Interesting Links for 15-02-2012
Feb. 15th, 2012 11:00 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
- When will experiences replace movie theaters?
I think people enjoy passive entertainment a lot, so I don't expect movies to go anywhere. It would be nice to see more "experiences", but I suspect that their cost is going to remain a chunk higher than a movie ticket.
- Some detail on what people who identify as "Christian" in the census actually believe
- Dutch government calls for loosening of copyright law. Could the tide be turning?
- Online RPGs WILL DESTROY YOUR RELATIONSHIP. Unless you play together, of course.
- Some common sense on prayer and councils.
What occurred to me, when reading someone else's journal, was that atheists are merely going to be irked by compulsory Christian prayers - but think about the effect it has on a Muslim, Sikh, etc. that in order to represent their constituents they have to sit through the prayers of a different religion.
- Game of Thrones Valentine's Day cards
- The UK devolved rights to Antarctica to Scotland - by mistake. Now they want them back.
- The BBC replaces the word "Palestine" with the sound of breaking glass. No, really.
- Firefox Roadmap for 2012
- This video is genius. Horrific, hilarious, genius. I can't say more than that without spoiling it.
- What If All the Cats in the World Suddenly Died?
- Chocolate + Apple = best valentine's present evar.
- Shitstorm 'best English gift to German language'
- Being left/right-handed affects your preferences
- Game Developer Gives 7-Year-Old Best Birthday Present Ever
- 9 Essential Skills Kids Should Learn
The comment I left on the prayers & councils post
Date: 2012-02-16 10:42 am (UTC)I happen to be a pagan, and while I can often find common cause with people of other faiths, I am generally none too happy to sit silently through prayers in the name of other religions when those prayers don’t directly speak to the reason I’m present. (I don’t so much mind Christian weddings, for example, as presumably the happy couple has made a deliberate choice to solemnize their partnership in this fashion.) Even when I agree with the topic of the prayers, if not the name in which it is offered, it is an uncomfortable reminder that I am a member of a minority religion. It does not give me a sense of peaceful purpose, it makes me angry, defensive, and prepared to give as good as I get. That is generally a counterproductive sentiment, and regardless of my personal work in trying to keep a clear head regardless, I would be much happier at college graduations, hockey games, and the like, if prayers were omitted. I cannot imagine attempting to usefully engage in government under those circumstances.
no subject
Date: 2012-02-15 11:18 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-02-15 11:24 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-02-15 11:45 am (UTC)(no subject)
From:no subject
Date: 2012-02-15 04:25 pm (UTC)There's a world of difference between a few councillors quietly having a prayer before a meeting and between a few councillors praying and expecting the atheist one to join in.
no subject
Date: 2012-02-15 04:51 pm (UTC)Mr Justice Ouseley ruled the prayers were not lawful under section 111 of the Local Government Act 1972.
However, he said prayers could be said as long as councillors were not formally summoned to attend.
They just can't force others to attend by holding them during the council sessions.
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:no subject
Date: 2012-02-15 04:53 pm (UTC)Having not attend this council I am unclear on whether the prayers were previous optional or compulsory but they were on the official agenda. Now they must not be on the official agenda; but can happen pre-meeting (or post-meeting, or whenever else people like); they are even allowed to use the council chamber to hold them in.
(no subject)
From:no subject
Date: 2012-02-15 11:26 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-02-15 11:34 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-02-15 11:38 am (UTC)Who thinks this is contentious? Not to mention I'm sure this sort of commentary about other countries wouldn't face the same kind of censorship...
no subject
Date: 2012-02-15 12:38 pm (UTC)… Given the doctrine of Parliamentary Sovereignty Westminster can just legislate to change the Scotland Act and return powers over Antartica to Westminster. The Scottish Government has pretty no come back to that at all.
The negotiaion over the Indepedence referendum arises because the Westminster government genuinely recognise the legitimacy of the people of Scotland having a referendum and the genuine but remote possibility that Salmond could place himself at the head of an angry mob / organised insurrection if the wishes of the people of Scotland were ignored.
I don’t see myself rioting over Antartica – no matter how much oil you could extract from penguins if you minced them finely enough.
no subject
Date: 2012-02-15 01:20 pm (UTC)I believe not. Westminster can amend the Scotland act, but the Scottish parliament would also have to agree to rescind those powers. That's sort of the point of devolution, you can't hand over powers but retain the ability to remove them whenever you feel like it.
The Express has a little more info. It seems that the Scotland Bill committee at Holyrood (under the previous government) agreed to basically undo that part of the legislation, but the current committee have decided to oppose it. The SNP have the means to make political capital out of this and it looks like they may do so.
no subject
Date: 2012-02-15 01:59 pm (UTC)Westminster consents to bound by the Scotland Act and the ECHR but, unless the constituation has fundamentally changed since I was at law school in the 90's the Queen in Parliament is sovereign and unbound.
no subject
Date: 2012-02-15 12:47 pm (UTC)Perhaps not as much as a member of another faith group would be.
no subject
Date: 2012-02-15 03:38 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-02-15 03:46 pm (UTC)Might not seem an important point most of the time but there could be occassions when you really want or need to sit with someone.
So, even if not compulsory one is at a disadvantage if one doesn’t want to sit through a formal prayer session.
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:no subject
Date: 2012-02-15 04:29 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-02-15 04:54 pm (UTC)The Origin Of The Species was a groundbreaking work of science which will not add anything to the understanding of a modern biologist who has read the same (and updated) information elsewhere.
no subject
Date: 2012-02-15 05:17 pm (UTC)I'm afraid I find that sort of statement slightly offensive. I'm a Christian. I do not believe all truth springs from the bible. I'm pretty offended anyone would think I would believe something so patently and obviously daft. I imagine a fairly high percentage of Christians are in this position.
I happen to have read the bible. I can't remember even a high percentage of it. I wouldn't question the faith or sincerity of someone who hadn't. I guess it's not just relgion that gets this. The "if you were really sincere you would..." argument is prevelant in a lot of beliefs:
If you were a committed vegetarian you wouldn't wear leather shoes.
If you were a committed environmentalist you'd never take a car anywhere.
If you were a committed socialist you'd have read Das Kapital (actually I haven't).
I'm just always a bit doubtful of the reasoning behind someone who makes this kind of comment. Why are they trying to state that someone's declared beliefs are not their real beliefs. That's why I'm really dubious about Dawkin's "not a real Christian" crusade. It's all so similar to a telegraph column about people who don't really believe in the environment, equality etc etc...
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:no subject
Date: 2012-02-15 08:48 pm (UTC)And they didn't translate it? to my ear, sheissensturm has a certain ring to it.
no subject
Date: 2012-02-17 06:21 am (UTC)RPG games?
Dwarven warrior mage?
Puh-lease. Regardless of the actual study, the article lost my interest two paragraphs in.
no subject
Date: 2012-02-17 08:12 pm (UTC)(no subject)
From:no subject
Date: 2012-02-17 08:11 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-02-17 08:16 pm (UTC)(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:no subject
Date: 2012-02-17 08:41 pm (UTC)He thinks enforced participation in pseudomagical rituals, while the head druid chants magic spells and symbolically sacrificies a nonexistent goat, is a totally meaningless thing to require as a prerequisite to participate in a body that is purely secular in purpose and that is legally obligated to not endorse or participate in any religion?
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From: