FOLLOW BOREME
TAGS
<< Back to listing
Richard Dawkins: Does editing human genes break moral taboos?

Richard Dawkins: Does editing human genes break moral taboos?

(4:07) CRISPR technology allows precise editing of the human genome. Big Think 2017.

Share this post

You can comment as a guest, but registering gives you added benefits

Add your comment
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
WalterEgo WalterEgo (147 days ago)

Some religions create "designer babies" by trying to prevent marriage outside their faith. The goal isn't for more gifted musicians, but for people who all think the same.

Original comment

Some religions create "designer babies" by trying to prevent marriage outside their faith. The goal isn't for more gifted musicians, but for people who all think the same.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: (146 days ago)

That's why atheists tend to marry each other too I guess

Original comment

That's why atheists tend to marry each other too I guess

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
WalterEgo WalterEgo (146 days ago)

An atheist man or woman can't marry a Muslim woman. Why? Because Muslim women are forbidden to marry outside their faith. LINK

Atheism doesn't have a rule book.

ReplyVote up (97)down (101)
Original comment

An atheist man or woman can't marry a Muslim woman. Why? Because Muslim women are forbidden to marry outside their faith. LINK

Atheism doesn't have a rule book.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: (145 days ago)

Oh, picking Islam?

Scoot down that same page to 'Modern practice' and it lists plenty of exceptions.

It looks like the religious 'rules' seem to vary between Islamic cultures and people can and do flout them.

Getting over the attitude of the average atheist (or any evangelical mindset) is bound to be more difficult when it comes to a respectful relationship.

You can move countries, but changing a mind is harder. The goal is creating people who all think the same.

Original comment

Oh, picking Islam?

Scoot down that same page to 'Modern practice' and it lists plenty of exceptions.

It looks like the religious 'rules' seem to vary between Islamic cultures and people can and do flout them.

Getting over the attitude of the average atheist (or any evangelical mindset) is bound to be more difficult when it comes to a respectful relationship.

You can move countries, but changing a mind is harder. The goal is creating people who all think the same.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
WalterEgo WalterEgo (145 days ago)

Should I have picked a different religion? Can you suggest one which does interfaith intolerance better? Maybe Judaism?

Original comment

Should I have picked a different religion? Can you suggest one which does interfaith intolerance better? Maybe Judaism?

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: (145 days ago)

Sure, OK, Judaism. Looking at your Wikipedia page, it says that in the USA "nearly half (47 percent) of marriages involving Jews were intermarriages with non-Jewish partners".

Do you think 47% of atheists willing choose to marry into religious families? Maybe you'll have to restrict your definition to strict Orthodox Jews and I'll do the same for strict atheists, and we can compare notes again.

I know you don't like straying from Wikipedia, but Pew research found that atheists were actually less likely to marry into another faith than Orthodox Christians (2014 Religious Lanscape study). Awkward.

Original comment

Sure, OK, Judaism. Looking at your Wikipedia page, it says that in the USA "nearly half (47 percent) of marriages involving Jews were intermarriages with non-Jewish partners".

Do you think 47% of atheists willing choose to marry into religious families? Maybe you'll have to restrict your definition to strict Orthodox Jews and I'll do the same for strict atheists, and we can compare notes again.

I know you don't like straying from Wikipedia, but Pew research found that atheists were actually less likely to marry into another faith than Orthodox Christians (2014 Religious Lanscape study). Awkward.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
WalterEgo WalterEgo (145 days ago)

From Pew: "The survey also shows that members of certain religious groups are more likely than others to be with someone of their faith, whether they are married or living together in a romantic relationship. For example, more than three-quarters of U.S. Hindus (91%), Mormons (82%) and Muslims (79%) who are married or living with a partner are with someone of the same religion. This is somewhat less common among Jews (65%), mainline Protestants (59%) and religiously unaffiliated people (56%)." LINK

Actually, these stats are irrelevant. Point is, religions are generally intolerant to interfaith marriages, and atheism is not a religion.

Original comment

From Pew: "The survey also shows that members of certain religious groups are more likely than others to be with someone of their faith, whether they are married or living together in a romantic relationship. For example, more than three-quarters of U.S. Hindus (91%), Mormons (82%) and Muslims (79%) who are married or living with a partner are with someone of the same religion. This is somewhat less common among Jews (65%), mainline Protestants (59%) and religiously unaffiliated people (56%)." LINK

Actually, these stats are irrelevant. Point is, religions are generally intolerant to interfaith marriages, and atheism is not a religion.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: (145 days ago)

I read that. Unlike you though, I also noticed the two religions that have more interfaith marriages than the unaffiliated, which you seem to have forgotten to mention. There's less than 10% difference between Jews and unaffiliated! Wow. Is that what you expected? Unsurprisingly, it appears that the most tolerant mind set (as regards interfaith marriage) is not the unaffiliated (and I'd bet every penny I have that if you split it into atheists and agnostics, then atheists would climb even higher in the rankings).

Point is, people with closed minds are generally intolerant to heterogenous marriages, which is why even atheists don't tend to marry non-atheists. And even though atheism mirrors religion in just about every way I can imagine, this is more about attitudes than interpretations of rules, hence why atheism doesn't do as well as you'd like.

Original comment

I read that. Unlike you though, I also noticed the two religions that have more interfaith marriages than the unaffiliated, which you seem to have forgotten to mention. There's less than 10% difference between Jews and unaffiliated! Wow. Is that what you expected? Unsurprisingly, it appears that the most tolerant mind set (as regards interfaith marriage) is not the unaffiliated (and I'd bet every penny I have that if you split it into atheists and agnostics, then atheists would climb even higher in the rankings).

Point is, people with closed minds are generally intolerant to heterogenous marriages, which is why even atheists don't tend to marry non-atheists. And even though atheism mirrors religion in just about every way I can imagine, this is more about attitudes than interpretations of rules, hence why atheism doesn't do as well as you'd like.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
WalterEgo WalterEgo (144 days ago)

So I was right all along. I should've stuck with Islam. Next time I won't listen to you. My bad.

Original comment

So I was right all along. I should've stuck with Islam. Next time I won't listen to you. My bad.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: (144 days ago)

Oh, OK. I guess when you said 'some religions' refuse interfaith marriage, you actually knew it isn't just religions and that more than half of atheists do too. Sorry, I hadn't realised you were implying that it isn't actually a religious trait - strange wording. It must sting to learn that your world view is officially more likely to refuse interfaith marriage than those Orthodox Christian bible-bashing crazy nutjob retards, right? Ouch. But yeah yeah, you were right all along, tell yourself whatever you like. We both know that your opinion is never amenable to new evidence.

Original comment

Oh, OK. I guess when you said 'some religions' refuse interfaith marriage, you actually knew it isn't just religions and that more than half of atheists do too. Sorry, I hadn't realised you were implying that it isn't actually a religious trait - strange wording. It must sting to learn that your world view is officially more likely to refuse interfaith marriage than those Orthodox Christian bible-bashing crazy nutjob retards, right? Ouch. But yeah yeah, you were right all along, tell yourself whatever you like. We both know that your opinion is never amenable to new evidence.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
WalterEgo WalterEgo (144 days ago)

"Oh, OK. I guess when you said 'some religions' refuse interfaith marriage..." Why don't you stop guessing and just read. You're back to your sloppy ways again.

I said "Some religions create "designer babies" by trying to prevent marriage outside their faith." Religious people are bound by a rule book which they interpret in various ways. The rule book tries to influence followers, and it succeeds to varying degrees. It is the ideology I'm talking about, not whether or not followers adhere to their ideology.

YOU introduced atheism into the conversation. Atheism is not a religion. It is not an ideology. There is no rule book. Even if all atheists marry atheists, there is no rule book to say they should. It is their choice, dictated only by the laws of the land and the wishes of their partner.

I couldn't find the stats you quoted about Orthodox Christians. Do send me a link, but it's irrelevant. If Orthodox Christians choose to shun their ideology, then good for them. "... Orthodox Christians who marry outside the Church are deprived of the sacraments of the Church." LINK

Zoom out a bit and look at the bigger picture. It will help.

Original comment

"Oh, OK. I guess when you said 'some religions' refuse interfaith marriage..." Why don't you stop guessing and just read. You're back to your sloppy ways again.

I said "Some religions create "designer babies" by trying to prevent marriage outside their faith." Religious people are bound by a rule book which they interpret in various ways. The rule book tries to influence followers, and it succeeds to varying degrees. It is the ideology I'm talking about, not whether or not followers adhere to their ideology.

YOU introduced atheism into the conversation. Atheism is not a religion. It is not an ideology. There is no rule book. Even if all atheists marry atheists, there is no rule book to say they should. It is their choice, dictated only by the laws of the land and the wishes of their partner.

I couldn't find the stats you quoted about Orthodox Christians. Do send me a link, but it's irrelevant. If Orthodox Christians choose to shun their ideology, then good for them. "... Orthodox Christians who marry outside the Church are deprived of the sacraments of the Church." LINK

Zoom out a bit and look at the bigger picture. It will help.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: (143 days ago)

I've read it again. You were linking this 'creating designer babies' to religion, specifically rule books that 'prevent marriage outside their faith', right? I did look at the big picture, and it turns out atheists have this mentality more than some religious groups, so it can't be simply about religion. Follow the evidence instead of bias, and it turns out to be something broader. Maybe social groups (including groups of the same world-view) don't intermarry that much - maybe you'd find the same within football supporters or vegetarians.

To be fair to you and your fellowship, apparently not all the 'unaffiliated' follow the condemnatory attitudes of your ideology, and apparently 44% are even brave enough to marry someone outside your belief set (though I'd doubt you'd be one of them, and I supect many of them are actually agnostics).

People of any world view make choices to follow a certain interpretation of a text, or follow the convention or their culture of family, or go with peer pressure, etc. It seems that an Orthodox Christian could (and usually does) choose to flout a stern attitude or expectation that their peers might have, in the same way that an atheist could (but usually doesn't) choose to flout an attitude of their peers. And I love it that you haven't found the stat on Orthodox Christians - it was on the same link that you sent me! I guess you weren't too interested in reading a second page, or finding out which groups might intermarry more than atheists - it could be sloppy or even lazy, but more likely that's just your confirmation bias furiously working away again, protecting you from evidence you wouldn't like. Who knows, perhaps the survey was carried out badly, right? Political shenanigans I expect.

I know you're not ready for it yet, but if you could just step out of your bias for a moment, you'd learn a lot about the real world.

Original comment

I've read it again. You were linking this 'creating designer babies' to religion, specifically rule books that 'prevent marriage outside their faith', right? I did look at the big picture, and it turns out atheists have this mentality more than some religious groups, so it can't be simply about religion. Follow the evidence instead of bias, and it turns out to be something broader. Maybe social groups (including groups of the same world-view) don't intermarry that much - maybe you'd find the same within football supporters or vegetarians.

To be fair to you and your fellowship, apparently not all the 'unaffiliated' follow the condemnatory attitudes of your ideology, and apparently 44% are even brave enough to marry someone outside your belief set (though I'd doubt you'd be one of them, and I supect many of them are actually agnostics).

People of any world view make choices to follow a certain interpretation of a text, or follow the convention or their culture of family, or go with peer pressure, etc. It seems that an Orthodox Christian could (and usually does) choose to flout a stern attitude or expectation that their peers might have, in the same way that an atheist could (but usually doesn't) choose to flout an attitude of their peers. And I love it that you haven't found the stat on Orthodox Christians - it was on the same link that you sent me! I guess you weren't too interested in reading a second page, or finding out which groups might intermarry more than atheists - it could be sloppy or even lazy, but more likely that's just your confirmation bias furiously working away again, protecting you from evidence you wouldn't like. Who knows, perhaps the survey was carried out badly, right? Political shenanigans I expect.

I know you're not ready for it yet, but if you could just step out of your bias for a moment, you'd learn a lot about the real world.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
WalterEgo WalterEgo (142 days ago)

There are thousands of religions today, of the 4 biggies - Judaism, Christianity, Islam, and Hinduism - all are intolerant to interfaith marriage to varying degrees.

An atheist and a Muslim fall in love and want to marry. Where do you think objections are going to come from? The atheist, the Muslim, or Islamic ideology?

A Christian and a Muslim fall in love and want to marry. Where do you think objections are going to come from? The Christian, the Muslim, Islamic ideology, or Christian ideology?

Correct answers have the word ideology in them.

---

Confirmation bias must be blinding me. I still can't find those stats about Orthodox Christians. What is the actual wording of the link to page 2? I can then search for the link.

Original comment

There are thousands of religions today, of the 4 biggies - Judaism, Christianity, Islam, and Hinduism - all are intolerant to interfaith marriage to varying degrees.

An atheist and a Muslim fall in love and want to marry. Where do you think objections are going to come from? The atheist, the Muslim, or Islamic ideology?

A Christian and a Muslim fall in love and want to marry. Where do you think objections are going to come from? The Christian, the Muslim, Islamic ideology, or Christian ideology?

Correct answers have the word ideology in them.

---

Confirmation bias must be blinding me. I still can't find those stats about Orthodox Christians. What is the actual wording of the link to page 2? I can then search for the link.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: P (140 days ago)

OK, so religions themselves are intolerant to interfaith to varying degrees, obviously there are interpretations within them that are intolerant to varying degrees, and you've already conceded that people follow each interpretation to varying degrees. The end result is that people choose which interpretation and how obstinately to follow it according to their personal attitude and how willing they are to defy the attitudes of their peers. Those same attitudes (open-mindedness, close-mindedness, obstinacy, defiance) are also found within atheists. Atheism in its common form is also very much its own ideology and far from a simple lack of belief, but I realise that you, as a follower, will not accept that.

An atheist, a Muslim, a Christian - well, I can't do much without making generalisations but in complete honesty, just from the people that I personally know, I'd say the objections would come from the atheist and their attitude / ideology, followed by the Muslim, followed by the Christian. I can't say I know many moderate atheists, whereas moderate Muslims and Christians in the UK are ten a penny. Maybe I'm biased too, but agnostics usually seem to be the ones who are happily nonchalant about the views of others, whereas atheists tend to be militantly judgmental as you demonstrate.

The objections 'from religion' would come in the form of interpretations of doctrine which isn't too tricky to circumvent because they are external - objections in the form of a judgmental attitude are far harder, because they're internal. As an example (using your ideology's rhetoric), can you imagine marrying a crazy retard who believed in made up bullshit?

I can tell that you've never had to research anything. The link is the same one that you posted - Pew, 2014, Religious Landscape survey, Chapter 2, Religious Switching and Intermarriage. I can't copy and paste it because it's a table, but it lists the original stats you liked, along with the stats you didn't, namely 56% of atheists don't intermarry, compared to 53% of Orthodox Christians and 39% of Buddhists. I really wouldn't worry about it, because as you've already admitted you have an excuse lined up to discredit it. Don't ask questions when you've already decided on an answer.

Original comment

OK, so religions themselves are intolerant to interfaith to varying degrees, obviously there are interpretations within them that are intolerant to varying degrees, and you've already conceded that people follow each interpretation to varying degrees. The end result is that people choose which interpretation and how obstinately to follow it according to their personal attitude and how willing they are to defy the attitudes of their peers. Those same attitudes (open-mindedness, close-mindedness, obstinacy, defiance) are also found within atheists. Atheism in its common form is also very much its own ideology and far from a simple lack of belief, but I realise that you, as a follower, will not accept that.

An atheist, a Muslim, a Christian - well, I can't do much without making generalisations but in complete honesty, just from the people that I personally know, I'd say the objections would come from the atheist and their attitude / ideology, followed by the Muslim, followed by the Christian. I can't say I know many moderate atheists, whereas moderate Muslims and Christians in the UK are ten a penny. Maybe I'm biased too, but agnostics usually seem to be the ones who are happily nonchalant about the views of others, whereas atheists tend to be militantly judgmental as you demonstrate.

The objections 'from religion' would come in the form of interpretations of doctrine which isn't too tricky to circumvent because they are external - objections in the form of a judgmental attitude are far harder, because they're internal. As an example (using your ideology's rhetoric), can you imagine marrying a crazy retard who believed in made up bullshit?

I can tell that you've never had to research anything. The link is the same one that you posted - Pew, 2014, Religious Landscape survey, Chapter 2, Religious Switching and Intermarriage. I can't copy and paste it because it's a table, but it lists the original stats you liked, along with the stats you didn't, namely 56% of atheists don't intermarry, compared to 53% of Orthodox Christians and 39% of Buddhists. I really wouldn't worry about it, because as you've already admitted you have an excuse lined up to discredit it. Don't ask questions when you've already decided on an answer.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
WalterEgo WalterEgo (139 days ago)

Thanks, I finally found the Orthodox Christians stats. I wish websites wouldn't display text as images, because it makes the text unsearchable. I did come across that page, searched for "orthodox", and moved on because there were no results.

So you now accept that religions (at least the 4 biggies) are intolerant to interfaith marriage. Yes, followers interpret their faith in different ways, but the original texts are intolerant to interfaith marriage.

The point I made was that the reason they are intolerant to interfaith marriage is that it's a way to create new followers - people who all think the same. Do you agree with that? In Islam, if a Muslim man marries a non-Muslim woman, the children are to be brought up Muslim. What do you think about that?

Instead of staying on topic, you wanted to engage in classic whataboutery - what about US atheists who intermarry less than US Orthodox Christians? That was some swerve.

I was especially impressed by your "zooming out" technique, you certainly picked that up quick. You zoomed out to US Orthodox Christians. You could have gone further to US Jehovah's Witnesses, who rival even US Buddhists in interfaith marriage.

There are over 300 million Orthodox Christians worldwide, less than 1 million of them are in the US. I think a little less cherry-picking would have been good. I can't be bothered to look it up, but I'd wager that most atheists in Norway marry atheists, most Orthodox Christians in Greece marry Orthodox Christians and most Muslims in Saudi Arabia marry Muslims.

If you want to talk about why people do not adhere to their to the original texts of their holy books, then we can.

Original comment

Thanks, I finally found the Orthodox Christians stats. I wish websites wouldn't display text as images, because it makes the text unsearchable. I did come across that page, searched for "orthodox", and moved on because there were no results.

So you now accept that religions (at least the 4 biggies) are intolerant to interfaith marriage. Yes, followers interpret their faith in different ways, but the original texts are intolerant to interfaith marriage.

The point I made was that the reason they are intolerant to interfaith marriage is that it's a way to create new followers - people who all think the same. Do you agree with that? In Islam, if a Muslim man marries a non-Muslim woman, the children are to be brought up Muslim. What do you think about that?

Instead of staying on topic, you wanted to engage in classic whataboutery - what about US atheists who intermarry less than US Orthodox Christians? That was some swerve.

I was especially impressed by your "zooming out" technique, you certainly picked that up quick. You zoomed out to US Orthodox Christians. You could have gone further to US Jehovah's Witnesses, who rival even US Buddhists in interfaith marriage.

There are over 300 million Orthodox Christians worldwide, less than 1 million of them are in the US. I think a little less cherry-picking would have been good. I can't be bothered to look it up, but I'd wager that most atheists in Norway marry atheists, most Orthodox Christians in Greece marry Orthodox Christians and most Muslims in Saudi Arabia marry Muslims.

If you want to talk about why people do not adhere to their to the original texts of their holy books, then we can.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: P (136 days ago)

I hoped that if you could manage to pluck some stats from a survey online, you might have the integrity to at least skim read the other pages and get the overall gist - it would be a really good evidence-led way to fight confirmation bias. You could learn to investigate a subject on an evidential and academic basis rather than relying on what Wikipedia / RationalWiki tells you, or whatever is 'searchable' on Google. You remind me of how lucky I am not to be hampered by the expectations of your spoon-fed generation.

As for positions that are the least tolerant to interfaith marriage; I zoomed out to include all those polled - from Hindu as the least tolerant (yes, your 'least bad' religion), all the way to Orthodox Christians as the most (above atheists, did I mention?). It was you who managed to omit the positions which fared better than yours. To be fair, they were on a whole different page which apparently is above your pay-grade.

No, I don't accept that religions "are intolerant to interfaith marriage" - read again - I accept that they are intolerant to *varying degrees* including next to none, and including a lesser degree than atheists, so it can't be a religious problem. Get it? This is my point; if it was religiosity that caused people to make similar-thinking offspring, then you'd expect atheists to be at the bottom, and Orthodox versions of major religions at the top. It's not, so be brave and follow the evidence.

Oh so THAT'S your reason to discount the Orthodox Christian stat! Another genuine laugh-out-loud moment; thank you. Don't you feel yourself doing it? Isn't it at least uncomfortable? You even had to find out how many Orthodox Christians there are! How long did you spend trying to gather evidence to challenge the original evidence you didn't like? How much Googling did you have to do to confirm your original position? You do make things hard for yourself.

You personify the attitude that you're condemning which is why you swerve the question about who you could bare to marry. You just happen to feel it's justified because your judgmental ideology isn't based on old books. Personally, I freely admit there are Muslim bigots, Arsenal bigots, Yorkshire bigots, atheist bigots, Democrat bigots, and countless others that would not contemplate marrying someone without the same beliefs or background as their own. But what I've spotted is that it isn't about religion; it's about attitudes, tolerance and intolerance, visible across any group of humans. That's zooming out.

As for 'whataboutery'; bless your cottons. I wondered how long it would take before your flavour of the month resurfaced. We were talking about what might drive people to create designer babies - I highlighted an inconsistency in your assumption, a broader picture, but look - you have a label to shut down that conversation and save you from addressing the issues. You're nothing if not predictable.

Original comment

I hoped that if you could manage to pluck some stats from a survey online, you might have the integrity to at least skim read the other pages and get the overall gist - it would be a really good evidence-led way to fight confirmation bias. You could learn to investigate a subject on an evidential and academic basis rather than relying on what Wikipedia / RationalWiki tells you, or whatever is 'searchable' on Google. You remind me of how lucky I am not to be hampered by the expectations of your spoon-fed generation.

As for positions that are the least tolerant to interfaith marriage; I zoomed out to include all those polled - from Hindu as the least tolerant (yes, your 'least bad' religion), all the way to Orthodox Christians as the most (above atheists, did I mention?). It was you who managed to omit the positions which fared better than yours. To be fair, they were on a whole different page which apparently is above your pay-grade.

No, I don't accept that religions "are intolerant to interfaith marriage" - read again - I accept that they are intolerant to *varying degrees* including next to none, and including a lesser degree than atheists, so it can't be a religious problem. Get it? This is my point; if it was religiosity that caused people to make similar-thinking offspring, then you'd expect atheists to be at the bottom, and Orthodox versions of major religions at the top. It's not, so be brave and follow the evidence.

Oh so THAT'S your reason to discount the Orthodox Christian stat! Another genuine laugh-out-loud moment; thank you. Don't you feel yourself doing it? Isn't it at least uncomfortable? You even had to find out how many Orthodox Christians there are! How long did you spend trying to gather evidence to challenge the original evidence you didn't like? How much Googling did you have to do to confirm your original position? You do make things hard for yourself.

You personify the attitude that you're condemning which is why you swerve the question about who you could bare to marry. You just happen to feel it's justified because your judgmental ideology isn't based on old books. Personally, I freely admit there are Muslim bigots, Arsenal bigots, Yorkshire bigots, atheist bigots, Democrat bigots, and countless others that would not contemplate marrying someone without the same beliefs or background as their own. But what I've spotted is that it isn't about religion; it's about attitudes, tolerance and intolerance, visible across any group of humans. That's zooming out.

As for 'whataboutery'; bless your cottons. I wondered how long it would take before your flavour of the month resurfaced. We were talking about what might drive people to create designer babies - I highlighted an inconsistency in your assumption, a broader picture, but look - you have a label to shut down that conversation and save you from addressing the issues. You're nothing if not predictable.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
WalterEgo WalterEgo (135 days ago)

We were not talking about " what might drive people to create designer babies " .

I made a statement that some religions have an intolerance to interfaith marriage as a way to further their religion. This was how I worded it: " Some religions create "designer babies" by trying to prevent marriage outside their faith. The goal isn't for more gifted musicians, but for people who all think the same. "

You might have come back with - those religions are not really intolerant to interfaith marriage, their aim was to create coherent families. Or maybe - at the time, there was a belief that when conflicting ideas met, the brain melted and that was a bad thing.

But instead, you chose to go off piste " That's why atheists tend to marry each other too I guess ", which quickly became - what about American atheists who interfaith marry less than American Orthodox Christians?

For somebody who analyses text for a living, you sure are jumping about a lot.

Original comment

We were not talking about " what might drive people to create designer babies " .

I made a statement that some religions have an intolerance to interfaith marriage as a way to further their religion. This was how I worded it: " Some religions create "designer babies" by trying to prevent marriage outside their faith. The goal isn't for more gifted musicians, but for people who all think the same. "

You might have come back with - those religions are not really intolerant to interfaith marriage, their aim was to create coherent families. Or maybe - at the time, there was a belief that when conflicting ideas met, the brain melted and that was a bad thing.

But instead, you chose to go off piste " That's why atheists tend to marry each other too I guess ", which quickly became - what about American atheists who interfaith marry less than American Orthodox Christians?

For somebody who analyses text for a living, you sure are jumping about a lot.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: P (134 days ago)

I never said I analyse text for a living; I said part of what I am paid for is my writing and textual analysis (albeit a little more formal than this), and you have since thrown the "text analysis" jibe at me a dozen times. When I start to value the opinions of inconsistent undergraduates more than publishers I'll let you know, but in the meantime how about you grow up and stop trying to score points? Try to understand issues and respond to arguments rather than hammering the jigsaw pieces around what you already believe.

Anyway, anyway, back to the issue - OK, you don't like the topic of designer babies (as per the video), so let's discuss what might drive people to preventing marriage outside their beliefs. Is that alright? Maybe it's religion. My point is the same - it doesn't seem to be religion because atheists do the same - there must be something else going on; a bigger picture.

I know you're on the defensive again, but no one was denying that *some* religious people try to prevent intermarriage. But if you're brave, we can expand it by pointing out that some non-religious people do as well (and other religious people don't), so therefore it isn't a religious problem - it applies to any social group including your own (which just happens to fare worse than some religions). That isn't 'off piste' or 'whataboutery', or any other label you can use to try to shut down the conversation; it's the bigger picture, watching where evidence leads, and in my view a more profound question. Your fervent atheism is preventing you from seeing the same trait in your own belief set, and your antitheist bias is preventing you from zooming out and discussing the broader underlying problem. Man up.

Once again, it's fascinating to watch you try and squirm out of the statistics, as you do with any uncomfortable evidence - oh but that's just American atheists, right? A non-representative sample! I wonder, did you have a problem with the limits of that research before you found out what it said about atheists? Again, do you feel it happening? Maybe if I find some broader statistics that you don't like, they might have been from a faulty survey... or political shenanigans. This is what it's like presenting evidence to someone with confirmation bias. You are absolutely textbook.

Original comment

I never said I analyse text for a living; I said part of what I am paid for is my writing and textual analysis (albeit a little more formal than this), and you have since thrown the "text analysis" jibe at me a dozen times. When I start to value the opinions of inconsistent undergraduates more than publishers I'll let you know, but in the meantime how about you grow up and stop trying to score points? Try to understand issues and respond to arguments rather than hammering the jigsaw pieces around what you already believe.

Anyway, anyway, back to the issue - OK, you don't like the topic of designer babies (as per the video), so let's discuss what might drive people to preventing marriage outside their beliefs. Is that alright? Maybe it's religion. My point is the same - it doesn't seem to be religion because atheists do the same - there must be something else going on; a bigger picture.

I know you're on the defensive again, but no one was denying that *some* religious people try to prevent intermarriage. But if you're brave, we can expand it by pointing out that some non-religious people do as well (and other religious people don't), so therefore it isn't a religious problem - it applies to any social group including your own (which just happens to fare worse than some religions). That isn't 'off piste' or 'whataboutery', or any other label you can use to try to shut down the conversation; it's the bigger picture, watching where evidence leads, and in my view a more profound question. Your fervent atheism is preventing you from seeing the same trait in your own belief set, and your antitheist bias is preventing you from zooming out and discussing the broader underlying problem. Man up.

Once again, it's fascinating to watch you try and squirm out of the statistics, as you do with any uncomfortable evidence - oh but that's just American atheists, right? A non-representative sample! I wonder, did you have a problem with the limits of that research before you found out what it said about atheists? Again, do you feel it happening? Maybe if I find some broader statistics that you don't like, they might have been from a faulty survey... or political shenanigans. This is what it's like presenting evidence to someone with confirmation bias. You are absolutely textbook.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
WalterEgo WalterEgo (131 days ago)

So you're paid for your writing as well. Are you paid by the word? Because you sure do use a lot of them.

I didn't like how you tried to imply that I think religion is why people don't interfaith marry when I said nothing of the sort. Or that atheists are intolerant of interfaith marriage because, hey, look at Orthodox Christians in the US. That was just silly. You should have some wages docked for that.

OK, let's talk about what might prevent interfaith marriages. Religion obviously has a role, but I would have thought the most significant players are psychology and maths. Psychology - people tend to mix with those they have things in common with, and maths - the choice of spouse is limited to who you mix with. An Orthodox Christian in America will probably mix with other faiths more than an Orthodox Christian in Greece because of the make up of the population, and hence more likely to marry outside their faith than their Greek counterpart.

Original comment

So you're paid for your writing as well. Are you paid by the word? Because you sure do use a lot of them.

I didn't like how you tried to imply that I think religion is why people don't interfaith marry when I said nothing of the sort. Or that atheists are intolerant of interfaith marriage because, hey, look at Orthodox Christians in the US. That was just silly. You should have some wages docked for that.

OK, let's talk about what might prevent interfaith marriages. Religion obviously has a role, but I would have thought the most significant players are psychology and maths. Psychology - people tend to mix with those they have things in common with, and maths - the choice of spouse is limited to who you mix with. An Orthodox Christian in America will probably mix with other faiths more than an Orthodox Christian in Greece because of the make up of the population, and hence more likely to marry outside their faith than their Greek counterpart.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: P (130 days ago)
Latest comment:

Being paid is pretty standard for most careers. I accept that I am not accustomed to writing for the Wikipedia generation who get intimidated by a 600 word abstract, but actually my career has nothing to do with this debate. As I said, stop trying to score facile points.

Oh. Well, I didn't like how you tried to imply that I tried to imply what you thought about religion. I was just stating a simple point - it isn't external ideology that creates designer babies; it's internal attitude. Perhaps we can infer a little something from your defensiveness, or the the fact that you cherry-picked religion as an example of people who try to create others who think the same... but that's circumstantial, right? You knew atheists did it too.

I also didn't like how you claimed that I implied that atheists are intolerant of marriage because 'hey look at Orthodox Christians'. Yes, silly. Atheists are intolerant of intermarriage because 'hey, look at atheists' (including yourself). The statistics we have support that, unless you have any others. Being led by the evidence instead of trying to find reasons to ignore it. Yes, I suppose an American atheist would typically mix with other faiths more than a Chinese atheist would too - obviously, in less diverse countries the opportunities for anyone to intermarry are reduced (including for the dominant group), which is why it's helpful to have a relative melting pot like the USA to test. But my question still stands - did you decide on this perceived limitation of the research before you found out that the research contradicted what you want to believe? I doubt I'll get an honest reply, but just think on it.

Well done on briefly zooming out to psychology! Finally! It's like getting blood out of a stone. Now maybe, if it's not too close to home, you could try pinpoint what sort of psychological attitudes may cause a religious person or an atheist to refuse to marry into another belief set. I don't think you'll need too much imagination.

Original comment
Latest comment:

Being paid is pretty standard for most careers. I accept that I am not accustomed to writing for the Wikipedia generation who get intimidated by a 600 word abstract, but actually my career has nothing to do with this debate. As I said, stop trying to score facile points.

Oh. Well, I didn't like how you tried to imply that I tried to imply what you thought about religion. I was just stating a simple point - it isn't external ideology that creates designer babies; it's internal attitude. Perhaps we can infer a little something from your defensiveness, or the the fact that you cherry-picked religion as an example of people who try to create others who think the same... but that's circumstantial, right? You knew atheists did it too.

I also didn't like how you claimed that I implied that atheists are intolerant of marriage because 'hey look at Orthodox Christians'. Yes, silly. Atheists are intolerant of intermarriage because 'hey, look at atheists' (including yourself). The statistics we have support that, unless you have any others. Being led by the evidence instead of trying to find reasons to ignore it. Yes, I suppose an American atheist would typically mix with other faiths more than a Chinese atheist would too - obviously, in less diverse countries the opportunities for anyone to intermarry are reduced (including for the dominant group), which is why it's helpful to have a relative melting pot like the USA to test. But my question still stands - did you decide on this perceived limitation of the research before you found out that the research contradicted what you want to believe? I doubt I'll get an honest reply, but just think on it.

Well done on briefly zooming out to psychology! Finally! It's like getting blood out of a stone. Now maybe, if it's not too close to home, you could try pinpoint what sort of psychological attitudes may cause a religious person or an atheist to refuse to marry into another belief set. I don't think you'll need too much imagination.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: (135 days ago)

"What aboutery" :) I know what vid you've been watching

Original comment

"What aboutery" :) I know what vid you've been watching

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: (147 days ago)

People haven't been interested in physical 'gene editing' in previous centuries because would have meant finding and pairing up with someone who you may completely hate and have nothing else in common with. Technological gene editing means you can reproduce with someone you genuinely want to reproduce with, and only specific genes would be altered.

That doesn't make it a good idea though. Dawkins picking on an example of musicianship is making it easy for himself (as usual). The concerns are more about the inadvertent multi-generational consequences... our genes have slowly evolved to give us the best chance of survival, and trying to tweak a few to encourage traits we currently desire is far more serious than organically encouraging those traits once we are born.

Original comment

People haven't been interested in physical 'gene editing' in previous centuries because would have meant finding and pairing up with someone who you may completely hate and have nothing else in common with. Technological gene editing means you can reproduce with someone you genuinely want to reproduce with, and only specific genes would be altered.

That doesn't make it a good idea though. Dawkins picking on an example of musicianship is making it easy for himself (as usual). The concerns are more about the inadvertent multi-generational consequences... our genes have slowly evolved to give us the best chance of survival, and trying to tweak a few to encourage traits we currently desire is far more serious than organically encouraging those traits once we are born.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Howboutthat (143 days ago)

Immunization against contagious disease is commonplace. While some protest about possible side-effects, I don't think anyone seriously insists that it is immoral to prevent smallpox. Similarly, prenatal genetic prevention of multiple sclerosis, etc will become commonplace, and failure to do so will come to be viewed as a form of child abuse. ("The plaintiff charges her parents with deliberately condemning her to a life of pain and agonizing degeneration to pander to a superstition common before her birth. Their defense- insanity?")

Original comment

Immunization against contagious disease is commonplace. While some protest about possible side-effects, I don't think anyone seriously insists that it is immoral to prevent smallpox. Similarly, prenatal genetic prevention of multiple sclerosis, etc will become commonplace, and failure to do so will come to be viewed as a form of child abuse. ("The plaintiff charges her parents with deliberately condemning her to a life of pain and agonizing degeneration to pander to a superstition common before her birth. Their defense- insanity?")

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
RELATED POSTS
Body language lessons from poker pro Liv Boeree
Body language lessons from poker pro Liv Boeree
Bill Nye, what if the world were run by scientists and engineers?
Bill Nye, what if the world were run by scientists and engineers?
Big Think - How Richard Dawkins learned to win arguments
Big Think - How Richard Dawkins learned to win arguments
Big Think - How America got divorced from reality
Big Think - How America got divorced from reality
Richard Dawkins: AI might run the world better than humans
Richard Dawkins: AI might run the world better than humans