2010 November | The Damned

Nov 30

	Joe Dixon's Atheist Bible Study #34 10 Commandments	From: JoeDixon Views: 73 6 ratings
	Time: 15:01	More in Comedy

Nov 30

I love love LOVE the WhirledNutDaily!

Apparently, the success of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows "renews concerns that children are being lured to Satan." After "concerns" they left out "...among dumbshits..."

Nov 30

Atheist Billboard on Nativity Scene: 'You Know It's a Myth' – The …

The ad was purchased by the group American Atheists, whose president, David Silverman, told The New York Times that he expects the billboard to stay up until the winter solstice on December 21, and possibly through Christmas. ...

Nov 29

Atheists Are Not Intellectuals!

Author: SeerSucker1981
Keywords:
Added: November 29, 2010

Nov 28

Atheist Billboard – Voice of the People

Author: patricianatheist
Keywords:
Added: November 28, 2010

Nov 27

Higgs boson particle proves existence of god?

Author: q1000101

Keywords:

Added: November 27, 2010

Nov 27

How to tell your parents you are atheist/agnostic

http://www.youtube.com/user/writcheyc?feature=mhsn

Have you stopped believing your parent’s religion? Many kids are questioning the religion of their parents. Some have stopped believing and don’t know how to tell their parents. This video is a guide to kids and teenagers in opening up to their parents.

In many respects, the advice in this video tracks the advice given to GLBT kids who want to be honest with their families and friends.

Hope For Young Atheists (anatheist.net)

No related posts.

Nov 27

Parental rights are not inalienable

: Image via Wikipedia

Here in the USA there is far too much attention given to the doctrine of parental rights and children are suffering for this. Our family laws granting parents so much power rest solely on patriarchal custom, not on ethics and not on an inalienable right. It doesn’t hurt that our judges are just as infatuated with the supernatural as the most uneducated people in the land.

Family law Professor James Dwyer presents the arguments against our current doctrine of parent’s rights in a seminal paper and in his books. Briefly, we do not grant rights to one group of people over the lives of another group of people except in this very unique case of parents and their children. The reason such rights are not granted is that according to our legal theory rights can only apply to an individual and must be self determining not other determining. Rights have a very technical meaning in the law, but people bandy the term around as though they actually know what they are talking about.

We especially should not grant such rights to a group of people who have questionable self serving motives, such as insuring the survival of a religion and using their children as instruments in such a scheme. This is why the Yoder decision will one day be reversed. If we can ever clear out the people like Thomas and Scalia and put the court on a progressive track.

Inalianable: Natural rights (or inalienable rights) are rights which are not contingent upon the laws, customs, or beliefs of a particular society or polity. In contrast, legal rights (sometimes also called civil rights) are rights conveyed by a particular legal or political entity, rights as enshrined in law, and as such are contingent upon local laws, customs, or beliefs. Natural rights are thus necessarily universal, whereas legal rights are culturally and politically relative.

Inalienable rights are usually enshrined in human rights declarations. I don’t find anything about parental rights being inalienable in the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Obviously, Michael Ferris of HSLDA agrees that our parental rights doctrine is on shaky ground or why would his organization ParentalRights.org be clamoring to amend the US constitution to “protect” parental rights. Which like I say do not exist in the sense of natural rights. What he and his devious attorneys attempt to persuade people with are quotes from legal arguments they take out of context from various court decisions. People who are not constitutional lawyers buy his line. Then, convinced the evil state is trying to rob them of their rights, they get all up in arms and send him money, which is the whole point. He stands as much chance of amending the constitution as I do.

The Swedes, some of the planets most bold social engineers, have created many far reaching laws concerning parent/child relationships. Libertarians, may all swoon now, but the Swedes seem to be doing pretty well as a society. You should know that by now.

Here is some news about how Swedes are going about amending their laws on sex ed.

http://www.thelocal.se/10298/20080306