IntenseDebate - Paul Murray

11 years ago @ Atheist Revolution - No, We Shouldn\'t Shun... · 14 replies · +3 points

No-one is shunning PZ because they don't like his *ideas*. They are shunning him because of this:

"He said Richard Dawkins ‘seems to have developed a callous indifference to the sexual abuse of children’ and ‘has been eaten by brain parasites’, Michael Nugent is ‘the Irish wanker’ and a ‘demented fuckwit’, Ann Marie Waters is a ‘nutter’, Russell Blackford is a ‘lying fuckhead’, Bill Maher’s date at an event was ‘candy to decorate [her sugar daddy’s] arm in public’, Ben Radford is a ‘revolting narcissistic scumbag’ and his lawyer is ‘J Noble Dogshit’, Rosetta scientist Matt Taylor and Bill Maher are ‘assholes’, and Abbie Smith and her ‘coterie of slimy acolytes’ are ‘virtual non-entities’. He called Irish blogger ZenBuffy a ‘narcissistic wanker,’ after she said she has experienced mental illness."

13 years ago @ http://www.belfasttele... - The prostitution propo... · 0 replies · +2 points

Half the hysteria about sex trafficking is not really about sex at all - it's racism and xenophobia. In the US it's mainly about mexican immigrants. Without mexicans living next door, the irish have to suppose that the russians, the estonians, the … the … the yellow peril (!) are battering down their doors.

Never mind that "trafficking" is absurd as a business model. It's selling coal to newcastle, ice to the eskimos: women willing to exchange sex for money are everywhere you go, it's pointless to go to the time and expense of importing 'em.

But both the people who think the slanty-eyed menace is setting up shop in their neighbourhood (and displacing the good, honest, hardwiring local whores and sending money back to foreign places), and the people who are certain that people having sex makes baby jesus cry or is necessarily rape (if it's hetrosexual) - they can can join forces on this, the bogus issue of "trafficking".

14 years ago @ http://www.calamitieso... - Calamities of Nature -... · 0 replies · 0 points

"The US states individually would probably fit better."

Why not simply break the US into "Yankees", "Confederates", and "The West" ?

14 years ago @ http://www.calamitieso... - Calamities of Nature -... · 0 replies · 0 points

One way of handling the fact that probabilities max out at 100% is to use not p, but p/(1-p). This gives you a nice curve that goes from 0 to inf. The log of this is symmetrical - and is actually the inverse of the logistical function, which I find amazing.

14 years ago @ http://www.calamitieso... - Calamities of Nature -... · 0 replies · +21 points

We did not evolve from apes: we *are* apes - a particular large-brained species of african ape. Asking :did humans evolve from apes" is like asking "did termites evolve from insects".

14 years ago @ http://www.calamitieso... - Calamities of Nature -... · 0 replies · +6 points

Or, both are caused by a common third factor. Perhaps the general acceptance of the enlightenment program - progressivism in general - causes wealth and acceptance of evolution.

15 years ago @ Godless Business - 33 - Access Ministries... · 1 reply · +1 points

"not-for-profit organisations will have to pay tax on profits that are kept for commercial purposes and not redirected towards the organisation's altruistic purpose."

Bugger that. If they run a profit-taking business, then they are not a charity.

Make 'em do profit-making activities as a commercial entity. If that entity chooses to give its profits to the charity and claim a tax deduction - fine. But keep them on separate books.

15 years ago @ Godless Business - Access to kids · 0 replies · +1 points

What? In the email in the image above, which quotes the legislation, "may not" is *exactly* what it says! Unless I'm getting a different image file to everyone else:

'If SRI is offered, it is to be scheduled on then school timetable; the usual period of time is 30 minutes per week. Secular instruction may not be timetabled while students from the class are attending SRI.'

15 years ago @ Godless Business - Access to kids · 0 replies · +1 points

For goodness sake: what does "may not" mean? May not. No, Jimmy, you may not eat a packet of tim-tams before dinner. The only way to understand the sentence your way is to parse it very, very oddly:

"[Secular instruction] [may] [not be timetabled] [while students are receiving SRI]."

as opposed to the more usual

"[Secular instruction] [may not] [be timetabled] [while students are receiving SRI]."

I continue to think that the department has interpreted this bad legislation correctly.

15 years ago @ Godless Business - Access to kids · 2 replies · +1 points

I dont agree - the problem is not "a bizarre reading of the act", it is the clear meaning of act itself. "May" means "permitted". The act is not stating "it's ok to not give other instruction", it's specifically stating that it is not permitted for other instruction to be given during RE. Same as "You may not walk through that door" usually means that door-walking-through is forbidden.

I imagine that the intent is that religious students ought not be forced to miss out on teaching given to other students - they must not be made to chose between RE and math class. it's not all that sinister, it's just badly thought out.

IntenseDebate Comment System

Connect with Paul Murray

People I'm following

Paul Murray