Vacula did a post claiming to reply to Michael Nugent’s post that asked him two questions. Vacula’s post didn’t reply at all; it ignored Nugent’s questions entirely and instead went on and on about how horrible I am. That’s not what Nugent asked, so it’s silly to say

This post will address Nugent’s most recent post and continue our ongoing dialogue.

One thing Vacula said was about my objection to his and Porter’s calling me “Ophie” – I pointed out that I don’t call them Justie and Karlie.

One should notice that the only reason Ophelia Benson was being called Ophie was because Karla Porter used the name in a satire piece, an episode of ‘As The Atheist World Turns,’ titled “ATAWT: Please Be My Agent Ophie.” While Karla was writing the piece, she didn’t use real full names, but rather only made references to actual people [Notice the characters EB, L Moore, Ophie, and Porter (who isn't even necessarily Karla)] . People ‘in on the joke,’ then, would easily get it.

But, no, that interpretation is the implausible one on Ophelia’s account and the name ‘Ophie’ is just to “belittle” Ophelia. Ophelia is complaining so much and taking great offense to a shortened version of her name. Give me a break.

Porter agreed in a comment, and added some geographico-linguistic expertise to amplify the point.

I have positions my first and last names as diminutive. It doesn’t irk me in the least. After more than 10 years of living in Latin America where use of diminutives is a sign of affection I have nothing whatsoever against them. Some people just don’t get it. to be quite frank…

It’s my turn to say give me a break. Or, more bluntly, bullshit.

Diminutives can be a sign of affection everywhere. Can be. That doesn’t mean they invariably are. They are a sign of affection when they come from people who like you. When they come from people who hate you, they are not a sign of affection. They are belittling. Who doesn’t know this?

Has Porter never even seen Tootsie for christ’s sake? Remember that? “My name is Dorothy. Not Tootsie, not Honey, not Sweetie. Dorothy.” And that wasn’t even about a diminutive nickname used as a weapon, it was just about a diminutive nickname used with casual patronizing dismissiveness.

I was arguing with some guy in comments on Jerry Coyne’s blog, years ago (obviously) – I think it was JJ Ramsey – and the guy called me “dear” in a response. I told him to knock it off, and Jerry backed me up, agreeing that it was sexist.

It’s very similar to the way the second person singular works in many European languages (and used to work in English). Tu, te, dich, and so on – they can be intimate and affectionate between relatives and friends – and they can be insulting or a marker of inferior status. It depends.

If people who are harassing you daily call you by a diminutive of your name, it is not a sign of affection. Karla Porter did not call me “Ophie” as a sign of affection. What she said in that comment is complete bullshit.

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)

Uh oh – batten down the hatches. Board up the windows, hide all the knives, tie down everything loose. Michael Shermer tweets

Chris Mooney takes issue with my claim that there’s a liberal war on science: http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/03/theres-no-such-thing-liberal-war-science …

So in a few minutes there will be a 5000 word piece up at eSkeptic, right? Ripping Mooney a new orifice and calling him a Nazi McCarthyite witch-hunting inquisitor? Right? Because it’s not permitted to take issue with a claim of Michael Shermer’s?

A small sample:

Shermer’s article ends with a statement that, as far as I can tell, is just incorrect: “Surveys show that moderate liberals and conservatives embrace science roughly equally,” he writes. I’m not sure where he gets this, but for a direct rebuttal let me point you to a recent study in the American Sociological Review by Gordon Gauchat, which finds that unlike liberals or moderates, conservatives have lost trust in science rather precipitously over the past several decades.

None of this should be surprising. As I argued on The Agenda, it’s no accident that conservatives have more problems with science than do liberals. It’s part of their personality and who they are. We know, from decades of psychological research, that conservatives are less open to new ideas and experiences, and have a higher need for cognitive closure—the desire to have fixed beliefs and certainties that are unchanging. So of course they find a dynamic force like science, which excels at upsetting the applecart, to be threatening. That oft cited statistic about only 6 percent of American Association for the Advancement of Science members being Republicans—get over it already. It’s not remotely surprising.

That’s a small sample. The whole piece is about Shermer and his wrongness! Most of my column that criticized Shermer’s sexist claim was about something else, not Shermer and his wrongness (or his sexist claim) at all. So that means Shermer will write about 20,000 words calling Mooney a Nazi etcetera, right?

Or not. Any bets? I’m betting he won’t. Why? Because Mooney wrote a best-seller, and he writes for major media, and he’s a guy. Shermer sees him as an equal. I’m betting he won’t respond that way to someone he sees as an equal. I think he felt free to respond to me the way he did because I don’t have anywhere near the clout that Mooney has, so responding to me that way seemed safe. I don’t mean I think he thought about it in those words, but I think he felt comfortable writing about me the way he did, and I strongly suspect he would not feel comfortable writing about Mooney that way, and I think those are the reasons. Mooney is an insider and a colleague, and I’m not, so calling Mooney ludicrously hyperbolic names would be awkward while calling me them would not. Mooney is a guy, and I’m not, so calling Mooney ludicrously hyperbolic names would be awkward while calling me them would not. I don’t know that; it’s an interpretation; but we know I’m factually correct about at least one part of it: Shermer did call me those ludicrously hyperbolic names.

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)

Stewart gave me a graphic he made. Everybody’s giving me graphics today! It’s a good day – albeit busy, what with one thing and another. The to-do list is lengthening.

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)

Peter Tatchell is outraged that Reading University’s Muslim Society invited Abu Usamah at-Thahabi to speak, given that Thahabi has endorsed the murder of gays and “apostates.”

A joint statement by the Reading University Muslim Society, Reading University Students Union and the University of Reading praised the “laudable aims” of the Muslim Society.

Laudable aims? Are the university authorities and student’s union bonkers or bigots? Do they, too, justify murder?

I find it impossible to believe that the Muslim Society was not aware of Thahabi’s extremist opinions. He is a well publicised hate preacher. How can an organisation be laudable if it hosts a person with such intolerant, murder-endorsing views?

Well…because if you don’t say the aims are laudable, maybe someone will call you Islamophobic. That’s how.

The joint statement went on to say:

“Both the University and RUSU (Reading University Students Union) are committed to supporting the Muslim Society in its aims of raising awareness of Islam and building mutual understanding. We are delighted that other events in the week’s programme will be going ahead as planned.”

Building mutual understanding? Has Reading University taken leave of its senses? How is mutual understanding advanced by hosting a preacher who advocates murdering ex-Muslims and gay people? Who disrespects women as inferior, lesser human beings? And who calls for the beating of littler girls?

By ignoring that part, and pretending that raising awareness of Islam is all about good things with no possibility of bad things creeping in.

At the last minute, the university decided to cancel Thahabi’s talk but not because of his sexism, homophobia and de facto incitement to murder. The reason the authorities cited for cancelling was, they said, “the increasing threat of violent protest by extremist groups.” These groups were not named.

Some people interpreted this as a smear against the peaceful counter-protest planned by the anti-extremist group, Student Rights, and by the Reading Atheist, Humanist and Secularist Society (RAHS).

However, a post on the English Defence League-linked Casual’s United blog stated that “local activists will be turning up to disrupt” the event. It also posted a telephone number that its readers can call to “tell them [the university] what you think of them for hosting this rodent.”

More fodder for the EDL. Bad move. Next time just don’t invite murderous clerics.

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)

Ania Bula made me a picture.

Beware the Masked Pineapple – it never Goes Home!

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)

Another week begins. Mayhew is still at it, still publicly fuming about the way I blog. It’s on Google+ this time, and she did some research. She also did some attempted argument.

Sara E. Mayhew

Yesterday 8:25 PM  -  Public

I pointed out the lazy blogging habits of certain Freethoughtblogs authors because it bothers me to see people trying make a name for themselves by posting fluff, when there are so many quality, hard working science advocates and educators out there.

That’s the argument part.

It’s a stupid argument.

One, “trying make a name for themselves”? How does she know that’s what we’re doing? How does she know all of us or any of us are doing that? How does she know we’re doing that more than anything else, or to the exclusion of anything else? She doesn’t. She doesn’t know any of those things. My main reason for doing it is the fact that I like doing it. When I started doing it I had no reason to think anyone would ever read a word of it.

Two, “when there are so many quality, hard working science advocates and educators out there”? Wut? Of course there are. There are tens of thousands of them. If we’re talking the whole world, there are millions of them. What’s that got to do with anything? Do I have some big fraudulent label on my blog that says “quality, hard working science here!”? No. Am I taking anything away from any quality, hard working science advocates and educators? No. That “when” is as random and meaningless as if she shouted at someone for eating lunch when there are so many quality, hard working science advocates and educators out there or going for a walk when there are so many quality, hard working science advocates and educators out there or burping the baby when there are so many quality, hard working science advocates and educators out there.

Three, don’t make me laugh. She suddenly starts complaining about “the lazy blogging habits of certain Freethoughtblogs authors” out of some broad social concern for quality science and education? Please. Out of all the bloggers in all the world, not to mention all the problems in all the world, she zoomed in on the putative lazy blogging habits of certain Freethoughtblogs authors…because she has a burr up her ass and she just can’t shut up about me. It’s got nothing to do with quality science and education. Her attempt at a “Dear Muslima” is pathetic.

Now for the quality hard-working research.

Here are some recent posts from Butterflies and Wheels, which shows how many words were copy/pasted from a secondary source, out of the total words of the post:

How to read satire 555/895
Michael Nugent visits the slime pit 556/791
Imagine 282/647

This isn’t simply trying to be transparent and quoting people accurately. Anyone who took high school English knows that if you can’t summarize a large chunk of text, you probably don’t understand it. Quotes should be supplementary, not nearly 50% of your piece.

This isn’t high school English, Sara. A blog isn’t a term paper. It isn’t a book report. It isn’t a dissertation. It isn’t a magazine column or a book chapter. A blog is a blog, and one of the distinctive features of the blog as a medium is that there are no rules. No rules at all. You can do anything with your blog you want to (within the law).

My aim isn’t to summarize stuff I read. I know how to summarize a large chunk of text, thank you, but it’s hardly ever what I want to do here. You’re trying to invent a new rule but it won’t work, because you’re not in charge of blogging. There’s no such “should” as “quotes should be supplementary, not nearly 50% of your piece,” not for blogging. There is for other kinds of writing, of course, but not for blogging. Blogging is a flexible, shifting, creative genre, and your invented rules cut no ice.

Blogging isn’t the same as handing in an academic paper, but having this much of someone else’s writing pasted into your post is intellectually lazy and sloppy writing. You could argue substance over style, but there’s so little substance there. It would be fine to do a TMZ/tabloid style take-down of subjects, but even those mediums have an element of entertainment and/or humour; it’s not to be mistaken for serious, quality information.

I’m not saying these peanut gallery style blogs shouldn’t exist. I’m saying that they should be given the credibility a peanut gallery deserves, which is much much less than well written, content focused bloggers who aim to communicate science and secular humanism with quality information. Those are the bloggers that deserve your serious attention and the guest speaker chairs at events.

Aha, now we get to the point! Nobody should be asking me to speak at events! Mayhew is pissed off that someone occasionally asks me to speak at an event.

Why? Why me, why now?

I have no idea. Maybe she’s used up her other targets and cast around for a new one.

It’s funny how I’ve never seen fit to do this to Mayhew. I don’t tweet and post and Facebook update to say she does shitty work and doesn’t deserve your serious attention and the guest speaker chairs at events. I don’t talk about her at all – until she starts poking at me.

Kylie Sturgess has a couple of very good comments on Mayhew’s post. Mayhew would be wise to heed them.

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)

And Vacula is still working overtime displaying his bullying skillz to an admiring world.

Karla Porter‏@karla_porter

People don’t take yourselves so seriously. We are all blips on the cosmic clock. Enjoy or short life, don’t be miserable =)

Justin Vacula‏@justinvacula

Ophie asks “who the fuck is @karla_porter anyway?” Interesting she forgot about this FB conversation from July 2012 – http://www.justinvacula.com/2012/08/ophelia-bensons-continuing-complaining.html …

Justin Vacula‏@justinvacula

@ElevatorGATE What nonsense. Ophie also complained much about July 2012 podcast w @karla_porter http://nepafreethought.org/podcast/episode?p=15 … – #bravehero

Ophelia Benson‏@OpheliaBenson

@daiapmorgen @justinvacula @karla_porter Notice that I don’t talk about “Justy” and “Karlie”? No sense of humor, I suppose.

Justin Vacula‏@justinvacula

@OpheliaBenson @daiapmorgen @karla_porter If Ophie really bothers, I’ll consider stopping. Karla just used it to not use real name in satire

     

A tidy collection.

Those ones about “who is Karla Porter” – I didn’t mean I thought I’d never seen the name before, I meant who the fuck is she, what does any of this have to do with her, why is she helping Vacula harass me, why is she caling me “Ophie” in that matey-contemptuous way, who is she.

But since she is harassing me alongside Vacula, I’ll point out what a thug she is. It’s my impression that she has some kind of responsible adult job – yet she spends time jeering at a total stranger on social media and in podcasts, and even contemptuously calls her by a diminutive, just to belittle. How very odd.

Anyway, Vacula’s last item is a real gem. Spoken like a true bully.

Update 6 hours later – because it’s too funny.

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)

Here’s something to follow in case you want a good thing to follow today – #CSW57, the Committee on the Status of Women at the UN. Michelle Bachelet is speaking right now.

United Nations CSW‏@UN_CSW

“1 in 3 girls in developing countries is likely to be married as a child bride.” – Ms. #Bachelet at #CSW57 opening. #endchildmarriage

UMWomen‏@UMWomen

Bachelet: Ending violence against women is the missing Millennium Development Goal that must be included in all future discussions. #CSW57

Anna Johnson‏@annaj21

Bachelet: it’s for Malala that we must come to a strong, action-oriented outcome. This is a historic opportunity #CSW57

@COSATU TODAY‏@_cosatu

@myworld2015Up to 70% of women in some countries face physical and /or sexual violence in their lifetime.” – Ms. #Bachelet at #CSW57

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)

The Faculty of Health Sciences at Simon Fraser does not welcome the “Vaccine Resistance Movement” on campus. It has issued a statement to say so.

FHS disavows any support or affiliation with Vaccine Resistance Movement

The Faculty of Health Sciences (FHS) was surprised to learn that SFU has rented space to the “Vaccine Resistance Movement” for their Summit 2013 at the Harbour Centre Campus. Renting space to  outside organizations for events such as these is done without any  academic oversight. FHS disavows any support or affiliation with this  event which we believe to be  anti-science and contrary to good public  health practice. We are deeply concerned that the public will perceive  the SFU venue as legitimation of the dangerous misinformation that the  Vaccine Resistance Movement is known for. Please accept our sincere  apologies for the inappropriate use of SFU facilities to promote this  event.

That is forthright. Well said.

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)

Catching up. This is from way back in January but I didn’t get to it then. It’s a post on the Ms blog about online harassment of women and what men can do about it, by Ben Atherton-Zeman.

He starts by saying that women get more online harassment than men do.

Racists harass people online; so do homophobes. Most people agree this is harassment. But my gender’s online harassment of women seems to go unquestioned, even defended, in most circles. Yet men’s online abuse of women has been well-documented by women such as Laurie Penney, Jennifer Pozner, Emily May and many other women.

“The sad part is that it works,” says feminist blogger Soraya Chemaly. “I have spoken to many, many women writers who ‘tone down’ their voices or stop writing entirely as a result of threats. … I mean, who wants to wake up in the morning to ‘Stupid cunt’ or ‘I’ll go from house to house shooting women like you.’”

…

Chemaly adds, “The point of the harassment, like harassment on the street, is to make the public sphere seem dangerous and to portray women as provoking a violent response through their actions.”

Pozner agrees. “It’s about the policing of women … using threats to keep us silent.”

And there isn’t much reaction, except from the targets themselves. There isn’t a great deal of blogger solidarity or human solidarity or progressive/liberal solidarity with women who are targets of harassment. That’s changing – some of that change happening right here, with you guys setting the example – but it’s slow.

But most men have remained silent, as we do with many forms of our gender’s violence against women. Many of us blame the victim, suggesting things women can do differently to ameliorate the problem. We tell women to grow a thicker skin, not to “feed the trolls” and not to assume all men feel that way.

Like Vacula. Ben A-Z missed something there: that suggesting things women can do differently to ameliorate the problem is not just victim-blaming, it’s also helping the harassers and telling the women to change what they do in order to appease people who are harassing them. It’s saying “if those harassers are harassing you for speaking out then you should stop speaking out.” It’s treating harassers like weather or a steep mountain, rather than as human beings who can decide how to treat people.

Think of the labor movement. Think of union organizing and strikes. The labor movement often encountered violence from the owners and the goon and scabs they hired. Progressives and liberals didn’t advise union organizers to stop organizing in order to avoid the violence; they did everything they could to expose the violence and to stand with those on the receiving end.

Men’s online abuse results in women hesitating to write, stopping writing altogether and fearing for their physical safety. Many women have told me that such abuse doesn’t just happen when women are writing about feminism, it happens to them all the time. Amy Davis Roth blogged about atheism and was subjected to daily harassment as a result. Roth described a “typical day” as “Wake up. Make coffee. Block hateful messages on Twitter or other social media … Make art.”

All the time. Once it starts, it doesn’t stop. Harassment becomes a career for some people (who promptly accuse the objects of the harassment who write about the harassment of “doing it for the hits”). It gets so non-stop and so obsessive that you can find two adults spending an entire hour doing a podcast to discuss a few comments that A Target made on a Facebook post. No really. I know that sounds incredible, but it’s true. Two adults, plus three callers. An entire hour. A few comments. By one person. On a Facebook post. “Dramatic reading”; discussion; more discussion; more discussion. For an hour.

Ben A-Z has some suggestions for what men can do to help.

1. Listen to women’s experience of online abuse and threats by men. Let us read articles about it – the ones linked here are a good place to start. Instead of suggesting solutions, we can take in how hurtful the comments are.

4. When men harass women online, speak up. We can say something like, “As a man, your harassing comment offends me,” in the Comments sections.  Say how it hurts you rather than speaking on behalf of the target.

5. Name the specific silencing tactic being used: name-calling, focusing on a woman’s appearance instead of her argument, etc.

7. Watch for “professional trolls” from the “Men’s Rights” or “Father’s Rights” groups. They will often use terms such as “misandry” and refer to the feminist movement as anti-male or the domestic violence movement as an “industry.”

8. Send supportive emails, letters, candygrams, etc. to feminist women. Thank them for the good work they are doing–not just when they are targets of online harassment, but all the time. “If you see someone doing good work, you can be sure they’re being told they’re fat and ugly,” says Emily May. “Nice emails counterbalance the noise.”

Good advices. You peeps are already doing them. Change is happening but my god it is slow.

Speaking of that, though – Annie Laurie Gaylor and Dan Barker signed Adam Lee’s petition a few days ago. That’s good. That’s very good.

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)

By the way, that whole pineapple thing? Mayhew’s witty “Pineapple go home!” on Facebook, Vacula’s witty repetition of “Pineapple go home!” farther down the thread on Facebook, “Pineapple go home!” as the title of the first episode of Vacula & Porter’s new podcast, Mayhew’s witty cartoon of “Pineapple go home!”?

I take it they have no clue what the pineapple is about. It’s about something. I didn’t make my profile picture a pineapple just because I wanted a piece of fruit as my profile picture. No. No, I made my profile picture a pineapple in solidarity with the Reading University Atheist, Humanist and Secularist Society. There was a little incident last October, which I blogged about several times. I first blogged about it on October 5.

I will just repost the whole thing here, because it’s mine, and I can do that.

Either the pineapple goes, or you do       

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)

Another cartoon, not quite as funny as Bjarte’s, but still funny, in its way.

[Art removed at the request of the artist. It was a cartoon of an angry scowling pineapple next to a sign with an arrow pointing to "Home."]

[The art can be seen here.]

[Missing art compensated for with amusing Twitter exchange.]

Sara E. Mayhew‏@saramayhew

@daiapmorgen It’s a pineapple, not an argument. Chill out. Just a doodle of a funny sounding phrase.

Justin Vacula‏@justinvacula

@saramayhew May I use this picture w attribution for tonight’s #bravehero podcast? http://www.blogtalkradio.com/bravehero/2013/03/03/go-home-pineapple …

Sara E. Mayhew‏@saramayhew

@justinvacula rather not. It was just supposed to be a doodle of how funny the phrase sounds, not about Benson.

Don’t geddit? It helps to know that my Facebook profile picture is a pineapple, and that Sara Mayhew told me to “Go home, pineapple” on her Facebook post in which she picked a fight with me. Justin Vacula found that so amusing that he echoed it. Then he was so taken with that that he decided to do a podcast titled “Go home, pineapple!” for a new series titled – I’m not making this up – Brave Hero. He’s named it after the obsessive loon who does the “ElevatorGATE” blog and Twitter account.

Justin Vacula Introducing the Brave Hero podcast with hosts Justin Vacula and Karla Porter…we’re just two young muppets in a balcony.

Episode one — “Go home, pineapple!” — will be aired Saturday (3/2/13) at 7:00PM EST. We would be honored if #bravehero Sara E Mayhew would call in.

Be a #bravehero and join the growing resistance movement today! Callers — no matter their viewpoints — are welcome and encouraged. Save the online atheist community, save the world.

http://www.blogtalkradio.com/bravehero

Brave Hero Online Radio by Brave Hero

www.blogtalkradio.com

Weekly live episodes of ‘As The Atheist World Turns’ with @JustinVacula, @Karla_Porter, and guest callers. Drama never dies. #bravehero

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)

Five students have been arrested in Dhaka in the murder of the atheist blogger and campaigner Ahmed Rajib Haidar. The police say all five confessed to involvement in the murder.

The detectives identified the five as Faisal bin Nayeem alias Dwip, 22, Maksudul Hassan Anik, 23, Ehsan Reza Rumman, 23, Naim Sikder Irad, 19, and Nafis Imtiaz, 22.

Dwip and Anik, who hail from Matuail and Keraniganj in Dhaka, are students of electrical and electronic engineering, while Rumman and Irad, who hail from Jhenidah and Brahmanbaria respectively, are students of electric and telecommunications.

Imtiaz, who hails from Sandwip in Chittagong, is a student of business administration.

Notice all the high tech. I mentioned this to Tasneem Khalil, who sent me the link, and he told me that Islamists recruit the brightest in high tech and finance.

Makes sense. They would, wouldn’t they. But notice how brightness of that instrumental kind can be compatible with moral idiocy. From Islamists to bankers, murderers to technocrats in charge of genocidal wars (I’m thinking of Halberstam’s Best and Brightest here), one kind of brightness does not necessarily imply or include another kind.

The “Borobhai” [senior brother; the mastermind] gave the NSU students links of some blogs and asked them to collect information about the bloggers.

Analysing the posts, the group decided to kill Rajib, who used to write under the pseudonym of “Thaba Baba”, Monirul Islam, the DMP joint commissioner, told the newspersons.

Once the decision was taken, an “intelligence group” was formed to collect detailed information about the blogger analysing his posts on blogs and Facebook, and track him down.

An “intelligence group” with no moral intelligence whatever.

On February 11, Rumman followed their target from Shahbagh Projonmo Chattar to Mirpur-10 intersection. “Rajib was in a bus and Rumman followed him by a bicycle,” said the police official.

Rumman failed to find out Rajib’s house that day. But the next day he succeeded to locate his place at Palashnagar.

“The group later started to collect information from locals regarding his profession, lifestyle, relatives, etc to finalise their killing plan,” said Monirul.

Anik and a couple of others went to Notun Bazar and bought machetes and knives. Anik paid the money, the arrestees said.

On the day of the killing, the group came to know from Rajib’s Facebook page that he would not go to Shahbagh that day and rushed hurriedly to Palashnagar by bicycles and bus, said Monirul.

They reached there around 4:00pm, carrying the machetes and knives in schoolbags.

The group started to play cricket in an alley near the blogger’s house to monitor his return.

As the sun was going down, Rajib was seen returning home. When he neared the gate of his house, Dwip hit him with a machete in a bid to sever his head from the shoulder, but failed to succeed in doing so.

After two more hits, the victim fell on the wall and Dwip continued to chop him, said Monirul.

Why? Because. He was an atheist. What more reason did they need?

“Three of them told us that they were not repentant for what they have done. They said it was their religious obligation to kill Rajib.”

No thinking involved. Just a made-up rule, and stupidly blindly following it, without thinking. Your superior officer tells you to kill everyone in the village, you do it. Your “superior brother” tells you to kill an atheist blogger, you do it.

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)

Bjarte has a new cartoon.

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)