Does Ray Comfort genuinly not understand evolution?

Ray Comfort, an easy target for anti-creationists because of his incredible obvious ignorance when it comes down to understanding evolution, has apologized for not knowing where he talks about:

I sincerely apologize for misrepresenting what Darwinian evolution says about the origin of males and females.

And he then cointinues to state that he:

I have checked out the references you have given me as to what the theory has to say about their genesis, read them again and again, and I still don’t understand what you believe.

Well, we (evolutionary biologists) could help out here. But the problem is not the evolution of the sexes, it is:

It doesn’t make sense to me because I can’t reconcile what I see in creation with what you would have me believe about evolution.

I give him that. Yes, it is impossible to reconcile evolution with a literal interpretation of the bible. And this is also why nobody until now has been able to talk sense into him. And further, nobody will, until he is willing to look at evolution as a process by itself and see what it explains. And he knows already, you can read that between the lines of his own posts, that once he tries that, he will see the power and beauty of evolution and it will become even more difficult to reconcile with his religious perspective.

Selectivity with civil rights

Yesterday, I was once more reminded of the selectivity of people when it comes down to civil rights. When California voted for proposition 8, a large proportion came from African Americans, who should know better about civil rights. They still are struggling to get those honoured, but when it was time to support another group struggling with similar issues, they turned around and voted to uphold discriminatory practices against another group in society. The same thing you see with gay rights activists, who as easy turn around and bash another group they do not have affinity with. It sucks, but I fear it is the reality we have to deal with.

Bob Rackleff is selective on discrimination

Today, I went to the First Presbyterian Church to hear a friend sing in the choir. It is a beautiful old church, finished in 1838. It has two galleries, and we sat down on one of them. From the gallery, you have a nice overview of the church. Originally, one of the galleries was reserved for the slaves:

The north gallery was reserved by the trustees’ deed for slaves who attended the services. Unusual for the times, slaves were admitted to membership.

After the service, while I was waiting for the others, I was approached by Leon County Commissioner Bob Rackleff who asked me if I was in the latest Mickee Faust production. Well, I hadn't because Mickee Faust does not like me any more. So, I told him that and also told him that this was the result of me standing up against the discrimination by Mickee Faust of a disabled person. His response was to just let it be and move on. Yeah, right. We discuss a bit more, but his message stays the same. So I say, if I would accept discrimination, nothing changes. And if we would have done that in the past, we still would have slavery. And in the back of my mind I thought, we just left a church that has a so-called slave gallery, but when it comes down to discrimination, your words are very selective. Commissioner Rackleff, it is great that you stand up for LGBT rights, but your selective outrage and acceptance depending on the type of discrimination just shows that deep inside, you are just intolerant. It is good that you will face another progressive opponent in the elections of 2010. I hope she wins.

When someone hits you with a hammer.....

When someone hits you with a hammer, who do you blame for the pain?

1. The person who hit you with the hammer?

Or

2. Yourself because you actually feel the pain?

Most people reading this will choose option 1. And that is very logical.

So, why is this an issue? Well, when we replace the hammer for abusive language, there is a considerable number of people who say that words do not hurt people, it is their own sensitivity that does. Tell that the boys who are bullied at school for being perceived gay while being heterosexual. Or the black man who is called a n......! Or the mentally disabled who is called crazy.

Words hurt, and words kill. And if anybody tells you to bone up and that you should be able to just handle it as a big guy, remember that that is just another way to be abusive and controlling. Because in the end, abusive language has only one purpose, and that is to control the recipient of the abusive language.

Seeing blind?

Okay, help me out. What do I miss here?

1. Volunteer organisation signs paper work that they are "committed to accessibility for people with disabilities, including compliance with the ADA" in order to get grand money.
   
2. An official of that organisation thinks that the ADA does not apply to that organisation.

Right.

This man is one of the lowest creatures in the world, who was released for a few days by the Dutch court and disappeared.
Now he is protesting the publication of this image. Really? Go fuck yourself.

ADA: who is the problem?

So, once it has been established that discrimination takes place, how are you dealing with it. Often, the atmosphere at the workplace has been destroyed, and that often becomes an argument to continue exclusion of the person discriminated in the first place. However, is that the only solution? Well, no, because when discrimination takes place, there is the person that does the discriminating and the person that is discriminated against. So, once it has been established that discrimination takes place, the person doing the discrimination has to bone up and change their ways, and if they cannot, they should be removed from their position. That might hurt, but it is also the most effective way to ensure similar cases of discrimination won't happen again. In short, the target for resolution should be those that discriminate, not those that have been discriminated.