Religious creation myths are all ridiculous

In response to Poxinfinite asserting that the creation stories of the Bible/Quran could be right...
They are as absurd as the creation myths in any religion/culture be they the Abrahamic 'creation ex nihilo', the vast range of Hindu myths (who according to Wikipedia don't seem to have much conflict with evolution), or the Inuit belief that the trickster in the form of Raven created the world (when the waters forced the ground up from the deep Raven stabbed it with his beak and fixed it into place).
I prefer the outlook of the Buddha who generally ignores the question regarding the origin of life.
No intelligent person could take them seriously.
These myths have been lampooned and had the nail put in their coffin by the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster...
This is the 'ironic' statement from their website:

The Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, while having existed in secrecy for hundreds of years, only recently came into the mainstream when this letter was published in May 2005.
With millions, if not thousands, of devout worshippers, the Church of the FSM is widely considered a legitimate religion, even by it’s opponents - mostly fundamentalist Christians, who have accepted that our God has larger balls than theirs.
Some claim that the church is purely a thought experiment, satire, illustrating that Intelligent Design is not science, but rather a pseudoscience manufactured by Christians to push Creationism into public schools. These people are mistaken. The Church of FSM is real, totally legit, and backed by hard science. Anything that comes across as humor or satire is purely coincidental.
http://www.venganza.org/about/

Poxinfinite is too long-winded!

The first direct attack on another blogger!
Poxinfinite: your comments are too frickin long!!
I know youre trying too expound a complex argument but we need to keep this blog snappier or it won't get read.
Its a lesson in being succinct!

Why is bleaching your skin more taboo than burning it?

At the end of the day whether someone uses a bleaching product to make their skin lighter (hydroquinone and mercury killing the melanin-making cells), or sits in the sun burning their skin (causing the cells in the epidermis to produce toxic compounds and damaging the capillarys), they are essentially doing the same thing - trying to change their skin colour.

Why is bleaching considered outrageous and yet sunbathing a status symbol.
Sunbathers will argue that they are just trying to look 'healthy', but we all know the history of people using arsenic to make their skin lighter (this was considered 'healthy' then), so it is clearly just the current fashion.
Is it the racial connotations of bleaching?
All I'm saying is: sunbathers are freaks!

Racist litterbugs

Should really add this to 'I Litter and I'm Proud' but...
Standing at the bustop this morning next to the bin.
White guy and a black guy standing near me.
White guy chucks his fag packet on the floor.
I pick it up and put it in the bin saying "I'll put it in the bin for you shall I bruv?"
White guy, pointing at the Bengali guy next to him, says: "Don't bother mate, none of these fucking pakis bother!"
As I front up to him I say "What the fucks the matter with you? [I've forgotten about the littering now] Why are you calling him a fucking Paki? I guess you would have called this guy a nigger 20 years ago?"
Black guy: "You calling me a nigger?"
Me: "No you stupid cunt. You two are both a couple of stupid cunts. Go fuck yourselves."
I walk off.
Not very productive.
What should I have done?

Message to my muslim friends

Jews/Christians have decided to gloss over the more gory bits of the Torah/Bible so Muslims need to to with the Qur'an.
Christians now accept that the Bible should NOT be taken literally…even Archbishops do not believe in the matter of fact creation of the universe in seven days. Likewise, rarely do you here the Pope reminding his Catholic flock of Exodus 35:2 which clearly states that "…whosoever doeth work on the Sabbath shall be put to death". For Christians to reject these outdated beliefs did not mean the abandonment of the entire religion (it is not necessary to throw out the 'baby with the bathwater'). It just means putting things that were written 2,000 years ago into context. [My personal view is that a religion is only truly representative of the original prophet for about 500 years after which time the message has become too diluted from the original, but lets not go there…]
I can imagine representatives of the Taliban saying that this is the reason that Christianity is not the force that it once was (i.e. because it doesn't follow the Bible to the letter), and I can understand this. It would be difficult for any 'progressive Muslims' (as Mirza calls them), which I think would be the majority of Muslims living in the West, to agree with this though.
I hope this doesn't come across as judgemental or preachy. No-one can question the power, importance and beauty of Islam and its role in establishing and continuing great societies the world over, but like Christianity it needs to come to terms with its harsher elements if it is to continue to develop and influence people. Either that or you should all really be taking up arms and smiting my neck!!!
Asalam-a-laikum

Don't save the children

In India, 50% of everyone born blind die in childhood.
People use resources but they mostly contribute to those resources in some way as well.
In an underdeveloped country it could be argued that blind people use resources but don't contribute.
In a developed country curing blind children means that more people contribute to the countrys' economy.
Therefore saving childrens' sight in a developed country means more people who can contribute.
However, in an over-populated underdeveloped country (India for example) there are less resources and less ability to be able to contribute.
Therefore curing blind children in India (or any over-populated under-resourced country) adds to that countrys' problems.
Therefore we shouldn't try to save the sight of poor Indian children

The struggle of good against evil: Evil wins

In the good old days, it was easy to distinguish good from evil. Good was always on Gods side and the Devils work was left to the idle but the events of recent years have made me wonder if these sides have somehome switched. I mean, the amount of pain and suffering inflicted by so-called "believers" from all faiths on the peoples of this planet is overwhelming.

Firstly, we have the Bush and Blair crusade on Islam - the struggle of good against evil for the 21st century. You have Islamic factions defending their faith by "any means necessary". Peodophile catholic priests protected by the Vatican. Aids epidemics worsened by ancient religious dogma.

The list is endless but my point is these so called believers don't seem to be offering much in the way of love and respect. Has good switched sides and have the false prophets finally taken control?