#52250: — 12/05  at  07:26 PM
)-:

#52251: Archosaurian — 12/05  at  07:35 PM
I guess it is the doom of all great thinkers to be beaten by ignorant, foolish thugs. The same thing happened to Voltaire. At least we can all hope that history will go the way it has followed so far in that the liberals end up overcoming hardwired conservatives, even if it takes many years of struggle.

Of course, if nothing is urgently done to stop all that is encouraging the stupidities, that may not happen.

#52252: Don — 12/05  at  07:37 PM
The godly work of right-good Christians of Kansas, I see. I'm sure those Bubbas are proud. And their wives and kids are "seen and not heard" and their animals are scared. These are the same yahoos who claim that Chrisianity is under attack by Atheist evildoers.

I sincerely hope Dr. Mirecki recovers quickly.

I see he is a Doctor of Theology and is an expert in ancient manuscripts. I'd rather hear that the two noodleheads who beat him up were upset about him cutting them off on the highway or something. But it's because he's dared to question the supposedly reverent and pure fundamentalism hold dear?!? Holy crap!

#52253: pough — 12/05  at  07:47 PM
WWJD?

#52254: — 12/05  at  07:58 PM
"Douglas County sheriff’s deputies are investigating the reported beating of a Kansas University professor who gained recent notoriety for his Internet tirades against Christian fundamentalists."

Internet tirades?

I thought it was an email.

And I didn't think there were such things as "Christian fundamentalists" any more. I thought they were all "born again Christians."

It's all so confusing.

Let's just call them "devoutly ignorant and bigoted asswipes" from now on.

That way we won't get confused about who we're talking about.

#52255: PZ Myers — 12/05  at  08:12 PM
Yeah. I do "internet tirades".

Do I need to get a nightstick for the car?

#52256: Eva Young — 12/05  at  08:20 PM
PZ, you might want to pack heat. This is appalling.

Here is some of the words of wisdom from that jerk who has been going after Mirecki:

Some of his inflammatory message board postings were made while he attended KU in the early 1990s as a graduate student in the sociology department. He worked for the university as a teaching assistant some of that time.

Altevogt, in a 1994 posting to a discussion board, talked about an article he’d read and took a poke at Hillary Clinton.

“This is an excellent article for those of you who can access it, since the network propaganda pigs tend to avoid saying anything negative about Hitlary.”

In another posting in 1996, Altevogt talked to another discussion board member who was defending comments by writer Andrei Codrescu:

“The subtle distinction you’re missing Nazi-boy is that there’s a difference between being taken to heaven by god, and wishing that people would die because you disagree with them, and moreover stating that the world would be a better place as a result of their deaths. The fact that you don’t understand that distinction is why I correctly have identified both you and Codrescu as crypto-nazis. The last group that failed to make that subtle distinction slaughtered six million jews.”

http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2005/dec/03/conservative_critic_known_inflammatory_speech/?evolution

I noticed you commented over on King's blog. It will be interesting to see if he responds.

#52258: — 12/05  at  08:26 PM
I think it's great what he tried to do, but he really should have been more careful. I hope he at least got the license number of those thugs who assaulted him.

#52259: — 12/05  at  08:29 PM
PZ, you gotta hire some body guards. Not only will it be for your protection, it'll look awesome.

#52260: — 12/05  at  08:36 PM
Posted at Inside Higher Ed:

A few folks here just don't get it. They seem to think that if one's belief, no matter how stupid or harmful or hateful, is based on a religious dogma, then that belief is above harsh criticism.

I recognize that this is the way our media works and habitual liars make strange "Bible-based" statements to our nations journalists and "pundits" every week and are not seriously questioned about why non-members of the religion should give a hoot.

But we're not on TV and I'm not a pundit and -- guess what -- neither is Dr. Mirecki. In fact, Dr. Mirecki is an expert on religion and how religions function and grow and shrink and die.

Religions do shrink and die, you know. It happens all the time. It's happening right now to some religion, somewhere. Anyone want to disagree?

Feudi writes

"I think he is correct that ID should be taught as part of a religious curriculum. However, his whole attitude towards the subject is so obviously poisoned before the class even starts"

Really? Is Dr. Mirecki's "attitude" "obviously poisoned" or has Dr. Mirecki maybe -- just maybe --LEARNED as a matter of FACT that the Discovery Institute and its employees are documented LIARS who are promoting "ID theory" in an attempt to diminish the status of science and promote their belief that the United States should be run from the top down as an officially Christian nation?

Is that not a possibility?

Bill Dockery writes

"attitude revealed by his leaked e-mail (a) does not show a commitment to truth-seeking "

Really? Or does Dr. Mirecki's "attitude" merely show that Dr. Mirecki has possibly -- just possibly -- LEARNED as a matter of FACT that the Discovery Institute and its employees are documented LIARS who are promoting "ID theory" in an attempt to diminish the status of science and promote their belief that the United States should be run from the top down as an officially Christian nation?

Is that not a possibility?

"Having a class with the dedicated purpose of attacking the views of others hardly sounds like free inquiry and independant thought."

How about a class which attacks the view that blowing up buildings so you can die as a martyr and further the struggle of your people in their efforts to defeat infidels is a productive way to behave? Assuming students are free to ask questions, how is this not "free inquiry" and "independent thought"?

I didn't hear anything about Dr. Mirecki not allowing people to ask questions in his class. You are smearing Dr. Mirecki and making it sound as if he is engaged in some sort of brainwashing exercise.

Perhaps he is merely telling the truth about the "fundies" at the Discovery Institute and their behavior.

Did you consider that possibility?

Maybe the "fundies" at the Discovery Institute NEED a big slap in their fat face because they all the time and our lazy media let's them get away with it?

Did you consider that possibility?

I'm just engaging some free inquiry here.

Joe V. writes

"we do not alienate the very people we are trying to educate."

The people who are alienated by comments such as Dr. Mirecki's do not want to be educated. They want to educate you. They want to educate you about Jesus Christ and his Word. They don't care about science. They don't care about facts. They care about promoting their religion. Search the net for information about the Discovery Institute's "WEdge Document" if you want to learn more about this.

"But how does someone with such a derisive attitude towards any religious belief (ID, Buddhism, wiccan, or whatever) become chair of a religious studies department"

Huh? How about the religious belief that women are like cattle to be sold and must never step outside of the house and should be killed if they are raped? If I'm a female professor of religious studies, can I not hold a derisive attitude toward that belief?

This is exactly what I was getting at above. Religious beliefs are not above criticism. The religious beliefs of Christians in this country are often de facto above criticism for fear of reprisal if they are criticized.

Dr. Mirecki will be happy to tell you about that, I'm sure.

kmf writes

"He has not only revealed his strong personal opinion of IDers, he has armed critics of evolution who argue that academia is intellectually dishonest and hostile toward conservative Christians."

Dr. Mirecki's opinions barely register on the scale. The "critics of evolution" will take virtually any statement about anything made by a scientist who criticizes "ID theory" into an attack on religion.

#52262: — 12/05  at  08:56 PM
PZ's post was on Panda's Thumb and then ... it's gone.

That's sort of interesting.

#52264: Federico Contreras — 12/05  at  09:04 PM
Hmm, does anyone know if you're allowed to carry a concealed firearm in Kansas?

I know that if I were in Kansas and I was Gay/Black/Jewish or an outspoken Atheist, I would definetly take refuge in scripture.

The scripture that says "HK USP .45 Auto" on the slide.



I am 100% serious. This is not a joke. I find the thought of physical violence abhorrent. The good doc needed options. Did you know that merely brandishing a firearm woulda been enough to prevent this horrid abuse of his person? Dead rednecks would not even have been necessary, even they know what self-preservation is.

#52267: PZ Myers — 12/05  at  09:11 PM
I voluntarily pulled it from PT for a little while, while leaving it here. There are some Kansas people on the PT mailing list, and they're keeping an eye on their local media for further updates.


No, I'm not getting a gun. There have been no threats against me, and even if there had been, I do not believe in reacting to stupid threats with deadly force. Let's keep this about Mirecki -- I think one important piece of protection I have is that I live in a small town where everyone knows everyone else.

#52268: — 12/05  at  09:16 PM
But how do you KNOW that your bullets are deadly to humans? I've never seen one of your bullets kill a human being.

Your belief that your bullets are deadly to humans is no different than my belief in God. It's just a matter of faith, except my evidence for God is better.

#52269: jinx — 12/05  at  09:17 PM
In an attempt to put the "What would Jesus do?" fallacy to bed at least among a few people:

Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law. —Matthew 10:34-35

I will kill her children with Death, and all the assemblies will know that I am he who searches the minds and hearts. I will give to each one of you according to your deeds. —Revelation 2:23

So, WWJD? Forgive him or take a lead pipe to him and his children, the Bible plainly supports both reactions.

#52270: Federico Contreras — 12/05  at  09:19 PM
hehe, it's not deadly force until you make a hit PZ. =)

But of course, I respect everyone's opinions on this, since as a liberal against excessive gun control, I am in the minority (and getting guns for self-defense is too much of a hassle where I live, I carry a wet noodle for personal defense).

Having a loved one assasinated tends to polarize your views on this issue, one way or the other I think.

Either way, you certainly don't make "stupid threats" if you know you may have to back them up with your life.

#52271: — 12/05  at  09:21 PM
Obviously what happened to Mirecki is scary and awful.
But is it fair to paint all fundamentalist Christians with the same brush ("thugs") because two of them are violent?

And to the guy who defended Mirecki's email... Mirecki was wrong to have put it this way ("slap in big fat face", etc.) As a professor, it's just not kosher. Not because of the Christianized sociopolitical climate, but because this is just not how professorship ought to be done, its way too prejudiced and personally vitriolic.

But yes, it is horrible that he got hurt and I hope he's ok.

#52273: — 12/05  at  09:32 PM
Tastant, the thing to keep in mind is that a lot of far-right evangelical and fundamentalist rhetoric is literally militant: armies, soldiers, and the like, not to mention their obsession with the actual military. Beating a university professor -- and keep in mind that they were following his truck, which implies surveillance and premeditation -- is the logical outcome of their rhetoric.

Now, it's true that most people on the far-right religious fringe, whether evangelical or fundamentalist, wouldn't openly countenance assault. But most segregationists wouldn't have supported lynchings, either. That doesn't absolve them of aiding and abetting what amounts to structural violence.

#52274: removed — 12/05  at  09:32 PM
Tastant, your compassion and concern is so underwhelming.

#52275: BWJones — 12/05  at  09:34 PM
Frederico,

A couple of points: Brandishing a firearm does not necessarily prevent abuse. In fact, it may escalate it. Anyone with any firearms training should know that you do not display or point a firearm unless you are prepared to terminate a threat. Furthermore, most gunshot injuries/killing occur within 25 feet. If one displays a gun with the intent to threaten, and are not prepared to kill, then they are risking the possibility of injury or death either by being killed with their own firearm (it happens more often that you might know), or another person's firearm. Furthermore, even if one is unarmed, and a person displays a firearm, 25 feet can be closed remarkably quickly. So, quickly that easily within 2 seconds, the person holding the firearm is in now in immediate jeopardy.

In many cases carrying a firearm is not the panacea that some believe it is, even if it is an H&K USP.

#52276: coturnix — 12/05  at  09:36 PM
Calling fundies 'fundies' is fine - it is not an insult, it is taxonomy.

Saying "big fat face" is bad style, for sure. Not dignified. Perhaps he should write a blog where he can rant like that. That would be an appropriate place for such statments. Error of judgement.

Getting beat up by thugs is being a victim of a crime. Violent crime. Perhaps also hate crime. There is a difference here - the thugs did not stop him to tell him that his face is also big and fat. They sent him to the hospital - he should send them to prison.

BTW, and OT, does anyone know what is wrong with Blogspot? It's been down for hours and there is no note on the Blogger homepage (even the Blogger blog, where they tend to post such announcements, is down).

#52277: — 12/05  at  09:36 PM
Insights into how/why this happened:

http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2005/11/ku_should_get_t.html

A chairman of a religion department shouldn’t be hostile to conservative Christianity. How about making Mirecki go through a paddling line at one of KU’s fraternities?

#52279: Federico Contreras — 12/05  at  09:52 PM
All good points Jones,

But, iirc, the blacks who were lynched, the gays who are still threatened, beaten and/or killed for their sexuality. I believe the state cannot protect us 24/7, so that is in our hands.

If a person rushes you when you draw on him, his life is forfeit.

Anyway, this is off topic. Point is, we'll have to agree to disagree. You can go ahead and keep on not liking them, and people like me can go ahead and keep carrying them, at least in the states (hypothetically, my carrying one protects you even if you don't =).

#52280: Federico Contreras — 12/05  at  09:55 PM
This was supposed to say:
But, iirc, the blacks who were lynched, the gays who are still threatened, beaten and/or killed for their sexuality *were also unarmed*.

Now back to our regular posts.

#52281: — 12/05  at  09:58 PM
"You can go ahead and keep on not liking them, and people like me can go ahead and keep carrying them, at least in the states"

Good luck in San Francisco.