But at the same time I have no problem with profiling. If a woman wearing a burka is 100 times more likely to have a bomb underneath than her non-burka-wearing peers, random security screenings should be slanted that way 100 to 1 in my opinion.
Sorry could you clarify? Statistically speaking, a black person is more likely to commit a crime than a white person. Should cops or shop-owners profile black people in this manner?
The analogy here is not great because one chooses to wear a burka, while one has no choice over race. I think you would probably make that distinction, but I'm just curious.
As far as the agnostic/atheist thing, I learned it a little differently.
Using the teapot example:
A religious person would say, "Yes, I believe the invisible teapot exists and it orbits the sun!"
An agnostic would say, "Who cares? We can neither prove nor disprove the existence of the teapot, so why even waste time arguing? It is indefeasible."
An atheist would say, "Invisible teapot? That seems silly. The teapot does not exist."
So the way I learned it, the the agnostic is the one who takes feasibility into account, while the religious person and the atheist don't.
The religious person is saying, "It exists!" Which is indefeasible.
And the atheist is saying, "It doesn't exist!" Which is also indefeasible.
At least that's the way I've always understood it.