What's even the point if you're not gonna do the second verse?

I would imagine that's true, but I also think that a lot of the nature/narratives of science and technology are very patriarchal. I read some psychological analysis about how some men obsess over creating machines because they can't create life. A lot of it is also about control. And of course most science/technology…

Just be careful you don't end up like Fry and become your own grandfather.

People like to split the "I don't believe in God" vs. "I believe there is no God" hair a lot, but the sentences mean the same thing. God either exists or it doesn't exist. And if God (note that this does not mean specifically Abrahamic monotheistic God, as both the Greeks and the Hindus talked about "god" in their…

"But what if you don't have any spiritual, metaphysical questions?" Well then, whatever you're smoking, can I have some?

But if you reject any existence of a divine being, or any sort of supernatural presence, then all you're left with for your spiritual, metaphysical questions is what can be proven by science, which is what I just listed.

"Yes, but say that there were certain states where it was still technically a law that you couldn't hold office unless you liked sports, and that even in states where it wasn't the law, people running for office were expected to demonstrate that they were sufficiently dedicated to sports. What if people were awarded…

I dunno. I've always considered the idea that there is this endlessly expanding universe that exists just cuz, and that all human consciousness, indeed the entire human experience, ever is just a combination of chemicals in one brain, and that when we die it's like turning off a TV set to be a pretty big leap of faith.

What's interesting though is that even though there's not conclusive peer-reviewed proof, all true believers have had the existence of God proved to them in some way that's convincing enough for them. So it's not as though people of faith don't have evidence, it's just evidence that pertains primarily to them.

Dude, spirituality's not a math problem or a court case. There's no way anyone can conclusively prove the existence of something that is by definition not of this world and beyond our perception using earthly empirical means. I don't know if atheists are just willfully dense on that point or what.

Eh, that's mostly just a cover. The central tenet of atheism is that God does not exist. Plenty of people believe in God and don't follow any religion, and they're not as pissed off. The problem is conflating belief in God or some sort of divine presence with adhering to any of the major religions. Honestly I think…

It appears the Urban Meyer era has started early.

No, see, misogyny is funny when white people do it.

Music snobs are only bad when they don't know anything about how music actually works. Ones who will go on and on about the Pixies but can't tell you what a parallel fifth is.

And really not that far off from history. The Vatican was a wild fuckin' place back in the day.

"I just feel like black people and other ethnicities have all this great culture, and I don't have any because I'm a boring white American."

Oh they're there in the anti-racism discussion groups also, claiming how identity-based caucusing just divides us and how they don't understand why ending racism requires making white people feel bad.

So this actually, sort of, exists in England, where devout Muslim couples can go to have disputes/divorces reconciled according to Sharia law. Oddly enough, some women say that these courts actually help them get out of abusive relationships, since it's the only court their husband will recognize. In America though,…

The upcoming political ads about how "so-and-so Democrat voted against a bill that would ban sharia law" will be priceless though.

So is it "contact" or "conduct"? Because the article says one thing and the quotes say another.