Archived blog post

Some good news

Posted by Tim on Thursday, January 10, 2008 | Permalink

It seems that the UK's "ancient, discriminatory, unnecessary, illiberal and non-human rights compliant" blasphemy laws - which are generally ignored anyway - are likely to be abolished [BBC News story].

Although certain religious groups will be seriously pissed off by this, it seems that many high profile Christians are in favour of the law being abolished. Lib Dem MP Evan Harris points out the obvious:
"The Almighty does not really need the protection of these ridiculous laws and that's why large numbers of people of a religious perspective share the view that these offences need to be abolished".

Comments [ hide comments ]
Religion in civilized nations is slowly going extinct. It may take a couple more generations, but sooner rather than later, it will be no more than a quaint notion in Europe.

The USA, as a religious backwater, proves itself to be the exception. We will, I fear, be left behind as a nation of idiots.
James Smith, 23.01.2008, 4:06pm #
That Evan Harris quote reminds of Waynes World.

"Go then!"

"I will!"

"Go then!"

Alan, 03.02.2008, 12:00pm #
This Site Is Great!!
Marcus Edell, 20.03.2008, 9:41pm #
"It has often been claimed, moreover, that these new and momentous findings have at last unearthed the true mechanism of evolution, and that we are presently on the brink of discovering precisely how macroevolution has come about.

However, the truth of the matter is very much the opposite: now that the actual physical structure of what might be termed the biochemical mainstays of life has come into view, scientists are finding ? frequently to their dismay that the evolutionist thesis has become more stringently unthinkable than ever before.

On the molecular level, these separations, and this hierarchic order stand out with a mathematical precision which once and for all silences dissent.

On the fundamental level it becomes a rigorously demonstrable fact that there are no transitional types, and that the so called missing links are indeed non-existent."
anonymous, 23.03.2008, 12:19pm #
NOTE: chunks of text copied and pasted from unnamed sources by anonymous commenters on posts about other subjects are likely to be deleted.
Tim, 23.03.2008, 2:21pm #
Scared of the truth ?
My main criticism of Darwinism is that it fails in its initial objective, which is to explain the origin of species. Now, let me explain exactly what I mean by that.

I mean it fails to explain the emergence of organisms, the specific forms during evolution like algae and ferns and flowering plants, corals, starfish, crabs, fish, birds.

Darwin turned biology into a historical science, and in Darwinism, species are simply accidents of history, they don't have any inherent nature. They are just 'the way things happened to work out' and there aren't any particular constraints that mean it couldn't have all worked out very differently."
anonymous, 23.03.2008, 9:53pm #
It is absolutely incredible that in 2008 we are still having a debate that has been proven beyond doubt to be in favour of darwinism, and that the 'people' that argue the case pull quote's out of their behinds to support a belief system that is thankfully dead in the developed world.......fact!
Justin Hafey, 26.12.2008, 10:40am #
All religion is is a set of guidelines on how you should live your life.

I belive there could be a god/creator but think all religions should be scrapped. It would save us a lot of unneccassary wars
Rory, 02.01.2009, 2:47pm #
re: scared of the truth

"I mean [Darwinism] fails to explain the emergence of organisms, the specific forms during evolution like algae and ferns and flowering plants, corals, starfish, crabs, fish, birds."

All of the examples you mention fill an evolutionary niche - that is there is a source of energy which they exploit in a unique way to reproduce.

If we were to run the experiment of life again on earth we certainly would not see e.g. fish (as we know them)- but we would very likely see multicelled, swift moving creatures in the oceans breathing the water. Something would evolve to fill the niche is my point, so if you want animals to have an "inherent nature" then perhaps it is the nature of the niche they fill.
felix, 06.02.2009, 12:35pm #
I think that if it was the exact same earth, we would have "fish", that are pretty similar to the current fish that exist. We probably wouldn't, however, have exact species, like salmon, tuna, or trout. They would be slightly different.
Numerous, 07.02.2009, 1:50am #
James Smith-

who would we be the nation of idiots? we are the one nation in the world that began its country determined for everyone to be equal (though of course theres all that racism stuff from back then bla bla bla) and to find religious toleration
rose, 04.05.2010, 5:05pm #
Please see my site and comment.
Aaron, 14.09.2010, 8:00am #

New comments disabled due to spam