A Different Street

I’ve never known what to think about Richard Dawkins, except for the fact that he and PZ Myers are objects of profound veneration among the online atheist community. I know I should dig past all that and try to figure out what they’re actually saying and why they’re saying it, but I get enough of people telling me that my faith is Teh Stupid from liberal political blogs, thank you very much.

Anyway, Zack Exley reports that Richard Dawkins has stepped down from his post at Oxford University to write

“… a children’s book on how to think about the world, science thinking contrasted with mythical thinking. I haven’t read Harry Potter … I don’t know what to think about magic and fairy tales.”

Prof Dawkins said he wanted to look at the effects of “bringing children up to believe in spells and wizards”.

“I think it is anti-scientific – whether that has a pernicious effect, I don’t know.”

Exley notes:

What’s so funny here is that [Dawkins] is turning even more into the mirror image of angry fundamentalist Christians who want to stamp out any delusion that’s not their own. For them too, unorthodox thinking is forbidden even for children. Dawkins says that scary fantasies are even more harmful than physical abuse for children. Maybe he could make a united front with Christian fundamentalists who would like to ban Harry Potter and cancel Halloween.

Interesting discussion at PeaceBang’s about whether the GOP’s blame-gaming of Sarah Palin is sexist or not.  (Parenthetical note: Is it wrong that I get ticked off when men tell me that attacks on a woman are not sexist? It feels patronizing even when that is (presumably) not intended. But as I mentioned below, I am feeling just the SLIGHTEST BIT TOUCHY.)

Why haven’t I been able to celebrate Obama’s historic victory, either here or personally?

Partly, I guess, it’s the exhaustion that follows a great release of tension. I couldn’t believe that America would elect George Bush in 2000, and I was shocked that he was re-elected in 2004. I’ve been angry and frightened for eight years, and I was desperately afraid of eight more. That won’t go away overnight, nor will the rage I still feel at being called anti-American, unChristian, and “socialist” for seeing what everyone now knows: the Bush administration was heinously wrong about, basically, everything.

I need to heal from that anger, I guess. I agree with Obama that we are all real Americans, and I deeply believe that we need everyone to participate in the solutions to our current problems. I know that doing a taunting “in your face” victory dance won’t get us closer to that vision — but maybe I need a little more time to, as they told us in 2000, “get over it.”

… and I have but one oven. In the past I have resorted to such anomalies as “crockpot stuffing” to cope with the space shortage, but if I can secure this handy multi-tier oven rack this year, I might not have to. Heck, I might be able to squeeze in a small dish of sweet potatoes, which no one in my family will eat but me. (Heathens!)

Via Slashfood.

Sara Miles on Progressive Revival, reflecting on her experience of voting today:

It’s dangerous to conflate Scripture and politics, but I have to say that something about this lived experience of democracy felt fundamentally Gospel to me today. Here we were, from every tribe and language and people and nation; here we were, with the lowly raised up and the powerful pulled from their thrones. Here we were, rejoicing.

Wil’s Fundamental Truth of Writing: Don’t be afraid to suck. It is easier to fix a broken scene than it is to fill up a blank page.

Awhile ago I was called out for using the “no true Scotsman” fallacy, as described here.

I suggest that the statement “No real Christian could vote for Obama” (or indeed “for McCain”) is a perfect example of this fallacy.

I’m boggled.  How could a person read this lambent and beautiful essay, and respond like this?

You’re not afraid to say it–despite many years in which women have preached feminism to each other, many if not most girls on the brink of womanhood are not primarily looking to be great career successes or to change the world or to be powerful and independent. They’re looking to connect with some special person.

Pardon me while I hurl.

There are distinct similarities between Arthur Conan Doyle’s Sherlock Holmes and George Bernard Shaw’s Henry Higgins.  Even their sidekicks are similar!