I’ve tried to stay out of this debate. It is pretty non-sensical, as most religious debates are–vi vs. emacs, brace styles, etc. However, Robert Cooper makes some good points for consideration in defense of static typing. The first one, right off the bat, has nothing to do with safety but touches on one of my favorite programming principals: intentionality. His other points are well made and well substantiated.
I even tend to think that his points, if well received, might help improve dynamic languages, in this case specifically Ruby, without having to give up the advantages of dynamic typing. Unfortunately, when the original poster to whom Robert is responding thinks it is realistic or practical to just fire people for making mistakes that a bit more intelligence in the language design could easily help resolve–well, good reception might be asking for too much.