I’ve always found myself bothered by the saying “A driver’s license is a privilege, not a right”. It’s a way for those with authority to warn drivers that they could lose their licenses at any point, so sure, it is rhetorically powerful. And, to an extent, it holds some truth. People can lose their licenses. But so what? People can lose their unfettered ability to walk around freely when they go to prison. But I doubt anyone is about to claim that we therefore don’t have the right to walk into our backyards whenever we damn well please.
So again, yes, the saying holds quite a bit of strength. But it is purely rhetorical strength. As for actual logic, it fails for the simple reason that we tend to define a right as something that is available to everyone on an equal basis (which is why marriage is a privilege where as the federal government and most state governments are concerned). Yes, there are requirements – people must pass tests. But people must also register in order to exercise their right to vote. And yes, there are ways to lose one’s license – drunk drivers do it all the time. But people also must not commit certain crimes if they want to continue walking around freely. So no, you rhetoric machines of authority, a driver’s license is not a privilege. I can get it, a Mexican can get, a woman can get it, and anyone else can get it. It is a right.
Atheism as a movement faces a number of issues. There is, of course, the fact that it is a purely descriptive position; it isn’t easy to gather together people with varying worldviews and philosophies. Then there’s the public vilification. If we’re to believe the attacks, atheists are arrogant and closed-minded and intolerant and bigoted and all sorts of other nasty things that are really just code for “I don’t like that atheists disagree with me”. And there are a whole host of other impediments to letting people know we exist. (Hell, even saying that we’re a part society is often received with foaming vitriol.) But one of the biggest issues I see is that of moving goal posts.
When atheists look at a specific belief to point out its flaws, why, that isn’t what most Christians believe! Or when atheists point to a widely believed idea in America’s dominant religion, why, that isn’t what True Christians believe! Or when atheists criticize so-called sophisticated theology, why, that’s just what one Christian believes!
Tobacco is a deadly Class A carcinogen that has no place in a pragmatic, rational society. Unfortunately, a lot this country is rather ideological. For that reason I offer a new national motto, borrowed and modified from the fine state of New Hampshire:
Live free and die.
I’m still waiting for the ideologues to explain how they’re able to spread the liberty they love so much to people who are dead.
There exists this popular argument about morality that I just detest. It goes like this: If morality is to exist at all, it must be objective. The reason this is complete junk is that it assumes morality is objective in the first place. In fact, just add “objective” in front of “morality” and absolutely nothing changes about the point – the tautological flaw just becomes more obvious.
Any news piece about a new scientific discovery which says some key aspect of evolution has been rewritten or radically changed is probably just a load of horseshit.
For the Sake of Science 