From San Francisco Chronicle:
"It's not courageous to make a simple statement about personal
beliefs,'' he told about 70 people at the San Leandro City Hall. "What is
courageous is to stand up in Congress and say, 'Let's tax the rich and give
the money to poor kids.' Now that's courageous.''
And more importantly:
Thomas was even happier to see that most of the people at the town
hall meetings weren't interested in talking about Stark's position on God.
Instead, Iraq, health care, global warming, immigration and other national
issues that drove the hour-long sessions.
"It's great that (atheism) didn't come up,'' he said. "There are far
more important things to be concerned about than what Congressman Stark
From The Gospel of Prothero on MSNBC:
In Prothero's utopian world, Americans would have enough religious
knowledge to debate ethics positions using holy texts, to understand
Biblical references in political speeches, to question their own
beliefs about God—and to encourage others to question theirs. Only then
will we enjoy one of the greatest privileges of the educated, which is
to change our minds.
If you want to see how an atheist rationally (and I may say, restrained at times) responds to an organised attempts by religious students to hi-jack the Q&A session, read this post and watch part 2 of the video. It is rather long, 69 minutes, but it is well worth your time I promise!
(For some reason, Vox's YouTube search does not find the video even though I can find it easily on YouTube site. Here is a short clip below.)
After the Stern Review was released last week (more analysis here), BBC News message board is asking readers whether they are willing to pay green taxes. After reading a fair amount of the comments (~5 pages worth) I was dismayed that many BBC readers either think the review is just another British government way to tax the population, or climax changes are not scientifically proven, or worse still, admitted defeat because the small nation of Britain can't change the global climate so let's carry on as normal.
For the sceptics, why do they constantly asking for proofs? Does the IPCC reports proof enough? No. Do all the thousands of scientific papers on the subject enough? Apparently not either. I think it is because climate science (just like any science, really) is complex and the answers to any complex questions will inherently complex. But yet, most people are looking for the simple answer to ever more complex questions, in life or in anything.
As for those who don't want to pay the green taxes. They are the very same group of people that make me leave that country without regret. They want the best of both worlds, they want the cake and eat it. They complain about how bad the NHS is but yet don't want to pay the tax increase needed to modernize and reorganize the NHS. They just want their free health care. They complain about the state of the education system but yet do not want to pay tax that would raise teachers salaries or increase number of teachers. And with the green tax, apparently taxing the people who drive SUV/4×4 to deliver their kids to school is not right because their big car is 'essential' to their life.
Does having a conscious play no part in their decision making? Do we need the intervention of the Vatican church (or any religions for that matter) before the majority of the Earth's population will take notice? As much as I dislike religion as an organized movement, if that's what it will take to avert the upcoming climate crisis I am all for it.
Most Americans appear to believe that without faith in God, we would
have no durable reasons to treat one another well. The political
version of this morality claim is that our country was founded on
"Judeo-Christian principles,” the implication being that without these
principles we would have no way to write just laws.