You know the commercials. The ones in which the thoughtful man surprises his wife for a holiday or anniversary with a piece of diamond jewelery. Her mouth opens in ecstatic disbelief, she looks at him, her eyes mist over with grateful affection, their lips meet...
And then the singsong voiceover: "Every kiss begins with Kay."
Think for a second about what the cynical bastards at Kay Jewelers are actually saying. Every kiss begins with Kay: all romantic love is founded upon the exchange of expensive gifts. Not attraction. Not shared dreams or common interests. Not even sex or the base desire to procreate and raise a family. No - Kay wants you to remind you that the true meaning of love is found in useless, shiny scraps of carbon.
There are plenty of other vomit-inducing commercials around this time of year, but I don't know of any others that make the outrageous claim that the very existence of romantic affection owes itself to the consumption of their product.
18 December 2007
10 December 2007
Oxymoron of the day: 'Creationist Biologist'
Reuters: Christian biologist fired for beliefs, suit says
A Christian biologist is suing the prestigious Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution in Massachusetts, claiming he was fired for refusing to accept evolution, lawyers involved in the case said on Friday.
The zebrafish specialist said his civil rights were violated when he was dismissed shortly after telling his superior he did not accept evolution because he believed the Bible presented a true account of human creation.
If an auto mechanic, a district attorney, or a real estate agent were to get fired for being a creationist, that's discrimination.
But if a marine biologist gets fired for being a creationist, that's just because the moron is too incompetent to perform his job.
It is perfectly acceptable that Nathaniel Abraham was fired for his religious beliefs. His beliefs not only indicate loose epistemic standards - which should discredit any scientist - they also come into direct conflict with the foundations of his scientific field. Just as no physicist can perform his job without belief in the theory of gravity, no responsible biologist can hold that his literal, word-for-word belief in the biblical creation story dislodges the theory of evolution. With some logical stretching, an advocate of intelligent design might be able to fuse his beliefs with evolutionary theory and still be a competant biologist, but no one who is daft enough to disregard a towering amount of essential scientific knowledge in favor of a puerile ancient myth can call himself a scientist.
In its concluding paragraph, the article reports that Abraham is now a biology "professor" at Liberty "University", the pseudo-academic shithole in Virginia founded by Jerry Falwell. Liberty University: where students and faculty alike come to insulate their god-given backward beliefs against the heretical facts and logic that run so rampant in today's world.
A Christian biologist is suing the prestigious Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution in Massachusetts, claiming he was fired for refusing to accept evolution, lawyers involved in the case said on Friday.
The zebrafish specialist said his civil rights were violated when he was dismissed shortly after telling his superior he did not accept evolution because he believed the Bible presented a true account of human creation.
If an auto mechanic, a district attorney, or a real estate agent were to get fired for being a creationist, that's discrimination.
But if a marine biologist gets fired for being a creationist, that's just because the moron is too incompetent to perform his job.
It is perfectly acceptable that Nathaniel Abraham was fired for his religious beliefs. His beliefs not only indicate loose epistemic standards - which should discredit any scientist - they also come into direct conflict with the foundations of his scientific field. Just as no physicist can perform his job without belief in the theory of gravity, no responsible biologist can hold that his literal, word-for-word belief in the biblical creation story dislodges the theory of evolution. With some logical stretching, an advocate of intelligent design might be able to fuse his beliefs with evolutionary theory and still be a competant biologist, but no one who is daft enough to disregard a towering amount of essential scientific knowledge in favor of a puerile ancient myth can call himself a scientist.
In its concluding paragraph, the article reports that Abraham is now a biology "professor" at Liberty "University", the pseudo-academic shithole in Virginia founded by Jerry Falwell. Liberty University: where students and faculty alike come to insulate their god-given backward beliefs against the heretical facts and logic that run so rampant in today's world.
05 December 2007
Teddy Bears and Prophets
Gillian Gibbons, the innocuous English primary school teacher who was nearly executed because her Sudanese students had the subversive temerity to give a stuffed bear the most popular name in the world, is back home in England. For the time being at least, she is safe from irrational dogma and religious hate.
This ridiculous story is reminiscent of the cartoonist row a few years back, when a European cartoonist was burned in effigy and had assassination decrees on his head for the simple act of drawing an image of Muhammad.
These two situations resulted from the same injustice: non-Muslims were being held accountable, and punishable, for transgressions of Islamic law.
Religion is like a social contract: if I choose to observe or convert to a given religion, I explicitly and implicitly agree to follow the laws, protocol, and moral standards set out by that religion. But those within the religion have no right to carry out an inquisition against outsiders who break arbitrary religious laws they never agreed to follow in the first place.
Also, although I admit that I have only a cursory familiarity with the Sharia, I don't know of what law exactly it is that prevents children from naming an inanimate toy bear after Muhammad. Muhammad is, after all, not only the name of the prophet, but the most common male name in the world. Besides, can you imagine the Catholic Church threatening to kill someone for naming a rubber ducky Jesus? The worst that would happen would be that the Pope would issue an edict against the deification of bath toys.
This ridiculous story is reminiscent of the cartoonist row a few years back, when a European cartoonist was burned in effigy and had assassination decrees on his head for the simple act of drawing an image of Muhammad.
These two situations resulted from the same injustice: non-Muslims were being held accountable, and punishable, for transgressions of Islamic law.
Religion is like a social contract: if I choose to observe or convert to a given religion, I explicitly and implicitly agree to follow the laws, protocol, and moral standards set out by that religion. But those within the religion have no right to carry out an inquisition against outsiders who break arbitrary religious laws they never agreed to follow in the first place.
Also, although I admit that I have only a cursory familiarity with the Sharia, I don't know of what law exactly it is that prevents children from naming an inanimate toy bear after Muhammad. Muhammad is, after all, not only the name of the prophet, but the most common male name in the world. Besides, can you imagine the Catholic Church threatening to kill someone for naming a rubber ducky Jesus? The worst that would happen would be that the Pope would issue an edict against the deification of bath toys.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
