--(Obama voice) "Let me be clear"--that doesn't mean that the lecturer is responsible in any way for this kid's death.
It's very possible that the lecturer just challenged him to read it and he was totally free to ignore the challenge.This professor either assigned him to read or challenged him to read a book
I haven't seen anything that suggested that the book was taught in the class.
So let me sum this up..
Kid kills himself, father finds book in kids room -> Logical conclusion book (author) was cause of kids death.
Seriously people..... THIS IS JUST PURE AN UTTER BULLSHIT!!!
Its about as relevant as saying, girl gets raped, father finds lingerie in girls room, lingerie designers caused the rape. It's completely stupid.
Kid kills himself, father finds book in kids room -> Logical conclusion book (author) was cause of kids death.
Seriously people..... THIS IS JUST PURE AN UTTER BULLSHIT!!!
Its about as relevant as saying, girl gets raped, father finds lingerie in girls room, lingerie designers caused the rape. It's completely stupid.
He was a christian, a believer and think Intelligent design is true. The book is against a god so expect it to have a lot of stuff that would disprove god.DrunkFace wrote:
So let me sum this up..
Kid kills himself, father finds book in kids room -> Logical conclusion book (author) was cause of kids death.
Seriously people..... THIS IS JUST PURE AN UTTER BULLSHIT!!!
Its about as relevant as saying, girl gets raped, father finds lingerie in girls room, lingerie designers caused the rape. It's completely stupid.
Over the months he lose faith in god and then kill himself.
You don't think the book has something in common in that? Sure the book didn't kill him fully but I'm sure it affected him quite much for him to be able to pull the trigger.
Last edited by Zukabazuka (2009-02-10 06:43:43)
I also begin to wonder that.FEOS wrote:
Or perhaps it was intended to make one wonder if his military service played a role in his suicide?oug wrote:
btw notice how the fact that he was a veteran comes into play in the OP - to suggest that he was no ordinary puny gay civilian.
At least that's how I read it.
Because I'm sure he was wanting to run from it but since God was in his way due to hell but after reading the book he kinda noticed the evidence against him.
Still if he was still alive it would just cause more harm to him due to mental pain.
This website is not known for its compassion... phrases like "let's turn the Middle East into a glass bowl" are more common than expressions of empathy.Stingray24 wrote:
Tragic death. You guys and your "natural selection ftw", have some compassion for once.
The fact of the matter is the kid was troubled but trying to blame atheism for his death is utterly laughable and was always going to invite derision.
Did he blame atheism, or did his dad, or did the writers of the article? It's actually quite important to this.Braddock wrote:
This website is not known for its compassion... phrases like "let's turn the Middle East into a glass bowl" are more common than expressions of empathy.Stingray24 wrote:
Tragic death. You guys and your "natural selection ftw", have some compassion for once.
The fact of the matter is the kid was troubled but trying to blame atheism for his death is utterly laughable and was always going to invite derision.
No I don't, I think people are putting connections between things which just don't exist.Zukabazuka wrote:
He was a christian, a believer and think Intelligent design is true. The book is against a god so expect it to have a lot of stuff that would disprove god.DrunkFace wrote:
So let me sum this up..
Kid kills himself, father finds book in kids room -> Logical conclusion book (author) was cause of kids death.
Seriously people..... THIS IS JUST PURE AN UTTER BULLSHIT!!!
Its about as relevant as saying, girl gets raped, father finds lingerie in girls room, lingerie designers caused the rape. It's completely stupid.
Over the months he lose faith in god and then kill himself.
You don't think the book has something in common in that? Sure the book didn't kill him fully but I'm sure it affected him quite much for him to be able to pull the trigger.
The OP blames atheism, that's what my response was primarily aimed at.DesertFox- wrote:
Did he blame atheism, or did his dad, or did the writers of the article? It's actually quite important to this.Braddock wrote:
This website is not known for its compassion... phrases like "let's turn the Middle East into a glass bowl" are more common than expressions of empathy.Stingray24 wrote:
Tragic death. You guys and your "natural selection ftw", have some compassion for once.
The fact of the matter is the kid was troubled but trying to blame atheism for his death is utterly laughable and was always going to invite derision.
I believe the father was attempting to blame Dawkins' book as a specific causative factor in his son's suicide.
And nowhere did I say that evolution shouldn't be taught in biology class. The compare/contrast between evolutionary theory and intelligent design shouldn't.Dilbert_X wrote:
Braddock wrote:
Fuck him, he was a weak minded idiot sheep who couldn't handle reality. Darwinism in action baby.
Perhaps if he hadn't been brainwashed into adopting the psychological crutch that is Christianity as a mindset for life he might have been tough enough to handle the shit life throws at you.Not really.FEOS wrote:
Intelligent design vs evolution is a theological point, not a biological point.
If a biology class can show evolution is a plausible theory its a biology issue and appropriate for a biology class.
Still waiting for a theology class to show anything is plausible.
Really kids shouldn't be exposed to religion, when they are adults they can make up their own mind, but brainwashing kids with your dogma shouldn't be allowed.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
No, you haven't. It has been suggested that the professor either challenged him to read the book or assigned it. I was addressing the "assignment" part. However, not really sure it's appropriate--in the context of the course--that "challenging" the student(s) to read a book like that is appropriate either. Outside of the classroom, it's fine.PureFodder wrote:
FEOS wrote:
My argument here revolves around what is appropriate for teaching in a science class vice a theology class.PureFodder wrote:
Plenty of intelligent design versions have an intelligent designer actively controlling the evolution of life, from the new Earth types to those who believe that someone/thing actively controls how evolution works. Obviously we don't know what this guys exact beliefs were, but there are plenty of beliefs that go against scientific understanding fundamental to understanding biology. Some however do believe that God made the very first bit of life and then let it run it's own course, which would actually fit in with any biology arguments.
Without knowing more about the situation we can't really fault the lecturer.
I fault the lecturer for assigning that book as part of his syllabus. It's not appropriate for a biology class. Period. Can't make it appropriate, regardless of the rationale. It just isn't.
However--(Obama voice) "Let me be clear"--that doesn't mean that the lecturer is responsible in any way for this kid's death.It's very possible that the lecturer just challenged him to read it and he was totally free to ignore the challenge.This professor either assigned him to read or challenged him to read a book
I haven't seen anything that suggested that the book was taught in the class.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
Fine with me.Aussiereaper wrote:
I agree, but you'd have to close Jewish, Christian, Muslim etc schools.
Fuck Israel
I can tell ya one thing about the kid...he never met my beautiful friend mary jane. A few whacks and he woulda been all set. a shame really.
Insane thread title.
Sounds like an MSNBC headline, tbh.Freke1 wrote:
Insane thread title.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
- Index »
- Community »
- Debate and Serious Talk »
- Richard Dawkins reaches through book to kill a veteran.