Fox Religion Panel Gets Heated When Catholic Insults Atheist as ‘Unintelligent’

33

It’s Thursday on Fox’s The Real Story, so you know what that means: Time to bust out the jokey “an atheist, a Jew, and a Christian walk into a bar Fox” lede graf. This time Gretchen Carlson’s religion panel went head-to-head-to-head over an atheist organization’s billboard declaring there to be no afterlife.

The billboard in question, sponsored by the Freedom From Religion Foundation, reads: “Enjoy Life Now. There Is No Afterlife.” American Atheists president David Silverman unequivocally praised the message as “the truth” and one that encourages people to pass a “good legacy” on to their children. “Take care of your fellow man because God is not going to do it,” he added.

In return, Catholic League president Bill Donohue took the opportunity to stab at Silverman’s intelligence, suggesting that only “intelligent” people understand that there is a “higher being.” When the atheist called him out for the insult, Donohue retorted: “I’m not sure how much intelligence there is to insult.”

Written By: Andrew Kirell
continue to source article at mediaite.com

33 COMMENTS

  1. Big Bill Blowbag resorts to the insult to sidestep the question of a supposed afterlife.

    Well Bill, no amount of insults will give you an afterlife. You will be dead, – just the same as I will be.

    • Yes. As I like to say, when he dies he is NOT going to be very surprised!

      In reply to #1 by Mr DArcy:

      Big Bill Blowbag resorts to the insult to sidestep the question of a supposed afterlife.

      Well Bill, no amount of insults will give you an afterlife. You will be dead, – just the same as I will be.

  2. In return, Catholic League president Bill Donohue took the opportunity to stab at Silverman’s intelligence, suggesting that only “intelligent” people understand that there is a “higher being.” When the atheist called him out for the insult, Donohue retorted: “I’m not sure how much intelligence there is to insult.”

    Higher intelligence is usually obvious in people who have it in plenty.

    Those who need to assert they have intelligence, do so because others would be unlikely to conclude that about them from observations of their words or actions!

    Donohue – “If you want to say you believe in nothing, I say you could,” the Catholic panelist added. “I know you stand for nothing, I know you’re good for nothing, so we agree!”

    This sums up Donohue’s understanding of the world beyond his own indoctrination with spoon-fed dogma. Take away his rote-learned dogma (which makes no sense anyway), and he understands “NOTHING”!

    • In reply to #8 by godsbuster:

      Although I would have felt more comfortable with “There is no evidence for an afterlife”.

      Agree. That is the correct answer. Asserting there is no afterlife is a bad way to do it. When you say there is no evidence for one, it asks the claimant to produce evidence instead of assertion. There is no afterlife, is just another assertion.

      • In reply to #17 by aquilacane:

        Asserting there is no afterlife is a bad way to do it. When you say there is no evidence for one, it asks the claimant to produce evidence instead of assertion. There is no afterlife, is just another assertion.

        Except… there is plenty of evidence for an afterlife. There are the reports of people who have had Near Death Experiences (NDEs), the supposed revealed word of God to his prophets, the description of an afterlife in the Bible, etc. It’s just that none of this evidence is particularly convincing to you or me.

        It’s like telling a born again Christian there is no evidence for the existence of God when he (or she) is absolutely convinced they have felt the very presence of God within their very souls. The problem is that believers and atheists have very different standards as to what constitutes evidence and you’re not going to get very far asserting a lack of evidence when they “know” that the evidence is there.

        Personally, I’d rather just assert that there is no afterlife and no god(s) as a default position.

        • In reply to #19 by godzillatemple:

          In reply to #17 by aquilacane:

          Asserting there is no afterlife is a bad way to do it. When you say there is no evidence for one, it asks the claimant to produce evidence instead of assertion. There is no afterlife, is just another assertion.

          Except… there is plenty of evidence for an afterlife….

          Er……NDEs (please note NEAR death, not POST death) are only evidence than the brain is vulnerable to extreme thoughts and beliefs and wishful thinking when subjected to stressful situations, and not evidence that the beliefs or delusions are actually true. You may well notice that Christians tend to see jesus, hindus see Krishna etc, which contradicts the assertion made by religions that theirs, and only theirs, doctrine is true.

          Many may claim to ‘see’ a bright light, maybe that is what happens to the brain close to death, who knows? However the power of suggestion, and I may also be a victim to that suggestion, can lead people to assume that that is what they will see. In the same way that ‘victims’ of alien abduction, many claim to see ‘greys’ or small hominids with large heads and huge black almond-shaped eyes, not because that is what aliens necessarily look like, but because sci-fi literature based only on human imagination has painted them that way. The power of suggestion.

  3. Bill Donahue is one aggressive, rude, intolerant character. I will never forget him debating Hitch in this, and worse, manner. I don’t know how Christopher didn’t just get up and leave this utterly violent and unpleasant man to his God and his imaginary ‘afterlife’, but then, by staying he proved what a wonderful debater he truly was. Silverman did well but I do so miss Hitch…

  4. I just watched an episode of MASH where the camp was “haunted by ‘BAD’ spirits” because Radar moved a totem pole of sorts. I just love how many of the characters universally write off the possibility of bad spirits and then say shit about god. It is the only episode of the show that I loathe. Even the Chaplain gets in on it. HATE IT.

    Anyway, this guy is the preening jock in high school who wanted to have sex with men and beat the shit out of the weaker boys because he couldn’t bang them then went home and masturbated thinking of how cool he was. Little does ho know that the people surrounding him are on to him, even the ones on his side. “METHINKS THOU DOEST PROTEST TOO MUCH”.
    An asshole is an asshole is an asshole.

  5. what an ass Donahue is — certainly intelligent Catholics will see that. He’s an embarrassment.

    Meanwhile, I want him to keep it up, so Catholics and others will see that he has no reasonable arguments at all so resorts to name-calling.

  6. there is a goD!, Donohue shouted

    [Removed by moderator to bring within Terms of Use] How is it he is still president of the Catholic League?

    Silverman rocks – smart, steady, all around good guy.

  7. Of course a bigot like Donohue will resort to “ad hominem” arguments. He has nothing else to fight with. He’s like a one-legged man in an ass-kicking contest who realizes that he doesn’t stand a chance (forgive the pun) and then resorts to biting his opponent’s calves while on the ground. No class whatsoever.

  8. A Short Guide to Infauxtainment:

    1) Find a controversial topic

    2) Gather a panel of opposing views

    3) Throw them some bones to chew on

    4) Watch them squabble over the bones**

    5) The end

    **It does not matter whether the squabble leads to anything revealing or unexpected or whether or not it moves the argument forward. Indeed, if you had done #2 correctly, you should know in advance what the squabble will look like as your guests will have previous form of saying the same things always. In any event, your audience does not care for new revelations or important insights; all they care about is that there is a “Fair and Balanced” (TM) squabble between the guests. Good luck.

  9. Once again, journalism is terrible. The words here don’t provide a sensible alternative to watching the video; they misrepresent what happened. Let me prove it.

    The insult Donohue was alleged to have made in the title is unempirical enough as it is, but in the body of the article we get this:

    In return, Catholic League president Bill Donohue took the opportunity to stab at Silverman’s intelligence, suggesting that only “intelligent” people understand that there is a “higher being.”

    Well, that’s even dumber. Of course plenty of unintelligent people think there’s a higher being. For starters, most people do, That automatically means plenty of them have to have 2-digit IQs, because there aren’t enough 3-digiters to go around. Further, even if it were true that all theists are intelligent, that wouldn’t imply the atheist Donohue was arguing with wasn’t also intelligent. Doesn’t Donohue know statements differ from their converses?

    Of course, because journalists think they can get anything wrong as long as they’re paraphrasing, Donohue actually said a third thing. He said “intelligent people usually” believe in a higher power. Incidentally, that says nothing about the odds of a nonbeliever being intelligent. What would be interesting to ask isn’t whether intelligent people usually do what people per se also usually do; comparing the two rates is what really matters. For what it’s worth, studies disagree over whether intelligence has no correlation with religion or a weak negative correlation.

    Later in the video, however, Donohue did say atheists were more irrational than religious critics of Halloween. That somehow didn’t get mentioned in the article at all. For atheism to be even slightly irrational, there has to be some evidence for theism; there isn’t.

    • In reply to #25 by Jos Gibbons:

      Further, even if it were true that all theists are intelligent, that wouldn’t imply the atheist Donohue was arguing with wasn’t also intelligent. Doesn’t Donohue know statements differ from their converses?

      Donohue actually said a third thing. He said “intelligent people usually” believe in a higher power.

      Donohue does not need to exhibit intelligence or reasoning.

      He is simply flattering all his following of dummies, (-who like him are indoctrinated in “faith-thinking”). They can’t do “reasoning”, but “believe in a “higher power” (easy for a low intellect dummy to believe).

      He is pretending the dogma-dependent dummies are more intelligent than atheists, to flatter their egos, and reinforce their “superior” dogma based “knowledge”! -

      Delusion-land mutual back-slapping indoctrination for dummies! – Don’t some of them lap it up to boost the viewing figures!

      His followers are proving they are really bright, by regularly handing money over to his organisation – so they deserve his flattery!

  10. First off, FOX is not a format for news, it is a menu for disseminating disinformation and class warfare. DONOhue is a dinosaur clinging to his potty training past. I have heard about the infamous “Irish temper” and wonder if the religious war history of Ireland has left it mark on immigrants of his age bracket. He certainly will “fight” for christ at the drop of a hat. Once again, the “humility” (and arrogance) of the believer is boundless! (I might add the clinging to ignorance) Donohue should return to Ireland where he would find that the population there is making progress in throwing off the shackles of dogmatism. By analogy, he is last year’s hat that no one thinks is fashionable anymore. As Captain Kirk would say – He is a “dunzel”

  11. It’s funny how Donahue complains that Silverman isn’t respecting his freedom of speech, and then claims offense at the atheist billboard which represents the freedom of speech of the atheists.

  12. I don’t know why the Rabbi was not also insulted by Donuhue’s ‘intelligence’ statement as well, after all the implication that those who don’t believe in jesus are stupid should also apply to jews, muslims, hindus etc. Logically this would have to be Donohue’s position on people of other faiths, on the basis they are believing in gods that he thinks don’t exist, implying that they also ‘believe in or stand for nothing’.

    What a dumbass

Leave a Reply