Comments for ZackFord Blogs

Comment on Why Is It “Disrespectful” and “Offensive” To Challenge Religious Beliefs? by ZackFord

ZackFord — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 04:06:43 +0000

I’m sorry, Shannon, but that’s absolute bullocks.

I don’t believe in time. I understand that time passes and I understand that we use human-made clocks to measure time based on the rate that the Earth rotates, which obviously reflects how humans most easily observe time (day<->night).

It’s much the same as the way that man created religion to try to answer questions that are unanswerable and to use those “answers” to control people and amass power.

Comment on Why Is It “Disrespectful” and “Offensive” To Challenge Religious Beliefs? by Shannon

Shannon — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 03:38:13 +0000

The study to which you are referring is merely a meta-analysis, which is a synthesis of research or a literature review. The authors of this meta-analysis did no statistical calculations of their own but used data points from other research studies to support their hypothesis. If you really want to be heard by the people you oppose you cannot simply deny their reality. I use the term reality loosely as I understand that you do not see the world in the way those with religious beliefs do. Start from a common ground. In what ways does your thinking border on belief? You believe in time, yet it does not exist. When you see the clock and it reads three, do you not believe it’s three o’clock. It’s only a man made phenomenon to control the environment.

Comment on Hometown Newspaper: Proud of Me, Not Proud I’m Gay by Oh please

Oh please — Tue, 09 Mar 2010 20:16:55 +0000

I have to agree with everyone who disagrees with you. While your company may have thought it would be nice to include information on you, the newspaper’s agenda was obviously not the same. Jumping to the conclusion that it was obviously because you are gay is pretty narrow minded, I must say. The newspaper cut it down to the bare minmum, gave the facts, and left it at that. You don’t know their space requirements. You keep harping on about the size of the picture, but what it comes down to is that they just wanted to give the FACTS and didn’t care about your life story – that was the tone the newspaper was going for. If you don’t like it, start your own newspaper.

Comment on Why Is It “Disrespectful” and “Offensive” To Challenge Religious Beliefs? by ZackFord

ZackFord — Tue, 09 Mar 2010 07:20:01 +0000

Well, drunkenness can be explained. My point isn’t that people don’t experience altered consciousness for various reasons in various ways, just that when they do, there is nothing to substantiate anything “spiritual,” other-worldly, or of a higher power about that experience.

Comment on Why Is It “Disrespectful” and “Offensive” To Challenge Religious Beliefs? by John Bisset

John Bisset — Tue, 09 Mar 2010 07:05:33 +0000

Just to clarify your comment Zack - that altered consciousness exists is an unfounded assumption and that the context of a particular altered state of consciousness should not be considered as having anything to do with it? For example, that the altered consciousness called drunkenness was not necessarily caused by the alcohol you just drank?

Comment on Religion Motivates Racism: The Supporting Research by Alan E.

Alan E. — Mon, 08 Mar 2010 22:48:17 +0000

I find that a lot of religiously “open-minded” people like to say that their god is a “She.” I have felt that this is the same where mentioned above that “religious figures are constructed in believers’ own images“. Feminist-oriented religious types like to try and say that god could be a she, but they assert just as strongly that they are right with the female model as those with the male model. It is rare that you find the argument that it doesn’t matter because: 1) your god doesn’t procreate, he just created 2)where is the proof that your god is either male or female and 3) it doesn’t matter anyways because there isn’t a god (ok this one is a common argument).

Comment on Why Is It “Disrespectful” and “Offensive” To Challenge Religious Beliefs? by ZackFord

ZackFord — Mon, 08 Mar 2010 08:40:18 +0000

Thanks for your comment, John, but I have to point out that the mere assumption that “spiritual experiences” exist is unfounded. Buying into ideas of post hoc, ergo propter hoc is very short-sighted, as is allowing subjective testimonials in hegemonic contexts to serve as “evidence enough.”

Comment on Why Is It “Disrespectful” and “Offensive” To Challenge Religious Beliefs? by John Bisset

John Bisset — Mon, 08 Mar 2010 05:02:23 +0000

Belief in a particular religious system, with no subjective proof by spiritual experience, is very strange indeed and probably the result of cultural brainwashing. But what if one stumbles into a profound spiritual experience and then discovers that the experience, and the conditions that preceded it, are in accord with Christianity?

The standard of behaviour expected of believers was never meant to be foisted onto the public at large. There are those ‘within’ and those ‘without’ (1 Corinthians 5:12-13 AV) If you are an atheist then you are ‘without’ and should not feel in the least obligated to the Christian ideal of behaviour. And shame on any who call themselves Christians and don’t know that.

Comment on Chatroulette: My First Spin by Buffy

Buffy — Sun, 07 Mar 2010 00:17:56 +0000

I’m not at all surprised by the reactions you got. People are complete jerks to LGBT people, particularly when they can do it anonymously.

Want to try another experiment? Don a Christian T-shirt or obvious cross/crucifix. See what reactions you get from people then. It would be interesting to note the difference.

Comment on A Reminder of Why The Catholic Church Sucks by ZackFord

ZackFord — Fri, 05 Mar 2010 19:09:58 +0000

Haha, I got that one! You must’ve missed it.