Dawkins defends comments about "Alien Designers".

Discussion in 'Science & Society' started by clusteringflux, Apr 15, 2008.

  1. spidergoat Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    51,949
    The Khmer Rouge wasn't against religion in general:



    Article 20 Every citizen of Kampuchea has the right to worship according to any religion and the right not to worship according to any religion.


    Reactionary religions which are detrimental to Democratic Kampuchea and Kampuchean people are absolutely forbidden. ​

    (Honorary Red Flag Letter to the Central Committee, 1977)​



    Check and mate.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,822
    Yeah neither was the Soviet Union. Athiests don't lie?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Fact: they destroyed the churches, killed Muslim clerics and decimated Buddhist monks from 80,000 to 3,000.

    Who cares what they SAID? Look at what they DID!
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. spidergoat Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    51,949
    Obviously not out of atheism, but because they felt those institutions were a threat to socialist revolution, as I have been saying all along.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,822
    :roflmao:

    You mean like the Jews were a threat to German economy.
     
  8. spidergoat Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    51,949
    Godwin's Law, you lose.
     
  9. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,822
    Wait I have one more:

    The United States does not torture.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    I can't believe youre falling back on propaganda to support your case.

    You know, until atheists accept that they can be vulnerable to ideological genocide, I'm not going to consider them as anything but delusional idiots.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  10. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    24,472
    Exactly.

    With the difference that Pol Pot was apparently, individually, atheist - unlike Hitler, who was apparently not.

    Which seems to make a big difference to you, for some reason. If you are arguing that evil people who get their hands on the machinery of organized theistic religion (or any other large social organization free of reason's restraint) are magnified in their capabilities, no one will object. If you are arguing that the atheist ones are evil because they are atheist you have to make some kind of different case.

    It's not impossible - one could, for example, argue that the more cynical the adherence of the Evil Power Seeker to the religion being used, the more likely success and consequent evil will be theirs in their ambition. But that is not an argument against Dawkins's objections to theism.

    Instead, you undermine your own arguments with stuff like this:
    A statement made, and a reality created, by the most flagrant theists ever to hod power in the US government.

    Meanwhile, the correlation between personal physical stature and evil-doing, in Great Leaders, is better attested than that between personal physical theism and evil-doing.

    btw: Most atheists easily agree that atheists can commit ideological genocide. The ideology involved will not be "atheism", however - at least, no sign of that in history or current trends.

    As far as being vulnerable to ideological "genocide" - of that we have several examples.
     
    Last edited: Apr 19, 2008
  11. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,822
    Well personally, I think Dawkins does more harm than good. He's like the well meaning fool, who is so interested in pursuing his own ideological goals that he's blind to the repercussions and consequences. I don't think he will do anything for furthering science. Quite teh reverse possibly, by alienating all thiests, moderate or extreme. And I think he will do even less for humanity.
     
  12. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    24,472
    That would be better argued from someone who appeared to have read his stuff and have some idea of what he was doing.
     
  13. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,822
    Rather than gauge the active anti-theism effect of his "teachings" you mean? Does anyone disagree that he is an anti-theist?

    Stuff like this:

    just makes my head spin.
     
    Last edited: Apr 19, 2008
  14. ElectricFetus Sanity going, going, gone Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,237
    Of course athiest do it! They are require by their atheist holy books to do it! Just like when different religions kill each other athiest group together, read from their holy text that puts them all in a singular mind funk bent on hate and they go burn them selfs some believers on stakes!

    (rather everyone kills each other, for any excuse imaginable, its human and has nothing to do with theism or atheism)
     
  15. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,822
    So it would appear that books are unnecessary. Since not only did atheists in the absence of any scripture kill millions, but repeated it over and over without the slightest remorse or reparation.
     
  16. (Q) Encephaloid Martini Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    19,125
    hehe, it's hilarious when the deluded devise silly notions they are unable to support, especially when they want to support their own hypocrisy.
     
  17. ElectricFetus Sanity going, going, gone Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,237
    You have difficult separating out sarcasm? But you did seem to figure out what I was saying at least mostly, its not a matter of books or belief, genocide is just human nature, I'm sure your aware of the millenia records of religious genocide so I don't see why you might believe athiest are the only ones that do it.
     
  18. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,822
    Like these?
     
  19. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    24,472
    Odd to see a religious theist confuse "anti-theism" with "anti-theist" - isn't that one of the big distinctions that supposedly lets all these theistic religions off the hook for their mass crimes and horrible atrocities ?

    But Dawkins has not been fulminating against theists as a category of people, at least not in anything I've read. He is arguing that theisms have certain flaws in common, as political philosophies and especially as approaches to understanding of the natural world, and that people are often victims of them in various ways.

    Hmmm. Aside from accusing certain Great Leaders of personal atheism and ideologies of focused anti-Church bigotry, you have been sort of missing that specific issue.

    Dawkins has been a bit better targeted, there. If you read his actual writings , say in "The God Delusion", he addresses your apparent concerns directly.
     
  20. (Q) Encephaloid Martini Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    19,125
    Nope. The author is a "professor" (hilarious) of the Jesuit University of New York. He is a full-blown theist. What the fuck did you expect?

    Typical bullshit from you, Sam. Knee-jerk reactions. Insulting, at best.
     
  21. visceral_instinct Monkey see, monkey denigrate Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,913
    Indeed.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Yes, because not believing in a God, even if that is out of a well thought out assessment of whether there is evidence, automatically makes you a delusional idiot.
     
  22. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,822
    You mean the part where he says religious people suck dummies is arguing against flaws in theisms? Or is it the part where he says that moderate theists are also delusional and should be included in the noble war of reason against faith?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    In fact some of his statements are very telling:

    He is clearly interested in using his atheism to interfere with state and social policy.
    Its interesting how he cherry picks the actions of theists and ignores the fact that sans scriptures atheists have been willing to go much further to promote their ideologies. Especially considering his own desire to influence policy, not only at the level of state but also at the level of family.

    What next, atheists bicycling door to door with a copy of his book?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!




    Well athiests appear to be especially good at it, wouldn't you say? Must be the larger forebrain as evidenced by the superior rational thinking.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!





    My dear (Q), you are supposed to read the article.


    Like this:

     
    Last edited: Apr 19, 2008
  23. (Q) Encephaloid Martini Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    19,125
    As opposed to the status quo of theism interfering with state and social policy?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    A cherry tree usually won't bare fruit every minute of every day of every century...

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     

Share This Page