"Name the most overrated things of the decade!" was my brief. Fine, but I thought that the decade -- whatever it was called -- finished at the end of 2009 (just like the nineties had finished in 1999, or the eighties in 1989). Many words have already been wasted arguing about whether the decade finishes this year, or finished 12 months ago. It is in danger of becoming one of the year's most overrated debates.
Whenever the decade began, we can now see in hindsight that a few things were highly overrated. Most of us now agree that President Bush's post-9/11 approval rating was a little higher than necessary, and that President Obama, for all his promise, was not the Second Coming (and neither, even more strangely, was Tiger Woods). We now know that Marion Jones, Floyd Paterson and JT LeRoy might have required less adulation. Enthusiasm over the War in Iraq has waned, ethanol in our tanks is no longer expected to save the world, and everyone has stopped watching Heroes.
But a few people and things still need to be cut down to size...
Mark Peters: 10 Of The Funniest Underrated Humor Books (PHOTOS)
Mark Juddery: 7 Overrated Things That Are Actually Pretty Good (But Still Overrated) (PHOTOS)
Seth Abramson: The Top 25 Underrated Creative Writing MFA Programs (2010-2011)
Mat Gleason: The Ten Most UNDERRATED Los Angeles Art World Stars
|
Post a Comment
That's because records were mainly sold as twoSong 45s....not as complete Albums.
After several 45's were released then a compilation album would come out contain all of the 45s' songs plus some new ones.
So Mariah's Achievement is still Remarkable in comparison
Dawkins does not say evolution proves god is false....that is absurd. What dawkins says is evolution allows atheists to be intellectually satisfied. In other words, instead of saying "I don't know how it happened, but I know the zombie jew hypothesis isn't convincing", there is a sensible answer to how humans got here.
The only reason the god-hypothesis would be effected by the theory of evolution, is because some people (creationists) assert their god requires for evolution to be false. Not all religions are that stupid.
RELIGION. In and of itself, it makes more people atheists than any author.
I suggest you ALL watch the following DVDs & Videos:
'Imagine If All Atheists Left America': http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mbef07aQtB8
'Constantines Sword':http://www.ConstantinesSword.com
'Theologians Under Hitler': http://www.vitalvisuals.com/?q=node/19
'The God Who Wasn't There': http://www.TheGodMovie.com/
'A brief rundown of the cost in human lives exacted by religion and religious warfare': http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lq0oMhR3OgI
I tell every one to support those who fight for 'Separation of Church and State'. These are a few I've been supporting for years;
Americans United for Separation of Church and State: http://www.au.org/
Freedom From Religion Foundation: http://ffrf.org/
Military Religious Freedom Foundation: http://www.militaryreligiousfreedom.org/
The Interfaith Alliance Foundation: http://www.interfaithalliance.org/
Not believing in a god is as much of a lifestyle choice as collecting stamps.
I've check out many of the major forms of Christianity (of the over 38,000 commercially available for purchase), and I cannot un-see what I've witnessed. I cannot unlearn the facts about these ancient forms of control.
When it comes to not believing in a god, I am convinced that I do not have a choice.
For the 2010s, whenever someone says something silly, I'm going to accuse them of "Juddery."
It's NOT something to do to be cool.
But since you're interested in belittling someone's position, it should be recognized that "Compulsive Christianity" is all the rage. Just go to church on Xmas and Easter, SAY that you believe in the bible (without having ever read it), and POOF! You've got morals, you're a Christian, AND people in the community will accept you.
They don't REALLY buy all this nonsense.
Sounds like a lifestyle choice to me.
I'm going to add "juddery" to my vocab too.
What the hell does this mean? Perhaps the rest of the items in the list are good, the the first item is so incoherent that I can't make out what it's trying to say. It order for something to be "overrated", mustn't it be 'rated" first? Who 'rates' religious belief/disbelief? I wasn't aware it was a fashion statement.
Is that REALLY militant?
As a life-long atheist, I don't think atheism is either "cool" or "overrated".
Nicely said, not that this discussion is of global import but the initial assertion was off base enough that I thought it deserved comment. Thanks for handling it.