True Atheist? Yup, I am… I don't think anything called "God" exists, or ever existed! I question every such imaginary concept people have related to god & religion, that's, even though they say is there for the good of mankind, is practically doing more bad to the mankind itself. Isn't it ridiculous that most of the human beings (supposedly the most intelligent being on earth) simply believe in whatever irrational you tell them, without ever thinking how can it be possible?
No end is in sight to the fierce debate raging in France over an imminent move to ban the wearing of the burqa in public establishments. On the contrary, just about any matter involving Muslims adds fuel to it. Right now the media are focused on an issue that, on the face of it, is of little relevance to the sartorial choices of an insignificant number of Muslim women.
Last December, Quick, a fast-food chain, introduced ‘halal’ hamburgers in six of its 300-odd outlets. It contained smoked turkey instead of beef and pork. The chain took care to ensure that the birds were slaughtered under the supervision of a duly-qualified cleric. Commercial interest clearly dictated its decision for the six outlets are all located in towns and cities with a large Muslim population.
That, however, was of no concern to Quick’s critics. The right-wing, xenophobic National Front led the charge against it. But others who are known for their hostility to the Front joined in the chorus of criticism as well. The burden of their dirge was two-fold. One, the food chain, by serving only ‘halal’ burgers, effectively discriminated against non-Muslim customers. And two, they included in the bill money that would go to cover the cost of the services of the cleric.
Both factors, the critics argued, were an affront to something that is a matter of life and death to the French: secularism. They saw in the food chain’s decision yet another instance of a supine surrender to the diktat of Muslim extremists. In his blog, a well-known journalist pointed out that in a large city in the north of France, swimming pools run by the municipality had reserved some hours exclusively for women, and some others exclusively for men. Another cited the case of male gynaecologists who were assaulted for examining female Muslim patients. Yet another blogger railed against Muslims for offering prayers out in the open. Christians, he wrote, pray only in a church and Jews only in a synagogue. Why have Muslims been given a special dispensation? And why can’t Muslims convert to other faiths when ‘infidels’ are free to embrace Islam?
So you think the position of Mars in the sky at the time of your birth made you tall, dark, and handsome (or short, fair, and ugly)? Or lucky (or unlucky) in love? If you think believing in astrology is anywhere close to scientific, well, Dude, time to think again.
Pick two babies born within a minute of each other. One has two nurses and a doctor attending; the other, just a midwife. One is born in a brightly lit maternity ward in a downtown big city hospital; the other in a poorly lit room in a village 50 kilometers from the nearest big city. ‘Downtown’ is just a few meters above sea level; the village is situated on a 1000 meter high plateau. These local differences have far greater effects on the babies than Mars does. Let’s see how.
Nearly five centuries of physics have given us quite a few certainties, and among those are that the only long range forces in the universe are gravity and electromagnetism. And both of these, from Mars, are totally – and I mean totally – overwhelmed by those same forces that were produced by things near you when you were delivered. In a word, Mars can’t influence you.
Start with gravitation.
The gravitational force between you and Mars is greatest when Mars is closest to the Earth; let’s say that’s 56 million kilometers. Now Mars has a mass of 6.4 x 1023 kg, so the acceleration, here on Earth, due to Martian gravity would be 1.4 x 10-8 meters per second per second (m s-2).
(UGW5UNH2VUSP) NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court has said that burqa-clad women cannot be issued voter identity cards, rejecting the argument that religion prohibits them from lifting their veils.
Counsel for petitioner M Ajam Khan had contended that asking ‘purdah-nashin’ women to lift their veil for being photographed would amount to sacrilege as their photographs would be seen by many men working as polling agents and electoral officials.
“It will hurt their religious sentiments and the Election Commission must not insist on ‘purdah-nashin’ women to be photographed for inclusion of their name in the electoral rolls,” said the counsel arguing before a Bench comprising Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan and Justice Deepak Verma.
The order comes at a time when a controversy triggered by the ban on full-length burqas has roiled France, attracting protests from clerics.
The argument put forward on behalf of petitioners failed to impress the court. The Bench said: “If you have such strong religious sentiments, and do not want to be seen by members of public, then do not go to vote. You cannot go with burqa to vote. It will create complications in identification of voters.”
Referring to the Madras High Court order upholding the EC’s insistence for a photograph without veils, the Bench said that the elections have been conducted without staying the HC order and that those who do not comply with rules on voter identification not be allowed to vote.
Appearing for the EC, counsel Meenakshi Arora said though electoral rolls were being prepared as per the judgment of the HC, it would be better if the SC gave a verdict that would help reach a closure on the issue.
When the petitioners again insisted on protection of religious sentiments, the Bench said: “The photograph is for identification of a voter. If someone comes to vote in a burqa and the photograph was also taken with veil covering the face, how would anyone identify the voter?”
Explaining that right to vote was only a statutory right and not a fundamental right, the Bench said: “Right to contest an election is an extension of the right to vote. Can anyone contest an election saying photograph of her face be not taken? Can she be photographed in a burqa with a veil and yet contest an election?”
Though the Bench made its mind absolutely clear, it agreed to a detailed hearing on the issue at a later date.
The Madras High Court had in a 2006 verdict held that faith and practice were on two different planes, saying there was nothing wrong on the part of the EC to insist on a photograph of the face of a ‘purdah-nashin’ woman for the purpose of preparing electoral rolls.
Fights With Municipality, Refuses To Give Their Child A Religious Identity (Mohammed Wajihuddin | TNN)
Mumbai: At an airy, spacious flat overlooking a verdant green patch in Versova, a three-week-old baby boy sleeps in his little cot. His mother, Aditi Shedde, glowing with newly acquired motherhood, is on her toes; she flits in and out of the room, asking the ayah to change the infant’s nappy and cover him in a sanitised towel.
The baby is kept at arms’ length when the flat’s expensive marble floor is mopped and sofas dusted several times a day.
So what’s so different about this new-born, who’s being cossetted in his prosperous home? Well, he has no religion. His Hindu Maharashtrian mother and Gujarati Muslim father have decided to leave the choice to him when he grows up. By itself, that may not be overly unusual; there are very many people who give similar choices to their children.
Where Aditi and her husband, Aalif Surti, differ is that they chose to battle an unremitting bureaucracy from the very start and refused to fill in the column titled ‘Religion’ in their child’s most basic document, the birth certificate.
It wasn’t a spur-of-themoment decision. “A few months into my pregnancy, we had decided that we would not give our child any religious identity,’’ says Aditi. “We are not against religion, but who are we to choose a religion on our
baby’s behalf ? We will expose him to the values of different faiths and cultures, and when he grows up he will be free to follow any faith — or none if he wishes.’’
Of course, getting the birth certificate wasn’t easy. The first hurdle cropped up at the hospital itself — the authorities were alarmed when the young parents said they would leave the religion column blank in the documents. Every hospital has to intimate the BMC about new births within 15 days, on the basis of which the BMC issues birth certificates.
“You will have to talk to the officer in the BMC,’’ a hospital staff member told the couple. “Since Aditi speaks fluent Marathi, I asked her to patao the municipality,’’ says Aalif, creative director with a film production and distribution company.
Next, Aditi was at the K-ward (Andheri) office of the BMC, bracing for the battle ahead.
Are you ready for a celestial battle on a truly cosmic scale? In the left corner stands the Federation of Indian Rationalist Associations, and in the right, are the nation’s astrologers.
Narendra Nayak, president of the Federation of Indian Rationalist Associations, who has been at the vanguard fighting godmen since 1976, is willing to give his entire life savings (Rs10 lakh) to the astrologer who can meet a rather canny challenge.
“We will provide them [astrologers] with the date and time of birth of 10 individuals. All they have to tell us is whether these individuals are male or female, and whether they are dead or alive. If an astrologer can guess eight out of the 10 correctly, then the prize of Rs10 lakh is his,” said Nayak. “But the one who wishes to take up the challenge will have to deposit Rs5,000 in order to participate.” While a number of older astrologers have spurned the offer, stating that such mundane astrology is not their forte, Bangalore’s leading cosmic-reader, Y Bhaskar Shetty, who has many political titans for clients, has picked up the gauntlet.
Shetty said he is willing to make the required predictions, provided the process was transparent. “As for the money, let him keep it,” said Shetty, “or give it to charity.”
Shetty regretted Nayak’s “ignorance” and claimed that the rationalists did not understand that humans are the microcosm of the universe and have to maintain their poise and alignment with the planets in the solar system. “Astrology is all geometry and gravity,” he said.
Many people argue that atheists pick on all theists when the fundamentalist/extremist ones are mostly at fault and the majority of theists are more benign and beneficial to society.
This is wrong. ALL theists and ALL forms of theism are harmful and destructive. The points outlined above are not specific to fundamentalist extremists; They are common among virtually all theistic denominations.
Contrary to what most may believe, moderate theists are the most destructive. This is because they provide the cover (as well as the breeding ground) for the fundamentalists. They are the major force that will not allow open and honest debate on theism to exist in the public mainstream media. There are many great documentaries on science and theology that will never air in the United States because theists, even moderate and liberal ones, would not tolerate such discussion. This is because theism really doesn’t have much of a legitimate, rational leg to stand on. The very fact that theists would rather not have their beliefs critiqued further underlines the reality that their beliefs are most likely not rational and that theists are most likely unable to defend them in an open forum.
For this reason, Atheists cannot pick and choose certain factions of fundamentalists to rail against. In truth, all theists — from extremists to liberals — are part of the same deluded group. They all create the same problems for our society, and it would be intellectually dishonest to claim otherwise.
Sam Harris gives another great presentation on this issue, going beyond the basics to explain why even moderate and liberal theists should be considered a threat to freedom, science, rationality and peace:
Recent Comments