Quote of the Day: PersonalFailure on the difference between “New Atheists” and theists

From the Mistress of Hell, PF, explaining why the moniker “New Atheism”, and its connotation, is garbage:

"New Atheism"/"New Atheist" refers to atheists speaking their minds, writing books and blog posts, wearing T-shirts and putting stickers on their cars and generally being exactly as open and vocal as Christians are in the US. So, of course, we're "rude", "shrill", "angry", "bitter" awful people who need to shut the fuck up and leave the talking to the Christians. Cuz, you know, privilege.

Bingo. (Added to Memorable Quotes, as usual.)

Unintentionally Ironic Headline of the Day

This is another one of those times where there are just too many cracks to choose from:

(via The Agitator)

Daily Blend: Thursday, April 07, 2011

Glenn Beck

• Japan hit with new 7.1 quake, bringing a (now canceled) tsunami warning.

• Is the Grossmont Union High School District in San Diego, CA illegally censoring a religious student, or punishing him appropriately for being disruptive? Given the context and precedent, I’ll wager it’s not quite as clean a case of “Christian prosecution” as it’s made to sound like.

• Report: Glenn Beck to “transition off” of his Fox News show, which will be replaced by various other shows from his same production company.
  (via @mmfa)

• Awesome: An interactive map of every war ever waged. I don’t even wanna imagine counting them all.
  (via @todayspolitics)

• Media Matters lists The 50 Worst Things Glenn Beck Said On Fox News. Cheery fella, ain’t he.

• The fact that this exists is yet more proof that there is no God.

If you have any story suggestions, feel free to leave them in the comments or send them in.

The “intelligent design” of American secularism

You’d think it would be so easy to understand and uphold.

‘Intelligent Design’ by Matt Wuerker [undated, unsourced]

Isn’t it peculiar how it’s always the side with the almost fetishistic adoration of the Founding Fathers who continually violates the very principles upon which the United States was founded?

(via @todayspolitics)

Daily Blend: Wednesday, April 06, 2011

Bryan Fischer

• Idaho House Republicans decide that pregnancy is no longer the woman’s decision after 20 weeks.
  (via @BreakingNews)

• BP oil rig parent company Transocean reportedly plans to donate its much-controversed 2010 safety bonuses to a memorial oil spill victim fund. If true, then good on them (even if it’s only to cover their asses from further public backlash).
  (via @BreakingNews)

• Incredible, horrifying hi-res photos of the damaged Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant.
  (via The Daily Grail)

• AFA’s Bryan Fischer: Welfare is just the government “subsidiz[ing] poverty” by “offering financial rewards” to Blacks who “rut like rabbits”. Or something. (Update: “[R]ut like rabbits” bit has been scrubbed from Fischer’s post.)

If you have any story suggestions, feel free to leave them in the comments or send them in.

The Daily Mail, hub of rational thought and responsible journalism

Some things just don’t require any further comment:

(via The Daily Grail)

Daily Blend: Tuesday, April 05, 2011

Pictured: MANDATORY

• Virginia proposes regulations preventing adoption agencies from refusing adoptions for same-sex couples. NOM: “Mandatory Gay Adoption”!
  (via Right Wing Watch)

• But how will we recognize the WND as a conservative-Christian rag without the horribly outdated design? (Oh, right, the wingnuttia.)
  (via Right Wing Watch)

• If you don’t participate on the upcoming National Day of Prayer, then D00000M! Or something.
  (via Right Wing Watch)

• Obligatory Moment of Squeee. Mmmm … gritty.
  (via Fark)

If you have any story suggestions, feel free to leave them in the comments or send them in.

Labels mean things [updated]

This is one of those throwaway posts that occur to me in the middle of the idle night, but I thought it was worth sharing. With all the various labels being thrown around (and so often in complete ignorance of their actual connotations), I thought it would be useful to set the record straight on what they actually mean. In addition, many people tend to conflate many of these labels, when they actually denote distinct traits that can be either complementary or contradictory.

So, what does being an <X> really mean? Well, I can’t use anyone else by means of example, so I’ll just use myself and explain why I proclaim to be the numerous labels I assign myself:

Update: 12/01/12 1:50 AM ET – Added the “Atheist Plus” label and made a few minor stylistic edits.

• I am an atheist/non-theist, as I do not believe in any one or more god(s).

• I am an Atheist Plus, as I believe that since religion is detrimental, not only should it be opposed, but we should also strive to rectify the the societal injustices it perpetuates.

• I am anti-religious/anti-theist^*, as I believe that organized religion, and the zealotry that fuels it, can only end up acting as a detrimental force in human society.

• I am an agnostic, as I do not believe in the possibility of anyone possessing true, absolute knowledge regarding the existence of any one or more god(s), and that anyone who claims otherwise is either misleading or deluded.

• I am also an ignostic, as I believe that any attempt(s) at debating the nature or existence of any one or more god(s) is futile in the absence of any coherent definition of said entity(s), and that any given definition that cannot be disproven is logically invalid, and therefore, discredited.

• I am a secularist, as I believe that government and society as a whole are much improved by the absence of institutionalized religion.

• I am a skeptic, as I do not believe in claims that do not have sufficient credible supporting evidence, be it material or logical.

• I am a rationalist, as I do not believe that the metaphysical or supernatural is required, or at all helpful, in determining what is true or not.

• I am a relativist, as I do not believe in any absolutes, and hold that any given thing, be it material or ideological, is better than some and worse than others.

• I am a naturalist, as I believe that everything has to do with the natural, physical, scientifically understandable world.

Daily Blend: Monday, April 04, 2011

Khalia Fitchette

Ten hours of sleep later and I’m still feeling like crap. I hereby decree that sleep is overrated. And that colds are an anti-blogging instrument by the Devil itself.

• PZ Myers speaks his mind about killing and the value of human life. (My take: I do believe in the greater good, and that sometimes, as horrible as it is, killing is absolutely necessary.)

• Inane, victim-blaming column attracts comments from cops who reveal just how clueless so many of them are.
  (via The Agitator)

• One of these does not belong.
  (via @todayspolitics)

• Stephen Colbert sings Rebecca Black’s ‘Friday’ on Jimmy Fallon. That is all.

If you have any story suggestions, feel free to leave them in the comments or send them in.

Daily Blend: Saturday, April 02, 2011

Gov. Jan Brewer (R-AZ)

Gaah, this cold is gonna be the death of me.

• Gov. Jan Brewer (R-AZ) wants to fine childless fatties, smokers and sufferers of “chronic condition[s]”.

• Indiana woman charged with “murder and attempted feticide” for losing her premature baby when she tried to commit suicide. Walking incubators, that’s all they are.
  (via Blag Hag)

• Newark, New Jersey honor student illegally arrested and detained for recording cops in public with her cellphone. Cops illegally delete the video. She’s suing. Sadly, don’t count on her clearing them out like they deserve.
  (via The Agitator)

• Florida Republicans think ‘uterus’ is inappropriate language for children. Why, then, so is ‘penis’, ‘breasts’, and ‘shut up, you pearl-clutching morons’.

• I’ve always wondered about this. Interesting answers. Kinda relieved it isn’t my original assumption.
  (via The Agitator)

• An actual Grammar Nazi. Hee.

If you have any story suggestions, feel free to leave them in the comments or send them in.

Supplemental tags: Humor • Satire/Parody • CollegeHumor

Preliator Survey 2011: Results and analysis

So, as you may have heard, I had a second little survey running for the last two weeks wherein I probed my readers for some of their personal information and what they thought of this blog. Although I didn’t get quite as many responders as I hoped or expected (last year’s survey received 18; this one closed with only 12), I suppose I should be happy twelve readers actually took the time to fill out the little questionnaire, so … yay!

Now, of course, keep in mind that with only 12 entries, this is in no way to be considered a definitive, balanced and reliable overview of exactly what sort of demographics comprise my readership. For all I know, it could be Gaytopia around here. (Which would please me endlessly, for some reason.) So, yeah, usual boilerplate disclaimer about this not being a scientific poll and yadda yadda yadda.

Here are the results, below. (Click the graphs for full-size versions.)

01) What is your age?

Results: “30—34”: 2 (16.67%) | “25—29”: 2 (16.67%) | “20—24”: 2 (16.67%) | “44—44”: 2 (16.67%) | “45—49”: 1 (8.33%) | “60—64”: 1 (8.33%) | “35—39”: 1 (8.33%) | “15—19”: 1 (8.33%) | “65 and older”: 0 (0%) | “55—59”: 0 (0%) | “50–54”: 0 (0) | “14 and under”: 0 (0) [full size (982×541)]

Friday Canine: Enough happy, time for a sad

[source | full size (725×770)]