Skepquote of the day
Dining out or, as lesbians refer to it, “eating out,” removes families from the home, relieves wives of their god given duty of preparing meals for their children and husband/master (thereby making wives slothy, fat and unattractive), and allows different family members to eat food that their family members are not eating. This, of course, destroys family togetherness and disrupts the meals of families who do decide to eat traditional dinners at home.
War on Christmas Over, Christians Victorious
Now that Washington State has approved the addition of a Festivus pole to the holiday display at the state capitol, I think we can properly hang a “Mission Accomplished” banner on our metaphorical air craft carriers. Yes, combat operations have ended in the so-called “Christmas wars.” Of course, atheists can only join the celebration as observers since we were never actually involved in the conflict. In fact, it turns out that the only combatant in this bitter dispute, a handful of dimwitted Christians, have finally achieved victory over themselves. They have made a thorough mockery of the very holiday they were allegedly defending from imagined threats.
At first, nobody objected to the “holiday tree” erected in the Washington State Capitol. However, a handful of thin-skinned Christians soon decided that using the more inclusive term “holiday” was a blow to their preferred religion. They requested the addition of a nativity scene, and with the help of a lawsuit filed last year by the Alliance Defense Fund, their request was granted this year.The thing is, Washington State recognized that the only legal way to permit a nativity display in a public building would be to permit all other groups to add their own displays. So, in getting their nativity scene, the Christians opened the door to virtually any other sort of display. Washington State deserves credit for understanding the implications of the Establishment Clause.
Daniel Loxton – “Where Do We Go From here?”
CLICK HERE TO GO TO THE ORIGINAL ENTRY AT “RODIBIDABLY”
Some time ago I heard a series of Skepticality episodes (original episode and a later response to the original episode where they talked about an article written by Daniel Loxton, titled “Where Do We Go From here? Has classic skepticism run its course?“. For a while I had wanted to comment on this episode, but had not gotten around to it, until today…
The essential points that he makes (at least as far as I read it) are:
- There is a feeling that skepticism has “won” (maybe not a complete victory, but if somebody wants to know the truth of just about any pseudo-science, the evidence is available)
- The top skeptics of the movement (James Randi, Paul Kurtz, etc) are aging, and many in the movement are tired of fighting the same old battles year after year
- Skepticism and the focus of skeptics seems to be shifting away from the old paranormal foes
- We need to get back to our roots and not only fight them again, but with renewed vigor
- There are two proper areas of focus for skeptics.
One is the promotion of science literacy and critical
thinking (often using the paranormal as a pedagogical
tool); the other is consumer protection in fringe science
areas — in particular, as regards paranormal claims - That the skeptical community are the ones best equip to fight against the scams, shams, and charlatans who are using fraudulent methods to bilk people of their money, and in some cases their lives
- And finally that skepticism should under no circumstances become entwined with and religious (or lack of religious) or political beliefs
While I know that many of my readers are perhaps to used to my long winded posts, I also understandthat no everybody wil lwant to read the full 9 page pdf of this, but I would suggest checking out the two Skepticality episodes (most particularly the first) to hear in his own words, how Daniel Loxton believes we should move forward, by going back ot what got us here in the first place…
We will always need people who still want their chance to slay the dragon.
Let’s go to work.







1 comment