Raif Badawi - The next martyr for Freedom of Expression.

Today, in despair, I sent the following to all Irish public representatives in Dáil Éireann, the executive of the Irish government. I have kept it short, unemotional and reasoned, and I urge you to do the same. It is the time for action, and to urge our governments to act on our behalf. I ask you to put any animosity you may feel toward your government aside and to contact your public representatives, to call them to defend Freedom of Expression, for all our sakes.

I beg you, do not stand by and see this done.

EDIT: http://www.thejournal.ie/blogger-raef-badawi-lashes-insulting-islam-1874264-Jan2015/


Dear Deputy,

I am writing to you about Raif Badawi, a Saudi Arabian blogger who is being held by Saudi authorities and is to be tortured through flogging weekly for several months for daring to exercise the basic human right of Freedom of Expression. This punishment is expected to kill him. Raif did not harm anyone, or attempt to incite violence or rebellion. His crime is that he was a founder of a website for political and social debate, “Saudi Arabian Liberals.”

I urge you to bring this story to the attention of the Dáil, and to push for a public statement calling on the Saudi government to free this brave proponent of freedom and liberal values.

Yours Sincerely,

The 10th Circle of Hell - Comment Threads

I spend far too much time on Facebook. One of the consequences of this is that I spend a lot of time on comment threads. Comment threads, to a Free Thinker, are the equivalent of all nine Dantéan circles of Hell rolled into one. Commenters fall into a number of categories, of which I have found the most prevalent are:

1. The Snob

This wannabe elitist always positions himself or herself as being better than the source of the article. More rational, more religious, more atheistic, more of a free thinker, you name it, this commenter is better than you, me and the entire body of experts on any topic on which they deign to bring their enormous intellect to bear. Easily spotted by their frequent accusations of pretentiousness, on the occasion that they spell it correctly, and by saying very little else. Don't engage with them, their comments are entirely opinion based, and they will only shout "freedom of speech!" at you.

2.  The Link-Bot

This commenter is usually fanatical about appearing right, and is able to paste dozens upon dozens of links from conspiracy theorist websites, backing up their frankly insane assertions. They believe that aircraft condensation trails are chemtrails, that flouride in the drinking water is toxic or a mind control agent, that life-saving vaccines are not beneficial and exist only to cause autism and make money for "Big Pharma," and a whole host of other irrational nonsense. Expect to see comments such as "I'm a Mom, so I know what's best for my kids," from people who are demonstrably not doctors, pharmacists, biologists or indeed even well-informed. Their links are often useful for informing oneself of the state-of-the-art in uninformed idiocy and preparing rebuttals.

3. The "Faketheist"

"Atheists" who are abusive, angry and make ad hominem attacks on even the most reasonable of religious people. These people, who identify themselves as Atheists, but are clearly very angry at their God or their religion, perhaps even specific religious figures, are loose cannons who will attack anyone on either side of a debate, for merely daring to be reasonable, moderate and calm. They contribute nothing, are capable of contributing nothing, and should simply be blocked. Or trolled, for entertainment purposes. 

4. The "Incorrectual"

This individual will use big words, often out of context, and scientific terms, usually incorrectly, in an attempt to sound intellectual. They become haughty and passive-aggressive when challenged, but usually manage to avoid swearing and being shouty. If conclusively proved wrong, they may engage in ad hominem attacks based on anything from their nemeses' profile pictures, locations, professions or other information they can glean. They tend to stay away from attacks based on hot-button issues such as race and sex.

5. The Troll

Everyone knows about trolls. They come in to stir up trouble, and are never more happy than when they initiate a screaming match between others, which they will then attempt to fuel with additional periodic comments. They range from the intelligent and well-informed to the barely literate. Either way they spell trouble, and the end of constructive debate. They also give rise to a sixth type:

6. The Well-Meaning Idiot

This last bunch really only seem to exist to add fuel to the trolls fire. They are usually uninformed, indignant, and politically correct to the extreme, even in the face of all reason. Their calling card is usually a phrase similar to "I bet you wouldn't like if it was you ..." They often consider themselves the arbiters of moral decency, are usually moderately to extremely religious, and regard atheism with the sort of 1950's middle-class horror otherwise reserved for "commies."

On the whole though, some comment threads are great for boredom, and you can come across some incredibly well-informed people. Note, I said can, not will. It's a little like panning for gold in the Atlantic. In theory there should be something there, but good luck finding it.

Hope to see you on the Facebook comment threads. I'm on the Guardian, Daily Kos, and the Irish Times most often.

What is an Agnostic Atheist?

Atheism has been blown up in the last few years it seems, to a massive topic, a huge set of ideals, centered around a few charismatic and very intelligent individuals. This has given rise to a million and one different misconceptions as to what Atheism is. There is one simple answer to that question. One. No more. It doesn't matter what your friends or acquaintances tell you, what preachers, teachers and televangelists shout, what your government representatives say.

Atheism is the lack of belief in a deity.

That is it, that is all. You may have met Atheists who were objectionable people, shouting down your religious opinions. That doesn't mean their behaviour is representative of every day Atheists. Surely you would not deem Christian or Islamic terrorists as representative of their whole religion? Of course not, you're not an extremist. In Atheism, as in Theism, there are extremists. Thankfully, Atheist extremists, unlike others, tend to restrict themselves to verbal assault, rather than engaging in physical violence and terrorism.

So why Agnostic Atheism?

An Agnostic Atheist, as any atheist, does not believe in a God or Gods. However, he or she does not claim to know for sure that this is the case. They do not claim knowledge that deities do not exist, merely that they do not believe. This is in comparison to a Gnostic Atheist, who claims to know for certain that there is no such thing as a deity. I fail to see how it is possible to know for sure, hence I am Agnostic. If compelling evidence is provided, I will reevaluate my lack of belief accordingly. 

Coming back to Theism, there are some within the churches who claim to know with certainty that their God or Gods exist. While they are unable to provide evidence for this, I cannot understand how they can claim for certain that this is the case. No matter, I'm not going to argue with irrationality. However, given actual knowledge that a deity exists, where does that leave faith-based religions? You cannot claim to "have faith" if you have knowledge instead. Faith is not required in the presence of knowledge.