Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Scott Adams Suggests Bill Gates For President

kdawson posted more than 7 years ago | from the not-in-it-for-the-money dept.

1224

gerrysteele writes to point out a recent post to the Dilbert blog, in which Scott Adams discusses the atheist ascendancy in America and rationalizes the need for an atheist leader. From the article: "Ask a deeply religious Christian if he'd rather live next to a bearded Muslim that may or may not be plotting a terror attack, or an atheist that may or may not show him how to set up a wireless network in his house. On the scale of prejudice, atheists don't seem so bad lately. I think that in an election cycle or two you will see an atheist business leader emerge as a legitimate candidate for president. And his name will be Bill Gates."

cancel ×

1224 comments

Atheists: The New Gays (2, Funny)

ArsenneLupin (766289) | more than 7 years ago | (#16912212)

So, will we see an http://atheistbuntu.com [atheistbuntu.com] site shortly, where the Ubuntu is actually a Windows variant?

Obligatory (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16912214)

I for one welcome our new borg overlords

God (5, Funny)

Wooky_linuxer (685371) | more than 7 years ago | (#16912216)

help us.

Re:God (5, Funny)

sjwest (948274) | more than 7 years ago | (#16912312)

If i was american i'd not vote for him, but im sure quite a few americians would vote for catbert.

Oh, the humanity! (4, Funny)

Bromskloss (750445) | more than 7 years ago | (#16912220)

Something tells me that government wouldn't switch over to free software too soon.

Re:Oh, the humanity! (2, Interesting)

doctor proteus (1028902) | more than 7 years ago | (#16912236)

Yeah talk about improving America's image overseas. But hey, he could mount one hell of a campaign.

Re:Oh, the humanity! (4, Funny)

VincenzoRomano (881055) | more than 7 years ago | (#16912364)

Well, this way the President will announce for "America NG" a brand new country for the next generation, designed from scratch, better, more powerful, for a better western expericence.

Re:Oh, the humanity! (2, Funny)

Bob Gelumph (715872) | more than 7 years ago | (#16912508)

Wait until the crash

How is this news? (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16912222)

I fail to see how this is news. I also fail to see how Scott Adams' opinion on who should be president matters.

Re:How is this news? (4, Insightful)

Jugalator (259273) | more than 7 years ago | (#16912374)

And I fail to see your sense of humor.

Re:How is this news? (1)

diersing (679767) | more than 7 years ago | (#16912422)

Are you suggesting Adam's piece was satire? It sure didn't read that way.

Re:How is this news? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16912450)

Its more of an opportunity for hundreds of Microsoft related puns, jokes, quips and snide remarks.

Not compatible (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16912224)

Think about it guys. If you vote for Gates, your country will stop working with the rest of us.

Re:Not compatible (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16912238)

It's hard to see how the US could cooperate less with the world community than it does at the moment.

Re:Not compatible (4, Insightful)

jmv (93421) | more than 7 years ago | (#16912276)

Dunno, they could build a giant, 50km tall wall all around the US... which in turns would help a lot reducing global warming (in the rest of the world that is). :-)

Re:Not compatible (1)

ArsenneLupin (766289) | more than 7 years ago | (#16912290)

I know this is a joke, but the US could:

  • Entirely stop trading with the other countries (well, that's basically the implicit threat that the US uses to coax the other countries adopt its stoopid IP laws...)
  • If that doesn't help, make use of its weapons of mass destruction

Re:Not compatible (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16912304)

The drivers for the rest of the world wouldn't work. And the file format would be incompatible.

Re:Not compatible (3, Funny)

Gorshkov (932507) | more than 7 years ago | (#16912574)

The drivers for the rest of the world wouldn't work. Does that mean all the Pakastanis in New York City would be unemployed?

neighbors (1)

l3v1 (787564) | more than 7 years ago | (#16912230)

And what are the odds that the neighbor atheist is a child molester or else ? If we're talking odds, we'd better consider everything, not just atheist vs Muslim. Prejudice may win, but I'd bet numbers show otherwise. And about "On the scale of prejudice" ... yes, I know prejudice is a very strong force, still, saying that atheists are more likely to be president since you prefer them over Muslims is just so stupid I can't place it on a scale.

Re:neighbors (4, Interesting)

Das Modell (969371) | more than 7 years ago | (#16912274)

Atheism does not make you predisposed to any particular behavior, or increase your likelihood of doing or not doing something. The same cannot be said of Islam.

Re:neighbors (1)

Txiasaeia (581598) | more than 7 years ago | (#16912300)

I don't know. I'm pretty sure that atheism does predispose you to [i]not[/i] attending church, or praying, or donating money to religious charities...

Re:neighbors (1)

Zebadias (861722) | more than 7 years ago | (#16912360)

I am athiest however I go to church for wedding ect.

Re:neighbors (1)

mihaibu (543723) | more than 7 years ago | (#16912402)

and this is a good thing

Re:neighbors (1)

joshetc (955226) | more than 7 years ago | (#16912408)

I'm sure most athiests go to church for weddings. I'd also rather have a president that doesn't talk to himself anyway. Not sure about the whole donating to religious charities parts, maybe that is why Bill Gates is the candidate? I'm sure hes donated to quite a few through his foundation or otherwise.

Re:neighbors (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16912368)

And this you know how? Portraits of muslims from Fox News?

Re:neighbors (1)

Das Modell (969371) | more than 7 years ago | (#16912572)

I love it how you guys always, always mention Fox News, even though I've never watched Fox News. It's amazing how you think that Fox is the only source of right wing/conservative/whatever information in the world.

Islam is a system, religion and culture that regulates life. There are many sorts of rules and attitudes that influence the way Muslims behave. This is common sense 101. The same applies to all human beings, regardless of their religion, culture or nationality. Furthermore, Islam is much, much more rigid and comprehensive than Christianity, or some other system. Islam isn't just about religion, it also regulates day to day life and political and legal matters.

Re:neighbors (1)

dave420 (699308) | more than 7 years ago | (#16912488)

Keep telling yourself that. Seriously. Bask in your ignorance. Bathe in it. It's delicious.

Re:neighbors (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16912438)

Of all the "religions" found in the prison population, atheism is the most under represented when compared to the outside population.

Re:neighbors (5, Insightful)

ContractualObligatio (850987) | more than 7 years ago | (#16912502)

On the child molestor odds:
Have you heard the stories about some Catholic priests? Or the activities of some cults? Or Michael Jackson? Hardly a scientific study, but arguably in the public mind child abuse is more likely with those who have a strong belief (however bizarre in Jackson's case...).

Irrespective of whether Adams is right or not:
Suggesting that the US electorate is more willing to vote for an atheist than a member of a religion that is (however unfairly) associated with the current war in Iraq, 9/11, etc, seems to me an entirely reasonable thing to suggest.

Why is suggesting an atheist president so stupid? Have I missed something? It seems to me Adams is simply hopeful that there might be a president who bases his decisions on facts and thinking, rather than an unaccountable belief system within a framework no one can quite agree on anyway. And again, it seems a reasonable proposition for a debate that the electorate might go for a well respected (outside of the tech community!), successful, famously philanthropic atheist before a Muslim, even if it is only for all the wrong reasons.

Re:neighbors (2, Insightful)

PopeRatzo (965947) | more than 7 years ago | (#16912564)

I have to agree with l3v1. We will not have an atheist president anytime soon. The superstitions of Americans are just too strong. In fact, we couldn't even have an agnostic. I'm praying we won't have a Mormon in 2008.

The funny thing, is that I don't believe will have a Jewish president either. I argued with my wife (who was not born in America) the other night about if Americans will elect a person of color, a woman or a Jew as president first. Forget about Hillary for a moment (and despite our mutual distaste for the thought of her as President). I think a woman will be president first. Then a person of color, and perhaps never a Jew. I've spent enough time in Red State America to know how deeply antisemitism and racism run in this country.

As an American of Italian ancestry, I also think it will be a good long time before a Southern European president will be elected. Just wait and see how the media chews up Giuliani.

Steve Ballmer can be Milk Monitor (1)

LiquidCoooled (634315) | more than 7 years ago | (#16912232)

"No running in the hall"

"PUT THAT CHAIR DOWN!"

No.No.NO!! (1)

styryx (952942) | more than 7 years ago | (#16912242)

This way, America doesn't have to do any more work. You can just wait for someone else to lead and then copy them and bully them out from their own idea... Hey, wait, you guys do that anyway. What do you need Bill for?

Re:No.No.NO!! (1)

VGPowerlord (621254) | more than 7 years ago | (#16912330)

Wait, you mean I can blame this crappy style of government on another country?

Could you tell me which one so I can flame them to death?

Re:No.No.NO!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16912504)

>You can just wait for someone else to lead and then copy them...

Adams nominated Bill Gates, not Linus Torvalds.

(Come on, laugh.)

No, we need a philosopher-king... (1)

C10H14N2 (640033) | more than 7 years ago | (#16912252)


Carlin/Black '08

They'd turn this place around... and smack the shit out of it.

Re:No, we need a philosopher-king... (3, Funny)

Shawn is an Asshole (845769) | more than 7 years ago | (#16912470)

Or

Colbert/Stewart

Hell, I've met several right-wingers that don't get Colbert's character and would probably even vote for him.

Scott Adams is smoking crack (4, Insightful)

Lord Kano (13027) | more than 7 years ago | (#16912256)

We're a country who has had one Catholic President and one Quaker. Arguably we've had pagans, if you count the deists. But their particular brand of deism was not too far from standard Christianity.

I predict that we'll have a Jewish president before an athiest.

LK

Of course! (4, Funny)

Esteanil (710082) | more than 7 years ago | (#16912264)

I believe him.

But as to timing, I think it will happen a short while after Microsoft wins the nationwide bid on supplying software for the next generation election machines... ;-)

I can see it now.... (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16912272)

"Your country has performed an illegal operation."

Oh, wait............ it already has. Nevermind.

Re:I can see it now.... (1)

nacturation (646836) | more than 7 years ago | (#16912538)

"Your country has performed an illegal operation."

Oh, wait............ it already has. Nevermind.


That must be the red, white, and blue screen of death?
 

I can see it now (1)

antifoidulus (807088) | more than 7 years ago | (#16912280)

Terror alert level: blue screen

Means death and/or reboot is imminent.

Re:I can see it now (1)

Txiasaeia (581598) | more than 7 years ago | (#16912316)

"Means death and/or [b]reboot[/b] is imminent."

Whoa, whoa, whoa... reboot? I didn't think that atheists believed in reincarnation!

bad choice..... (1)

onegear (802747) | more than 7 years ago | (#16912284)

this country is already in bad enough shape........

M$ jokes aside... (3, Insightful)

EvilCowzGoMoo (781227) | more than 7 years ago | (#16912286)

Would it really be so bad to have the government run with a more business like model? The current administration has blown away all hope of a balanced budget, would it be so bad if the government actually made a profit?

Put aside the perceived greed that drives M$ and you see that Bill Gates is actually quite a philanthropist.Would it really be so bad to have the government run with a more business like model? The current administration has blown away all hope of a balanced budget, would it be so bad if the government actually made a profit?

Put aside the perceived greed that drives M$ and you see that Bill Gates is actually quite a philanthropist. I can see some good things coming from his presidency.

On the flip side though, it may spell doom for small businesses trying to find a fair playing field against the giant almost monopolistic corporations out there.

Re:M$ jokes aside... (2, Insightful)

EvilCowzGoMoo (781227) | more than 7 years ago | (#16912310)

Would it really be so bad to have the government run with a more business like model? The current administration has blown away all hope of a balanced budget, would it be so bad if the government actually made a profit? Put aside the perceived greed that drives M$ and you see that Bill Gates is actually quite a philanthropist.Would it really be so bad to have the government run with a more business like model? On the flip side though, it may spell doom for small businesses trying to find a fair playing field against the giant almost monopolistic corporations out there. (Wow this is one I realy wished I had hit preview fist on!! Copy / Paste gone wild!)

Re:M$ jokes aside... (1)

Capt James McCarthy (860294) | more than 7 years ago | (#16912334)

"The current administration has blown away all hope of a balanced budget, would it be so bad if the government actually made a profit?"

Please tell me you are not that dim. You want to have the Govt. _make_ money??? WTF? If they have one red cent left over, it damn well better come right back to the ones who gave it to them in the
first place.

An unbalanced budget does work in world politics and world govts cannot be run as a business. If the US owes another country trillions of dollars, where is the incentive for said country to work against the US? They would want the US to thrive so they can get their money back.

Re:M$ jokes aside... (1)

ArsenneLupin (766289) | more than 7 years ago | (#16912522)

Please tell me you are not that dim. You want to have the Govt. _make_ money??? WTF? If they have one red cent left over, it damn well better come right back to the ones who gave it to them in the first place.

Why not invest it instead, in order to make sure you have to pay less tax in the future. I'd certainly prefer much more a government that had cash on hand, than one which is indebted, and whose debtor's interest I have to pay through my taxes.

Re:M$ jokes aside... (1)

Yaztromo (655250) | more than 7 years ago | (#16912370)

Sorry -- have to reply to this thread to obliterate an accidental moderation. Unfortunately, with this new moderation system I inadvertantly highlighted the moderation drop-down, and pressed down-arrow, thinking I was going to scroll the page. Next thing I know, "Interesting" is highlighted and accepted immediately as soon as I release the cursor key.

And I wouldn't moderate this as "Interesting". What a waste of a modpoint...

Yaz.

Re:M$ jokes aside... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16912414)

> Would it really be so bad to have the government run with a more business like model?

Look at Hungary, a small central european country. Ferenc Gyurcsany, a former communist-era pioneer leader, turned into shady capitalist businessman (oligarch), vowed to govern Hungary as a big company when he became PM years ago. The country is now in total economic turmoil, achievements and society-wide hope created during the 1998-2002 christian conservative government were destroyed. The current gov't coalition minority party, the libertine SZDSZ stole most of the country's capital funds and taxes / state debts are higher than ever.

People protest in the streets after a leaked tape revealed Gyurcsany actually enacted entirely fake laws and censored public economic data to win the 2006 spring elections. It will be a very "hot" winter, the protestors already commandeered a T-34 tank to demand his resignation. The state TV building was torched and police fire 12-gauge on protestors. The gov't controlled media accuses the political right on being fascists hellbent on a coup and many low-class people are stupid enough to belive this.

You better not live in a country governed like a company. It ends up being "Enronia" too often.

Re:M$ jokes aside... (0, Troll)

Sqwubbsy (723014) | more than 7 years ago | (#16912436)

You should bone up on Federalism and Alexander Hamilton [ustreas.gov] . Government is not a zero sum game.
The current fiscal imbalance comes from two things: Medicare expansion and the War on Terror. Both were inevitable. Medicare expansion had been a dem talking point for at least a decade. The War on Terror had been going on as well (we had troops flying over Iraq and on the borders since the cease fire of '91.)
Tax cuts were necessary to fight off the Clinton recession of 2000. It worked. Bush has had a better economic expansion that even Clinton had despite inheriting a bigger recession and having to fight a war in his first year in office.
And the fruits are coming - the deficit is going down because of increased revenues.

Governments can only exist if they borrow money. Jefferson, one of the original Republicans and a man with great hatred for Hamilton, wanted to destroy Treasury when he was elected as the first non-Federalist. Even his Treasury Secretary Albert Gallatin [ustreas.gov] realized that to undo what Hamilton did would destroy the US.

Bush has extensive business experience and the debt/repayment cycle is part of that. You have to use money to make money and sometimes you have to borrow money to make that happen.

Re:M$ jokes aside... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16912534)

The current fiscal imbalance comes from two things: Medicare expansion and the War on Terror.

The Iraq war was inevitable? No it wasn't, if billions weren't poured into that useless war, we could have invested that money elsewhere and maybe the budget wouldn't be so far in the red. And who knows, maybe it wouldn't be in the red at all.

War on Terror is nothing more than an excuse for Dubya and Co. to do away with democracy and invade innocent countries. Oh and fill the pockets of Haliburton and the likes.

Re:M$ jokes aside... (1)

clickclickdrone (964164) | more than 7 years ago | (#16912544)

>Bush has had a better economic expansion that even Clinton had despite
>inheriting a bigger recession
Except Clinton balanced the books..

Re:M$ jokes aside... (1)

Shawn is an Asshole (845769) | more than 7 years ago | (#16912498)

Government shouldn't turn a profit. It should, however, take in as much as it spends. It should also be as efficient as possible with the money it has (like that will ever happen...). The current administration can't grasp that simple concept.

Re:M$ jokes aside... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16912524)

I'm a small business owner (who's in competition with some very large companies) and I'd vote for Bill Gates - I reckon he'd be more likely to help (or plain not hinder) business more than just about anyone else who's likely to run.

Re:M$ jokes aside... (1)

shawnseat (453587) | more than 7 years ago | (#16912540)

Can we really afford another CEO President [sptimes.com] ?

Obligatory (1)

whathappenedtomonday (581634) | more than 7 years ago | (#16912288)

[Mr. Burns:] Excellent. [/Mr. Burns]

Gates (4, Funny)

zeromorph (1009305) | more than 7 years ago | (#16912296)

As if US politics hadn't enough *Gates in history.

But a Iraq SP2 might be useful anyway.

Could be worse... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16912302)

It could be George W Bush

WTF is this intolerant bullshit? (3, Insightful)

Lord Kano (13027) | more than 7 years ago | (#16912308)

  • Ask a deeply religious Christian if he'd rather live next to a bearded Muslim that may or may not be plotting a terror attack, or an atheist that may or may not show him how to set up a wireless network in his house.


The question presupposes too many things. Namely that muslims are either praying or plotting terror 24/7 and that no athiest ever plans to hurt anyone else.

Muslims, especially arabs, have become what black people were in the time period between reconstruction and the 1960s. The scapegoat for every one of society's ills and a panic button that people with an agenda know that they can push.

Today we have sneak and peek warrants because idiots are afraid that "Da Moose-lims" are going to blow things up. Do you know how people succeeded in getting cocaine criminalized? By scaring the white masses by crafting the idea of big black bucks who were out of their mind on the drug rampaging and raping white women.

Maybe a muslim president would succeed in severing our ubmilical relationship with Israel.

LK

Re:WTF is this intolerant bullshit? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16912386)

big black bucks who were out of their mind on the drug rampaging and raping white women
They do this even when they aren't on drugs.

Re:WTF is this intolerant bullshit? (1)

Lord Kano (13027) | more than 7 years ago | (#16912500)

They do this even when they aren't on drugs.

Vist a night club some time, the vast majority of it is completely consentual.

LK

Re:WTF is this intolerant bullshit? (5, Interesting)

MichaelSmith (789609) | more than 7 years ago | (#16912518)

It is interesting to me that the USA is one of the worlds most influential christian nations, and one of the few countries on earth with a constitutional separation between church and state.

By comparison my own country (Australia) is almost athiestic, yet our constitution bars anybody who is not a member of the church of england becoming head of state.

Is it possible that this is a passing phase for the USA? Is the religious right being supported by people who will be dead in 10 years? Or does this run right down through the younger generations?

I get the impression that religion, like support for guns, is just one of the symbolic markers which politicians use to stake their territory. Perhaps because the language of economics is too complex for most people so they have to base their campaigns on simple things.

Re:WTF is this intolerant bullshit? (1)

oliverthered (187439) | more than 7 years ago | (#16912526)

It depends where your sitting, and from where I'm sitting all Religious people are at fault, especially those that follow Abrahamic religions.

Bush and Blairs christian? views are certianly as bad as anything the muslims have come up with, and there's nothing that needs to be said about Isreal s policies.

What a luck! (1)

VincenzoRomano (881055) | more than 7 years ago | (#16912314)

Thanks God I'm not American!

Re:What a luck! (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16912380)

Thank God I'm an atheist!

Just Fix The Damage Done Over The Past 6 Years (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16912318)

It shouldn't matter who the hell is elected president in the US if congress and the courts start fixing the damage that has been done by the current administration to civil liberties and the restoration of the checks and balances that use to exist between the three branches of government.

If things are working properly in the US form of government, the president should not be the main focus of political activity. Whoever is president in the US should act more like a governor of a state where they are mostly focused on keeping order and efficiently executing the operation of the state(or country in this case).

Things have gotten fucked up for the most part of people sitting on their asses over the past decade and not voting and instead sitting around making smart ass comments/suggestions like Mr. Adams is.

Would that mean that... (1)

dummyname12 (886454) | more than 7 years ago | (#16912324)

we've been assimilated?

The more I see Microsoft Products like Zune popout (2, Insightful)

rolfwind (528248) | more than 7 years ago | (#16912332)

The more I think Bill Gate is the ultimate PHB. Yes, he knows some tech, but does he get it? I read his book years back (his first book) and have found nothing insightful.

The Zune and the Xbox and the Microsoft school in Philadelphia lead me to believe that he will throw money at problems and bring minimum vision - I would also cite he derogatory statements about the $100 laptop, but then I don't know how much of that opinion was intertwined with business interests.

In any case, if you have watched South Park lately, with episode of Cartman waiting for a Wii, one of the points it made, with its atheist skeptic future was that atheists/skeptics can be just as intolerant as religious fanatics - these people are just directing their zeal in other beliefs.

I don't know if Gates is religious, but it's my opinion he does have a zealous and rigid belief system shaped around Microsoft/Software_Patents, and other things that I find it incredibly disturbing that he could wield presidential power. I'd almost rather give Bush a 3rd term.

Re:The more I see Microsoft Products like Zune pop (4, Insightful)

pubjames (468013) | more than 7 years ago | (#16912482)

Yes, he knows some tech, but does he get it?

This is the great misunderstanding about Bill Gates. Many people think of him as a brilliant technologist, but he is actually a brilliant businessman with a good understanding of computer technology. Unfortunately I expect he will go into the history books as a brilliant technologist.

You americans... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16912338)

Being a European whose precious TV program was polluted with US whinge for the last 5 years I'd like to recommend that you completely drop this Religion==Politics thing and separate them.

We did it many years ago and today Europe doesn't fight such stupid wars anymore. There are sometimes religious clowns on TV like the pope who dares to talk about his opinion on abortion and safe sex. But nobody really cares.

Too sad your ancestors left Europe before that happened.

Re:You americans... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16912400)

Amen. Same in New Zealand. Nobody gives a crap about religion in politics.

Most of the time political parties distance themselves from religious groups.

The Prime Minster is agnostic and fundamentalist groups are laughed at.

There is one dickhead who shows up on Friday mornings (sometimes) at a local hospital to protest about abortion.
He gets ignored.

Wow - that's rather loaded (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16912350)

I know that it's intended to be humorous, it's more than a little imbalanced to state 'may or may not be plotting a terror attack' against 'may or may not show him how to set up a wireless network'.

It is also unfair to make the neighbour contrast -- yes, I make an effort to live in an area where people share my values. This includes the ability to drink beer and appreciate the neighbour's wife in a bikini.

At any rate, Bill Gates is not an atheist - he's agnostic. The atheist religion (sic) has a bizarre tendency to justify itself through accusing various prolific hand-picked figures over history of being atheist. Most of these charges are inaccurately levelled by taking a quote out of context to further their own agenda (does this sound familiar...?).

There are extremely bright people with (Beethoven) and without (Mark Twain) convictions.

Personally, Mark Twain gives me laughter and insight, while Beethoven gives me inspiration.

Re:Wow - that's rather loaded (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16912444)

The atheist religion

Atheism is not a religion, it is the absence of religion, just as standing still is not a type of running. Agnosticism is the absence of decisiveness.

Re:Wow - that's rather loaded (1)

^Bobby^ (10366) | more than 7 years ago | (#16912468)

"The atheist religion"

My, they do use words differently over in the US.

Re:Wow - that's rather loaded (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16912506)

Somewhat, but I'm not American. Apparently the subtleties pointing at atheism being a religion were lost on you, and now I'm forced to beat it over your head in reply.

Re:Wow - that's rather loaded (1)

vadim_t (324782) | more than 7 years ago | (#16912514)

IMO, agnosticism is rather inconsistent. By that logic you must admit that anything at all is possible, so you need to consider every bizarre theory, like the Invisible Pink Unicorn.

Ignosticism at least looks more logical. The position here is more or less "You say that your God is both infinitely benevolent and a jerk at once. Come back when you have something that makes sense."

What about Lou Gerstner (1)

quiberon2 (986274) | more than 7 years ago | (#16912354)

Bill Gatea after Lou Gerstner, or Bill Gates standing against Lou Gerstner ?

Seriously, it's OK if Bill stands for President. But he needs to be in a position to represent all Americans; and I think that means he would need to sell all his Microsoft stock during the days between 'winning an election' and 'taking power'.

Re:What about Lou Gerstner (1)

MichaelSmith (789609) | more than 7 years ago | (#16912420)

would need to sell all his Microsoft stock during the days between 'winning an election' and 'taking power'.

And where would he put the money? Buy a small carribean country for the duration? That amount of money, you can't put in the bank without winding up the owner of the bank.

Re:What about Lou Gerstner (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16912458)

Why? Cheney still has interest in Haliburton .. still makes millions every year...

Not so fast. (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16912372)

Scott Adams refers to Professor Dawkins' splendid new book. The following comes from the preface:

The status of atheists in America today is on a par with that of homosexuals fifty years ago. Now, after the Gay Pride movement, it is possible, though still not very easy, for a homosexual to be elected to public office. A Gallup poll taken in 1999 asked Americans whether they would vote for an otherwise well-qualified person who was a woman (95 per cent would), Roman Catholic (94 per cent would), Jew (92 per cent), black (92 per cent), Mormon (79 per cent), homosexual (79 per cent), or atheist (49 per cent). Clearly we have a long way to go.

Now, admittedly, the date on the study is 1999, and Scott Adams suggests that times have changed because of 9/11; but seriously, do you imagine that an atheist is going to win in Utah any time in the next fifty years? Dare to dream.

Re:Not so fast. (1)

91degrees (207121) | more than 7 years ago | (#16912478)

but seriously, do you imagine that an atheist is going to win in Utah any time in the next fifty years? Dare to dream.

But does that really matter? Seems likely that the atheist would be a Democrat or independent. He'd never get a safe Republican seat like Utah. The important question is how much of an effect godlessness would have in the swing states. I'd like to see how the figures break down in different states.

I must say that this is a stark contrast to Britain where a candidate puttingtoo much emphasis on his religion would be viewed with a certain level of distrust.

Re:Not so fast. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16912582)

But does that really matter? Seems likely that the atheist would be a Democrat or independent. He'd never get a safe Republican seat like Utah. The important question is how much of an effect godlessness would have in the swing states. I'd like to see how the figures break down in different states.

That's a fair point. I chose U-taw as the canonical example of a backward, priest-ridden state. But this is by no means a purely partisan Democratic/Republican division. The study cited above claimed that 51% of the American population, as of 1999, would not vote for an atheist. Some of those 51% must be Democrats, and probably more than a few. In a swing state, that's quite enough to secure the result for the other side.


I must say that this is a stark contrast to Britain where a candidate puttingtoo much emphasis on his religion would be viewed with a certain level of distrust.

How true. Tony Blair puts too much emphasis on his religion, and I certainly wouldn't trust him...

Oblig. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16912392)

Resistance is futile.

You know what I like most about this article? (1)

Nijika (525558) | more than 7 years ago | (#16912398)

It still advocates a religious decision to your voting choices. I know I know, "atheism isn't a religion", but the idea is that someone's religion, or lack thereof would sway your choice, rather than the actual political agenda. Religion is a bad yardstick for a leader, regardless of what it is (or if it is at all). Also, making the assumption that an Atheist is less likely to be bigoted than a non-Atheist is at best quaintly ironic, and at worst purely ignorant.

Re:You know what I like most about this article? (2, Insightful)

gerrysteele (927030) | more than 7 years ago | (#16912532)

Wrong:

People become atheists generally through an intellectual choice. Religious people are so because that is the way their personal influences have made them. They therefore inherit the prejudices that go along with that. They are therefore unlikely to objectively consider many other real life issues outside the context of their religious prejudice. Ergo, an atheist will not refer to religious preconception upon appraisal of any options presented in a given situation. A vote for an atheist is therefore a vote for someone who can make a choice and justify it rationally. For example, Tony Blair and G. W. Bush both justified the Iraq invasion by deferring to the judgment they shall receive from their god.

The obvious choice (1)

clickclickdrone (964164) | more than 7 years ago | (#16912418)

Ferris Bueller for president!

A whole new range of political terms and language. (5, Funny)

salparadyse (723684) | more than 7 years ago | (#16912424)

My Oval Office
My Little Puppy British Prime Minister
My Electronic Voting Machine - press the button, the screen changes, but nothing else does.
UN.dll has caused a fatal error.
Foreign Country Explorer - where do you want to invade today?

Why? (4, Insightful)

techmuse (160085) | more than 7 years ago | (#16912432)

Why would Gates want to give up so much power to become president? Wouldn't that be a step down?

Why Gates? (1)

brennanw (5761) | more than 7 years ago | (#16912442)

We've already got a government that needs frequent rebooting.

That's not good... as in Italy... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16912448)

Yeaaah! An american "Berlusconi" to dominate the world!!! (but after...)

US cmits suicide, hires Gates for foreign relation (1)

hAckz0r (989977) | more than 7 years ago | (#16912464)

News break: US commits suicide, hires Gates for top US foreign relations position (president) just to be sure to pull it off successfully.

Oh, sorry Bill. My mistake. We already hired someone for that postion.

Bill Gates would be stupid to run (1)

MBC1977 (978793) | more than 7 years ago | (#16912466)

Seriously, he would have to be an idiot. Considering he would have to divest himself of most (if not all) of his shares of Microsoft (which is worth billions), just to take a salary of 200,000 per year would be lunacy. Of course there are other kickbacks, but nothing compared to what he is worth or earns now.

Re:Bill Gates would be stupid to run (1)

fl!ptop (902193) | more than 7 years ago | (#16912550)

just to take a salary of 200,000 per year would be lunacy

fyi, the president's annual salary is $400,000 per year [wikipedia.org] .

(US Marine, College Student, and Proud Parent!)

if all that is true, then thank you for your service, but God help us all!

Re:Bill Gates would be stupid to run (1)

MBC1977 (978793) | more than 7 years ago | (#16912570)

I stand corrected, thanks. But I still think he would be an idiot. lol

Re:Bill Gates would be stupid to run (1)

clickclickdrone (964164) | more than 7 years ago | (#16912566)

>Of course there are other kickbacks, but nothing compared to what he is worth
>or earns now.
Not everyone's motivation is the size of their paycheck.

Now there's a notion (1)

Amphiaurus (984533) | more than 7 years ago | (#16912492)

that totally soured my stomach first thing Monday morning.

I'm still standing by ... (1)

JensenDied (1009293) | more than 7 years ago | (#16912494)

I'm still standing by the campaign for Cthulhu for 2012.

End of faith (5, Interesting)

clickclickdrone (964164) | more than 7 years ago | (#16912496)

Anyone interested in the possibilities of a world without faith could so worse than read the book "End of Faith" by Sam Harris. This book puts forward a powerful argument against all religions whilst putting forward insightful ideas for an alternative way to add value to our lives. It also has interesting views on radicalism within religion, primarily that the only true believers of any religion are the fanatics as they take the entire bible/koran/whatever at face value and live it whereas more moderates cherry pick the bits they like and ignore the bits they don't (stoning the neighbour for eating fish on a tuesday, nah, ignore that one. Hate gays? yup, tick) resulting in the vast majority of any given religions followers as basically failing that religons requirements.

Bill in charge? (5, Funny)

Patrik_AKA_RedX (624423) | more than 7 years ago | (#16912536)

I can see this happening.
- Finland added to list of rogue states.
- Bin laden looses first place to Torvalds
- US army invades China in the War Against Piracy.
- European parliament get accidentaly carpet bombed. Suriving senator drops MS fines.
- Microsoft tax becomes official and mandatory for everyone.
- Making MS jokes becomes capital crime. Death sentence reintroduced in all states.
- Gate-ology becomes state religion. Defines witches as people who use different OS.
- enviromentalists complain on enviromental effects of witch burnings.
- Enviromentalists proven to be very flameble.

Highlights the real issue (1)

Timesprout (579035) | more than 7 years ago | (#16912552)

Lack of competent politicians in the US. Its popular to poke fun at Bush but the only reason he is president is because he is an excellent fundraiser and extremely well connected flesh presser, not because he is actually capable of doing the job. Decision making is for his cabal of neo-con buddies.

Bill Gates on the other hand after his years at MS is used to having his instructions carried out as if they were the word of God, thats just not going to wash with either party in the US, not to mention that publically he comes across with all the personality of a fish. I applaud his charitable efforts but watching his response at a refugee camp in Africa recently was quite interesting. Bill seemed hugely uncomfortable with the fact that what he was seeing reality, that such desperation actually existed. Hes better off running his charity and the US might try developing some competent politicians who understand that politics are global these days and that the reality based community are correct more often than not.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...