Remind me why I should care that Lindsay Lohan is going to appear nude in a movie.

It must be very important that “LiLo” is going to “lose her clothes,” in an upcoming movie, because this story about her nakedness is one of the top headlines on today’s homepage of MSNBC.  Here’s the essence of this important “news”:

Set to play a “nymphomaniac waitress” in “Florence,” Lindsay purportedly countered the producers’ request for a topless sex scene with a “full frontal” offer. “She is fully aware of the potential of her body,” a Tinseltown pal insisted. “Lindsay wants to build up an image as a mature, responsible actress.”

Why is Lohan’s nudity so worthy of this prominent headline?  Is it because she is pretty?  MSNBC includes this photo in case you need to see her to comprehend the story:                                 lilo-photo.jpg

Yeah, she’s pretty, but pretty women can be found in many places and most of those sightings are not newsworthy.  Is all of this media attention occurring because Lohan is a woman who will be appearing naked?   No, seeing a naked woman is cheap and easy (for instance, I’ve heard that one can Google “naked women” and find lots of photos and videos of naked women on the Internet. Caveat: In no way am I suggesting that all of the naked women you might find on the Internet are also pretty). 

I think this media attention regarding Lohan is because a lot of people will be “getting what they covet” when they see Lindsay Lohan naked.  I’m reminded of being in high school, where one of …

Continue ReadingRemind me why I should care that Lindsay Lohan is going to appear nude in a movie.

Why Atheism Doesn’t Matter, but Skepticism Does.

Summer of 2004. I have considered myself an atheist at least since the summer of 2004. For the sake of feeling smart and consistent, I believe I’ve considered myself an atheist for much longer. But I only have documented evidence of such a stance dating back to the summer of 2004.

Did I have some great logical awakening that roused me to critical thinking and clear-headedness? No. I know I did not. I know I didn’t become a perfect bastion of scientific thinking because, in the summer of 2004, I believed in handwriting analysis.

A knowledge-thirsty little 10th grader, I still believed then that if someone with a PhD wrote a book, that book had to contain gospel truth. I didn’t know the difference between bad science and good science. I didn’t even realize such a rift existed. So handwriting analysis, with all of its certain language and its sheer lack of cited empirical evidence, seemed as valid as medicine or geology.

Only half a year or so later, as I struggled to tell a friend that the dominating middle region in her script belied a permanently childish outlook, did I begin to realize exactly how idiotic this whole graphology thing sounded.

Ouch. It still stings to admit. Should I also admit that I used to take multivitamins? That I preferred bottled water over tap? Evidence supports none of these beliefs.

I hope I’ve made my point clearly: atheism did not protect me from having moronic …

Continue ReadingWhy Atheism Doesn’t Matter, but Skepticism Does.