… and one of them is expelled. Actually, one was expelled and the other was Expelled.
This has to be read to be believed. Normally I’d add that the manager movie producer obviously had good taste, but there’s no way I can make my usual sarcastic snark about PZ here, because the manager of the theater producer is obviously a total jerk. He’s within his rights, but that doesn’t make him any less of a tool.
A few updates: Here’s a (very NSFW language-ridden) first-hand account of what happened from someone who was right there. You may be amused to hear that the Kevin Miller, who wrote the movie, has a fallacious account of what happened on his blog; the spin is that PZ wasn’t invited, though the truth is you didn’t need an invitation to go. He also links to another account that is at very strict odds against PZ’s own account and that of the other first-hand witness. Oh, those wacky creationists! Is there nothing they can’t lie about?
Another update (March 22): PZ has posted clarifying (to me at least) that it was the producer of the movie who had him thrown out, not the theater manager. I wanted to make sure that this was corrected, because I certainly don’t want innocent people to be falsely accused of anything.
March 20th, 2008 at 8:26 pm
Never mind, you caught it already. Hilarious, just.. just…
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
sorry
March 20th, 2008 at 8:26 pm
Is that the funniest thing you have ever read? I am still laughing and might possibly have wet myself. And if any fans of BSNYC read this…first!!!!!!
March 20th, 2008 at 8:31 pm
By the way Phil, I think you are being a tad hard on the manager. If this was a screening and not a feature release, he was probably just following directions from his clients. Now you could question his taste in clients.
Oh, and looks like someone snuck in before me so I only get a podium…damn.
March 20th, 2008 at 8:34 pm
It’s possible the manager was tipped off by the Disco ‘tute that PZ might show off, but no matter what, the manager was being a jerk. PZ is many things, and one of them is polite. In person, he is very low key, and wouldn’t have started any trouble. The creationists are incapable of hitting anything but their foot when they try to pull stuff like this.
March 20th, 2008 at 8:35 pm
http://digg.com/general_sciences/Expelled_from_Expelled
Here’s another ‘digg’ link…
March 20th, 2008 at 8:40 pm
I was reading that!!!
Oh my god. The hilarity cannot be beaten here. Pathetic, what a crash and burn!
…wait uh… PX?
March 20th, 2008 at 8:45 pm
What business is it of the police who goes to see a movie?
March 20th, 2008 at 8:47 pm
I dunno Christian, but in the comments PZ says he didn’t look at the badge. I’m pretty certain it must’ve been a rent-a-cop.
These guys are powertrippers.
March 20th, 2008 at 8:47 pm
The theater was probably “four-walled”, meaning that the whole place, all “four walls”, was leased by some party as a venue for their movie. The theater manager undoubtedly couldn’t care less who pays to see a movie and buy some overpriced corn & soda. But the leasors have the right to restrict entry at their discretion (of course, as long as it doesn’t violate any constitutionally granted civil rights). The cop, if not a mall cop, could’ve been a real city police officer being paid by the theater to be there on his own time.
But really: who hires a cop to make sure that only the choir gets to hear the sermon? That’s really a desperate measure.
March 20th, 2008 at 8:50 pm
Ahh, pitiful draconian tactics. What the hell is this Fascist Europe? Those creationist bastards are attempting to control the crowd with restrictions that would make the severest fundamentalist terrorist envious beyond possibility. At least Dawkin’s made it in, and the skewering is gonna be totally worth the minor restrictions on our freedoms.
March 20th, 2008 at 8:58 pm
Oh. Their. god.
That was too good to be believed. I literally guffawed upon reading it.
WIN!
March 20th, 2008 at 9:00 pm
PZ might still have grounds for a lawsuit:
TITLE 42 > CHAPTER 21 > SUBCHAPTER II > § 2000a
§ 2000a. Prohibition against discrimination or segregation in places of public accommodation
(a) Equal access
All persons shall be entitled to the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, and accommodations of any place of public accommodation, as defined in this section, without discrimination or segregation on the ground of race, color, religion, or national origin.
…
He needs to talk with the theatre manager, and the cop, and discover *exactly* why he was denied entrance to a public-access business.
March 20th, 2008 at 9:00 pm
This is so funny, just told my sister and her ex-husband about it. They are both Bio-Tech scientists, they had a good laugh.
March 20th, 2008 at 9:06 pm
This has got to be one of the funniest true stories I have ever read. To pick out Pz and miss Dawkins is beyond comprehension. It goes beyond comedy. I posted to PZ to please utube an interview with Dawkins after the show. The viral properties of such a hilarious video would spread like wildfire. I have no words for this. It is so insane, it is beyond comprehension. I really hope this is taped, recorded and widely distributed! To use a biblical phrase, let them reap what they sow! f-ing great.
March 20th, 2008 at 9:08 pm
HAHAHAHA…
The end is just heart-warmingly hilarious.
March 20th, 2008 at 9:16 pm
…You’re kidding! That is hilarious!!! Lawsuit!!!!
March 20th, 2008 at 9:18 pm
I could not help but laugh out loud, so much so that my neighbors wanted to know what I was laughing about. I sure hope PZ lets Dawkins guest-write an entry. I’m still grinning from ear to ear 30 minutes after reading it.
March 20th, 2008 at 9:30 pm
I didn’t get to the warning about irony meters until about the 200th post, and by then, mine was just a little puddle soaking into the carpet.
If you haven’t followed the link to PZ’z blog yet, first take the batteries out of your irony meter, short the terminals together, put it in a Faraday cage, and bury it under at least 1 meter of soil (if dry, 1.5 m).
You could nip out to Circuit City or Radio Shack and buy a cheap one, but what’s the point?
Best. IDiocy. Ever.
March 20th, 2008 at 9:41 pm
@Zim:
I agree, but that’s kinda tricky to pull off. If someone on shorts, barefoot and smellnig wants to dine on an expensive restaurant, the clients would be asking the manager to remove him, and I’d not judge him for doing so, or he might even risk losing a good chunk of his clients.
You could argue that PZ and Dawkins where – kinda, sorta – the barefoot guys on this case, and it would be a decently accurate analogy.
But I’d think of suing them anyway, just to shine a bright light on that, regardless of my chances of winning.
March 20th, 2008 at 9:43 pm
Okay, I’m up off the floor now, I’ve got control of all my bodily functions again… Oh, here we go again Hhahahahhahahahahahahahaha!
I don’t even know what to say! These people are so paranoid that someone would see their silly little movie and NOT like it. So, when it starts in general release, are the “Fundie Stormtroopers going to police the line ups.
March 20th, 2008 at 9:57 pm
Here’s a first-hand account of what happened. Some NSFW language, but geez, I can hardly blame her.
March 20th, 2008 at 10:13 pm
[...] (Pointage from the Bad Astronomer…) [...]
March 20th, 2008 at 10:45 pm
A policeman kept someone out of a theater because they were not of the proper faith. Let me say that again: a policeman kept someone out of a theater because they were not of the proper faith.
I assure you all I, for one, am NOT laughing.
I am chilled right to the bone.
March 20th, 2008 at 10:56 pm
Man the last line is so damn hilarious!
March 20th, 2008 at 11:15 pm
I KNOW it`s funny, but still, I`m not laughing.
Not even amused.
What`s wrong with me?
March 20th, 2008 at 11:30 pm
As a manager of a theater, I would like to say that having to kick people out who aren’t causing trouble is a terrible thing to do. However, for a screening like this, the theater could easily lose the ability to offer future films had they not abided by the production company’s rules.
Btw, as a secular humanist, I’m happier than a pig in Bad word deleted that Dawkins was able to get in.
March 21st, 2008 at 12:16 am
LOLOLOLOLOLOL
ROFL
I really am STILL Laughing
LLLLLLL
I REALLY Needed That
Really!!!
Just Giggling a little now
Big Sigh w/Grin
OK…LOL!!!
Truly Ludicrous…
Thanks!
Tim Says Smiling
March 21st, 2008 at 12:37 am
@ Daffy,
No.
P to the Zed was refused entry because he was on a (obviously way too small) list of those to be kept out.
The manager or owner of a buisiness is allowed to refuse to allow any person for personal reasons.
If those who rented the place gave mall management a list of “undesireables”, that list is perfectly legal unless it can be proven to violate a protected category.
As hilarious as the situation is, it would be as large a mistake to pretend that Dr. PZ’s exclusion was a travesty of justice as it would be to grant credence to any of the pathetic whining that the producers of the movie in question cite as evidence of exclusion.
Sometimes you just have to choose a guestlist, and those not on it are to be escorted off the premises. The difference is that, in science, the guestlist is always changing, and is only dependant on results.
The ID guestlist, on the other hand, is not only stale, but now completely rotten, and the stench ascociated with it forces those who value reality to eschew it completely, and to likewise eschew tose to whom its stink has infused.
March 21st, 2008 at 12:48 am
I’m with Daffy. The similarity here to certain recent history is too close for comfort.
March 21st, 2008 at 12:51 am
Daffy,
The irony and hypocrisy is the the thing here. As a bartender, I can ask you to leave my bar and if you don’t leave, I can call a cop and the cop will make you leave, and possibly arrest you, because I have the right to “refuse service for any reason”… you’ve seen the sign… I need not give a reason. This is not fascism, just stupidity…fascism comes a later.
I agree that it is scary, but not because of the cop…because of people with power who capitalize on the popular ignorance perpetuated by this… shtuff.
Did I say that out loud???
March 21st, 2008 at 1:34 am
“a policeman kept someone out of a theater because they were not of the proper faith.”
Or because it was a private screening. You rent the theater, you get to say who stays and who goes.
My company does this all the time: we rent an entire theater, every screen, for some big blockbuster every summer and guess what? You’re not invited because you didn’t pay for it. Your “freedom” ends when I’m the one paying the bill.
Still, hilarious. The ID fundies tend to always shoot themselves in the foot. But then, that’s what happens when critical thinking is not a high priority.
March 21st, 2008 at 1:55 am
@autum
the thing is, if he was on the list because of his religious beliefs, then it could fall under that specific definition of discrimination. You can throw someone out because they are creating a scene, but not because they are Black/Gay/Atheist/Russian etc.
March 21st, 2008 at 2:56 am
C’mon. Did you read the title – “…no intelligence allowed” (in theaters)
Policeman just provided proper order by limiting access for under… over… something public on restricted movie.
There’s no formal rating letter defined by MPAA yet. But it’s just another evidence of conspiracy against creationism
March 21st, 2008 at 3:32 am
I read this last night on PZs blog. Wowzers, that thread had over 500 posts and counting. Of course, the fundies are saying that they got one over on the evilutionists. Hey, you never know, up next could be astronomy.
BTW, could this be the “Shot hear ’round the blogosphere”?
March 21st, 2008 at 5:04 am
If you read further down on that NSFW link Phil provided, there’s a wonderful and very succinct piece of evidence that the film-makers lied – it involves domain names. I wasn’t previously aware of it, but it looks pretty conclusive to me. “BUSTED” – indeed.
March 21st, 2008 at 5:42 am
Put me down as skeptical. Why would they be “on the look-out” for PZ Myers and not Richard Dawkins? Insufficient information. I have a suspicion that something else was going on or there’s some back story here we don’t know.
Let’s reverse this for a moment. Let us suppose a Creationist blogger is in line with his friends and family to see a movie about Evolution. He is asked to leave. He writes this up in his blog and chortles how his friend, another Creationist, got to go into the exhibit, anyway. Would we be as quick to accept his account of how it all went down?
Maybe it did happen as Mr. Myers noted on his blog. But there’s a few rough corners to this story, a few things that don’t compute. I take Mr. Myer’s claim that he was turned away at face value. I’m not so quick to accept the reason why, especially since he admits they let Mr. Dawkins in.
March 21st, 2008 at 5:49 am
I think we’re dealing with people who have no sense of irony, and very little wit. Speaking of which, I’d love to hear Ben Stein explain the situation.
March 21st, 2008 at 6:30 am
@KC
Not sure exactly what they had as their registration for the movie, but it may have had an option to reserve multiple tickets under one name. If that’s the case, it is very likely that Prof. Dawkins’ name was not on the list, therefore, no forewarning.
March 21st, 2008 at 6:40 am
Critics have gone way over the top with the “fascist” epithet. Actual fascists would have unleashed a gang of private thugs to beat PZ and his cohort bloody, if not dead. We’re not quite there yet; stay tuned for further developments.
Amusing, though, that these ID cretins cringe before the other ID, Intelligent Debate.
March 21st, 2008 at 6:48 am
On a related note, I came across this article from the NY Times:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/10/business/media/10stein.html?partner=rssnyt&emc=rss
March 21st, 2008 at 6:54 am
You seem to be overlooking the creationist movement’s well-documented history of dishonesty. There is no parity here.
March 21st, 2008 at 7:22 am
That is truly some funny stuff right there.
March 21st, 2008 at 7:35 am
Seems simple enough to me – PZ goes online, fills out registration for his ticket. The computer system cannot reject him based on his name, so he gets a ticket for himself and say, four guests.
He shows up at the theater with his four guests, himself, and his whatever (printed receipt, registration number, his name to claim his seat, etc). The producers presumably went through the list of people first to see who all was coming, and clearly recognized his name. They saw him in the crowd, and selected him to be removed…
What doesn’t make a lick of sense is why they wouldn’t have his entire PARTY removed, but they told the cop to do whatever it was they told him to do – which was clearly to remove PZ alone- they didn’t have any other names (just the generic ‘guest’ of PZ) so they didn’t take it to the next level.
And quite frankly, I can easily see how they wouldn’t think to remove Richard Dawkins from the line… I’m sure that if indeed they saw Professor Dawkins they likely didn’t believe it was ‘really’ him, just someone who looked like him. Why would he be coming all the way to the States to see some small screening of their movie when with just a little wait he could likely see it much closer to home. If I’d been there and standing next to Richard Dawkins I likely wouldn’t have believed it was him without ID (haha! Get it?!) myself.
Still, the entire thing is just hillarious. I shake my head at the sheer hawsomeness.
March 21st, 2008 at 7:41 am
read the spin they are putting on it.
Pure unadulterated cowardice
March 21st, 2008 at 7:47 am
“I’m sure that if indeed they saw Professor Dawkins they likely didn’t believe it was ‘really’ him, just someone who looked like him.”
Hah! LOL! Yeah, the path from the UK is so vast that the statistical probability of him finding the right path is one out of billions and billions, so infinitesmally mathematically small that he couldn’t possibly have found his way over. [/sarcasm]
March 21st, 2008 at 7:49 am
I have Expelled my coffee through my nose from laughter.
Do you think that’s by “design”?
March 21st, 2008 at 7:50 am
In further reading about this movie (which I knew NOTHING about) it seems Professor Dawkins was actually interviewed and appears in the movie. Now it really doesn’t make even a LITTLE sense why they wouldn’t realize that yes indeed, that really is him in line, and dis-invite him along with PZ…
*scratches head* Make head hurt to make sense of ID’rs…
March 21st, 2008 at 7:53 am
Ses
PZ and Dawkins were both interviewed (under false pretenses mind you) and appear in the movie.
You’d think that people actually in the movie would be allowed in.
Hilarious.
March 21st, 2008 at 7:56 am
Rev. BDC, that is a great link, and not one supportive comment in the comments section…
March 21st, 2008 at 7:58 am
“Normally I’d add that the manager obviously had good taste, but there’s no way I can make my usual sarcastic snark about PX here”
Not sure of any back-history, but what’s the beef with PZ?
March 21st, 2008 at 8:18 am
This screening of Expelled was being conducted in PZ’s home state of Minnesota and he had blogged that he would be in Minneapolis for a gathering of atheists. It’s not at all surprising that they expected PZ to show up (especially if they bothered to check who had signed up for tickets).
March 21st, 2008 at 8:21 am
@Andrew:
Phil and PZ are friends, they just like making snarky comments at each other. I think the PX thing was a typo.
March 21st, 2008 at 8:30 am
NO MOVIE FOR YOU!!
March 21st, 2008 at 8:55 am
There’s a guy that posted wrote a big article of lies about this. Saying that PZ was bugging everyone and tried to sneak in and that Dawkins crashed the party.
March 21st, 2008 at 8:55 am
Rev. BigDumbChimp:
Thanks for posting the link. I liked the comment:
“Incidents like this make me want to hug PZ. He and his peanut gallery have been lighting up switchboards (not to mention my blog) across the web with their cries of outrage. They’re the best PR team a guy could wish for. Keep up the good work!”
That’s a riot. Yeah, the switchboards may be lighting up, but judging for the blog comments, there not all new faithful jumping on the band wagon…
March 21st, 2008 at 9:05 am
@Michelle
I saw that mentioned in the comments on PZ’s blog. The account of this person is posted in full in the News section of the Expelled site, here: http://www.expelledthemovie.com/chronicle.php?article=11
Anyone know if there are any more screenings planned for the film? It would be interesting to see if they turn away any other prominent media/blog/science personalities.
March 21st, 2008 at 9:07 am
I started a ball rolling in the Irony section of Wikipedia, suggest you guys check it out
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irony
March 21st, 2008 at 9:22 am
Sigh, Matt… Seriously don’t do that. Wiki is suffering from enough edit wars.
March 21st, 2008 at 9:40 am
I honestly thought it would get removed in a heartbeat, and I wouldn’t mind that at all – just have the link to the history of the page, for ha-has (Such as the Mercury -> Canada wiki edit that Phil posted).
March 21st, 2008 at 9:45 am
I dunt lyk the way this iz gowing. Most Krishtiuns ar ext…extreee… verry smrt. I wuz homskooled bekawz of teh badness of pubic ejukashun. I bekame smart! Pleez stop mackin fun ov intelujent Krishtiuns that mak gub mooviez lik this. Yoo shud be ashamed of urselfs.
I thinck the mooovy will be grooovy. It will be teh biggets muny maker of all tyme. Juzt yoo wayt and c!
March 21st, 2008 at 9:52 am
“A policeman kept someone out of a theater because they were not of the proper faith. Let me say that again: a policeman kept someone out of a theater because they were not of the proper faith.”
Quoted for truth. You nitwits will be laughing all the way to prison. Stop downplaying everything and wake the hell up!
March 21st, 2008 at 9:54 am
delaying criticism will only build it to a fervor, silly creationists.
March 21st, 2008 at 10:25 am
DO YOU EVER WONDER WHETHER THE TENDENCY TOWARD RELIGION HAS SOME BIOLOGICAL SURVIVAL VALUE? FINALLY, SOMEONE IS RESEARCHING JUST THAT,,,
http://www.economist.com/science/displaystory.cfm?story_id=10875666
GARY 7
March 21st, 2008 at 10:40 am
So if we weren’t created then who is talking (blogging) and who is listening?
March 21st, 2008 at 10:41 am
Actually, Gary, I have often wondered that. It seems that religion is so destructive, in that many wars and killings have occurred because of it, that it serves absolutely no rational purpose. One really cannot use the “Morality” card, because atheists have just as high moral standards as religious people. (Some would argue, higher standards.) Maybe it does have something to do with survival of the species, after all, if death is not the end, then the species does survive. Most religions teach that aspect. Personally, I would like to believe that a part of us does live on, call it a soul or consciousness or a purple nurple for all I care. But then on the other hand it would be nice to just not exist, especially knowing some of the nutjobs I’d have to put up with for eternity.
I almost sprayed my drink all over my monitor reading the comment about Carmelite nuns being inserted into an MRI. It was just funny to me.
March 21st, 2008 at 10:53 am
I’m going to film a documentary called “Denied”. It’s about a guy whose lifelong dream is to play hockey in the NHL. The entire movie is going to be about how unfairly he’s been treated by the NHL for not giving him a chance.
He can’t play hockey to save his life, but I won’t mention that part.
March 21st, 2008 at 11:00 am
I am going to make a movie too. ‘Ignored’. Because my wild inconsistent fantasies about physics are ignored by scientists.
Off topic, the movie Fitna by Dutch lawmaker Geert Wilders will be released in two days, march 23th, according to the website. Earlier today a clip showed up at Youtube which looked genuine. The clip was quickly removed and the account was closed.
March 21st, 2008 at 11:17 am
Hey, tsg, that’s the name of my movie! It’s about a guy (who shall remain nameless) that goes into bars and tries to pick up women…
March 21st, 2008 at 12:34 pm
Reading the first-hand account sheds a little more light, but like a trouble light in an engine compartment, there’s a few annoying nooks and crannies that remain in the dark.
Keep in mind I’m not saying that it *didn’t* happen. All I’m saying is I’m skeptical of the particulars. And part of that skepticism, I’m sorry to say, has come from interacting with the public.
About the only way I could find out to my satisfaction is to contact the theater manager and ask how it all went down. That should be sufficient to either directly confirm how it all went down, to refute it, or to set off the bovine fertilizer detector. I don’t know whether to take that step or not. OTOH, I’d feel foolish to take a stand either way without that input.
March 21st, 2008 at 12:50 pm
I would think that the fact that religion seems coupled with civilization indicated it fulfills some purpose. If all religions were equally destructive, then the human race would not have survived. OTOH, those that are destructive tend to be, er, self-remedying.
It’s a philosophical question. Certainly atheists are less amoral than the next person, but most were raised in a culture with at least some vestige of religious thought. Which is just another way of saying we’re all influenced to some degree by our society.
March 21st, 2008 at 1:15 pm
BIG typo – but fortunately not as big as I thought I’d typed. Above I wrote:
“Certainly atheists are less amoral than the next person . . .”
What I intended to type was:
Certainly atheists are no less amoral than the next person . . .”
I’ll leave the typo I feared I’d written to your imagination. It would have been considered a flame or a troll – and rightly so.
Since the atheists I’ve known have been as moral as anyone else, my point was that both atheists and the religious have moral values.
March 21st, 2008 at 1:53 pm
An Intelujent Krishtchun says: “I dunt lyk the way this iz gowing. Most Krishtiuns ar ext…extreee… verry smrt. I wuz homskooled bekawz of teh badness of pubic ejukashun. I bekame smart! Pleez stop mackin fun ov intelujent Krishtiuns that mak gub mooviez lik this. Yoo shud be ashamed of urselfs.”
OK, Biff, we know it’s you. Put down that Commodore 64 keyboard and get a real computer…
- Jack
March 21st, 2008 at 2:25 pm
Gary Ansorge says: “DO YOU EVER WONDER WHETHER THE TENDENCY TOWARD RELIGION HAS SOME BIOLOGICAL SURVIVAL VALUE? FINALLY, SOMEONE IS RESEARCHING JUST THAT,,,”
Gary, I think your Caps Lock key is stuck.
Seriously, that was a fascinating article. Coincidentally, Richard Dawkins was interviewed on the NPR program “Fresh Air” a few weeks ago and host Terry Gross asked him that exact question. His conjecture is that it was a way of passing on survival values to the next generation. Those with this tendency as children would accept what adults told them uncritically. This is important because children don’t always understand why it’s good for them, but those that that simply accept it will survive more than those that mutter “that’s stupid” and walk off to try an ride a mammoth (that analogy is mine, not from the interview).
Unfortunately, this trait is pretty deeply seated and doesn’t go away in adulthood. The concept of “God” was a natural consequence as a sort of “parent for grownups”, to find someone with the ultimate knowledge of right and wrong who will protect you from the evil of the world without you having to think about it.
Makes sense to me.
- Jack
March 21st, 2008 at 4:55 pm
Phil, I can only imagine what will happen to you if you ever try to get into a theater to see Armageddon II: Revenge of the Space Rock.
March 21st, 2008 at 4:56 pm
… only in America …. amazing.
March 22nd, 2008 at 7:54 am
An Intelujent Krischun writes:
[[I dunt lyk the way this iz gowing. Most Krishtiuns ar ext…extreee… verry smrt. I wuz homskooled bekawz of teh badness of pubic ejukashun. I bekame smart! Pleez stop mackin fun ov intelujent Krishtiuns that mak gub mooviez lik this. Yoo shud be ashamed of urselfs.
I thinck the mooovy will be grooovy. It will be teh biggets muny maker of all tyme. Juzt yoo wayt and c!]]
BA, it’s your blog, but would you have permitted a post like this if it had purported to come from “An Intelujent Joo” or “An Intelugent Neegrow?”
March 22nd, 2008 at 8:28 am
You see how many comments his post has got already? 1200 when I last checked. Is that a record for a science blog, I wonder?
db
March 22nd, 2008 at 8:56 am
Barton, you’re a Christian by choice, but you can’t choose your ethnicity. To me, that’s a crucial difference.
March 22nd, 2008 at 10:11 am
Why should he be?
The funny thing is, Dawkins is on the program of that conference.
March 22nd, 2008 at 10:14 am
Ah, yeah, it’s the blog that’s too stupid for Unicode input again… <sigh> really, you should
be assimilatedcome over to ScienceBlogs.March 22nd, 2008 at 10:14 am
Oopsie.
March 22nd, 2008 at 10:46 am
Barton, The “Offensive” post was written by me, and was not meant to offend anyone, and I apologize if you were, but puleeze, equating what I wrote with racism is clearly over the top! It was meant in jest, and actually I take offense at that comparison! Even when I was in the church community, we could at least laugh at ourselves.
I find it quite amazing that many Christians will look at Muslims, who IMHO over-react to cartoons depicting their prophet, and make such comments as, “Get a life!”, or those who denigrate gays, yet scream, “Persecution!”, when someone points a finger at them!
BTW folks, Kevin Miller did issue an apology on his blog, concerning what happened with PZ. I still vehemently disagree with the premise of this movie, but at least he should be given credit where credit is due.
Hey he is Canadian, and this seems to be a ritual of ours, saying sorry! He lives 50 miles from me, so we’re practically neighbors!
March 23rd, 2008 at 11:53 am
Having had the pleasure of meeting PZ makes this all the more humorous.
BAC
March 26th, 2008 at 3:57 pm
I very much suspect that PZ wasn’t expelled for being an atheist, but rather for being a vocal anti-creationist. It is possible the rationale they were working under was that PZ would be disruptive (yell out in the movie, start chanting slogans, whatever), so they preemptively ejected him. Regardless of his real life personality, their mostly familiar with his online persona, which can be loud and demonstrative. Oddly enough, though, no one from the movie website has claimed this. So the only reasonable reason for keeping PZ hasn’t been claimed.
I also think this is the rationale for the cop hovering around Dawkins when he was speaking. It is the purpose of a security guard (which is the role he was serving) to keep riots from occurring. Someone with strong opinions at odds with a large group, especially the program organizers, is usually a focal point for any disruption and/or violence that occurs – whether it comes from the objector or the objectees. It is logical and practical for the cop to spend his time near Dawkins, especially if there were’t other hotbeds of potential disruption and violence.
I don’t think a lawsuit is justified, and even if it is, I think it is counter-productive. If they didn’t quiz everyone on entry for their religious beliefs, it would be very difficult to prove the reason they expelled him was for his beliefs and not over some concern that he would be disruptive.
July 8th, 2008 at 12:47 pm
cheap airfares new york