1. Comment #71330 by jimbob on September 18, 2007 at 1:03 pm

Part of me wants to laugh and go "Yay!" but part of me cringes too -- she'll undoubtedly be advanced as the stereotypical atheist -- and all of us will have to be on the defensive against the caricature.

Other Comments by jimbob

2. Comment #71337 by Quine on September 18, 2007 at 1:16 pm

Part of being in this 'herd of cats' is that each cat is going to do what he or she pleases, and that is just the way it is. It is very difficult to organize a group of people based on what they don't believe. Imagine trying to get a convention booked of people who don't believe that Elvis is still with us. Atheism has always suffered this problem of organization, which I think has to be accepted, and moved passed.

Don't worry about the stereotypical atheist, just do your best to speak the truth based on reason.

Other Comments by Quine

3. Comment #71338 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 18, 2007 at 1:24 pm

As I have pointed outbefore, it's this kind of an idiot that is the reason that so many good and decent people turn towards religion.

While the metaphysical claims of religion are bullshit, much of what it describes is real. Devotion, the Sacred, Sin and Redemption, Worship - these are all real, human characteristics and are among the most important ones. Jeer all you like.

Thanks to this idiot, the view of atheism as shallow and pointless will be engrained still further.

Other Comments by Fanusi Khiyal

4. Comment #71339 by BigJohn on September 18, 2007 at 1:24 pm

I love Kathy Griffin!!!!

Other Comments by BigJohn

5. Comment #71340 by BAEOZ on September 18, 2007 at 1:24 pm

We all know that all atheists have faith. It's just another faith. Faith in communism, fascism, eugenics, baby skinning and broiling. It's the devil's work. God created atheists to temp believers and try to turn them away from eternal salvation. Atheism is a religion. Oh, I already said that one.

Other Comments by BAEOZ

6. Comment #71345 by He'sAVeryNaughtyBoy on September 18, 2007 at 1:30 pm

Just from that interview she comes across as slightly annoying rather than funny, but then I guess I don't get American humour. As for her speech - was that it? The way it was presented to us, it sounded like she had gone off on a rant and might has well have said "Fuck you Jesus."...

... but she didn't. She had a little giggle, poked fun at all the planks who go up and thank god (because he's obviously more concerned about whether this twat or that twat deserves an award than the suffering of the world) and then walks off.

They're right about cencorship being better than self promotion. Just ask Frankie - he says relax!

Other Comments by He'sAVeryNaughtyBoy

7. Comment #71346 by roach on September 18, 2007 at 1:32 pm

"Devotion, the Sacred, Sin and Redemption, Worship"

Why are these capitalized? Religion insults, cheapens, and greatly exaggerates all these supposed aspects of the human condition.

Other Comments by roach

8. Comment #71351 by skyhook0 on September 18, 2007 at 1:43 pm

I thought this comment was fine. I'm pretty shocked to see this held up as an example of an "errant cat" on this website, which stands so firmly behind RRS etc. The "God made my football team win" attitude is one of the most disgusting parts of "faith," and also one of the criticisms of faith that is most easily accepted by the mainstream. This seems to be a fine example of lampooning an aspect of many people's faith that the average viewer can agree is despicable. I'm really at a loss for how this gets criticized while RSS gets lauded here.

Other Comments by skyhook0

9. Comment #71357 by tdreyno on September 18, 2007 at 2:08 pm

"Devotion, the Sacred, Sin and Redemption, Worship"

The what now? Never experienced one of those... so much for the "human condition."

Other Comments by tdreyno

10. Comment #71359 by Janus on September 18, 2007 at 2:12 pm

While the metaphysical claims of religion are bullshit, much of what it describes is real. Devotion, the Sacred, Sin and Redemption, Worship - these are all real, human characteristics and are among the most important ones. Jeer all you like.

*jeers*

What nonsense. Devotion to and worship of something that doesn't exist? Not what I would call an "important characteristic". Sin and redemption? Among the silliest and most harmful of Christianity's tenets. The Sacred? What the fuck is that?

If there's anything wrong here, it's that you think these things are in any way opposed to shallowness and pointlessness.

Other Comments by Janus

11. Comment #71365 by Richard Morgan on September 18, 2007 at 2:34 pm

Big John

I love Kathy Griffin!!!!

Me too!!! I just want to thank Jesus for giving me a computer and inventing the Internet and YouTube so I could see this clip.
This would not have been possible if He'd been wasting His time saving lives in Darfur.

Other Comments by Richard Morgan

12. Comment #71366 by USA_Limey on September 18, 2007 at 2:35 pm

She's an entertainer; this is how she makes her living.

Courting controversy and staying in the headlines is how these people keep their careers ticking over.

On the whole I am not bothered by this much, and in all honesty most theists probably will see it for the self promotion it is rather than anything else.

Other Comments by USA_Limey

13. Comment #71367 by Theocrapcy on September 18, 2007 at 2:43 pm

@jimbob

The stereotyping will occur regardless. Religionists have an in-built need to be simplistic.

You go girl.

Other Comments by Theocrapcy

14. Comment #71372 by walk on September 18, 2007 at 3:02 pm

It's about time someone called attention to the inanity of entertainers and sports figures always fawning humility and thanking a diety for achievements that are clearly their own. Thanks, Kathy!

Other Comments by walk

15. Comment #71374 by The author on September 18, 2007 at 3:24 pm

I very much dislike this person. Kathy Griffin obviously only said the ridiculous Jesus stuff because she wanted to be talked about. She could also have said "Fuck the Jews" or something like this. It didn't seem to me that she would care about anything else than herself and her career. I do not declare my solidarity to every idiot who thinks he/she can make money with offending someone, if it is religion or not.

Other Comments by The author

16. Comment #71377 by Robert Maynard on September 18, 2007 at 3:29 pm

URGH.
What an annoying person.

Other Comments by Robert Maynard

17. Comment #71384 by Zaphod on September 18, 2007 at 4:00 pm

I am offended when moronic so called superstars collect awards and thank god when in reality what they are arrogantly saying is "Thank you god for making me so much better than the rest". Censorship is stupid.

The only problem I have with this is that I don't find Kathy Griffin particularly funny.

Other Comments by Zaphod

18. Comment #71388 by walk on September 18, 2007 at 4:21 pm

I can understand being put off by Griffin's personality and the way she approached this, but atheists in the US are so tired of being hit over the head by self-righteous, bigoted faith-heads ("9/11 was god's punishment for immorality"), that is nice to see someone publicly hit back once in a while, however crudely.

And, yes, she does this for personal publicity, but (rather than making a random shocking comment) I believe she's always spoken out for non-belief.

Other Comments by walk

19. Comment #71389 by Inferno on September 18, 2007 at 4:38 pm

Kathy Griffin is annoying, but damn American theists (and Fox) get upset over the smallest things.

Other Comments by Inferno

20. Comment #71395 by nancy2001 on September 18, 2007 at 4:59 pm

It's great that Kathy Griffin spoke out against religion last week. Millions of people heard her comments. The tide is starting to turn.

Other Comments by nancy2001

21. Comment #71396 by robonstormymonday on September 18, 2007 at 5:03 pm

BAFOZ wrote :

"We all know that all atheists have faith. It's just another faith. Faith in communism, fascism, eugenics, baby skinning and broiling. It's the devil's work. God created atheists to temp believers and try to turn them away from eternal salvation. Atheism is a religion. Oh, I already said that one."

Is this supposed to be a joke? I really hope it is, because otherwise you have posted one of the most hopelessly ignorant comments I've ever seen.

Other Comments by robonstormymonday

22. Comment #71408 by Thelonious on September 18, 2007 at 5:38 pm

Fanusi Khiyal: While the metaphysical claims of religion are bullshit, much of what it describes is real. Devotion, the Sacred, Sin and Redemption, Worship - these are all real, human characteristics and are among the most important ones. Jeer all you like.

Janus: *jeers*

What nonsense. Devotion to and worship of something that doesn't exist? Not what I would call an "important characteristic". Sin and redemption? Among the silliest and most harmful of Christianity's tenets. The Sacred? What the fuck is that?

If there's anything wrong here, it's that you think these things are in any way opposed to shallowness and pointlessness.

This is precisely the attitude that allows mainstream folks to write atheists off as petty, whining, shallow and angry. I see way too much of it on this site.

Janus, Mr. Khiyal expressly rejected the metaphysical claims of religion as "bullshit," so he's not talking about devotion to a non-existent god. I would suggest that he's talking about psychological characteristics here - and the ones he mentions are all very important and deep concepts.

I personally believe that the notion of sin is corrosive and destructive - nevertheless, it is important and may not be possible to eradicate.

Just because you don't understand the notion of the sacred, doesn't mean it isn't important. Mr. Khiyal is not your enemy - he just doesn't want to throw out the baby (arguably a good metaphor for, or example of, the sacred) with the bathwater.

What would you offer as oppositions to shallowness and pointlessness? (and, of course, "depth" and "meaning" are only simplistic answers - what qualities of life provide depth and meaning?).

Disclaimer: Let me make this explicit, since it is easy to misunderstand - I am NOT pushing any sort of metaphysical or religious agenda here. I DO think that concepts such as Devotion and the Sacred play an important role in a well-lived life (less sure about sin and redemption).

Other Comments by Thelonious

23. Comment #71416 by Yorker on September 18, 2007 at 6:07 pm

First time I've heard this girl speak and while I don't find her terrifically funny, she veils her intelligence well. The main thing is she's an atheist doing the right thing and that makes her OK in my eyes.

Other Comments by Yorker

24. Comment #71418 by Yorker on September 18, 2007 at 6:11 pm

21. Comment #71396 by robonstormymonday

You must be new here.

Other Comments by Yorker

25. Comment #71420 by Yorker on September 18, 2007 at 6:15 pm

8. Comment #71351 by skyhook0

There are some weird people here. Your mistaken if you think everyone supports the RRS. Some, like myself, support them but a minority don't.

Other Comments by Yorker

26. Comment #71429 by HappyPrimate on September 18, 2007 at 6:50 pm

I'm sorry I missed the show when it aired. Kudos for Kathy and Sally. Don't be afraid to ridicule religion or unnecessary war when you are given a public platform. Kathy's remarks were so full of truth and it was so obvious that that is what upset Xians. People can be starving around the world but they want to believe a prayer will be answered for their every little whim. Funny as funny can be. Loved it! Great she is getting a lot of mileage out of it as well.

Other Comments by HappyPrimate

27. Comment #71450 by Janus on September 18, 2007 at 7:51 pm

Thelonious,

Your attitude and Khiyal's is one of pompous pretense and fake depth that should have died with your belief in religious nonsense, but apparently didn't. It's an attitude born out of a perverse attachment to superstitious ignorance and fuzzy-headed thinking.

The two of you remind me of those new age gurus who wrap themselves in an aura of mystery and go on about "Being One with the Universe", or "Empowering your Inner Self", or "Feeling Awe at the Grand Interconnectedness of It All". And Joe Average goes cross-eyed and says, "Whoa man, that's deep", and feels much respect for these gurus.

But of course they're nothing but charlatans. The depth that Joe Average thinks he sees in them is not depth at all, it's just the feeling that most people get when they listen to meaningless nonsense that they, at some level, wish were true.

What do you expect me to think when some bozo comes in and writes in a reverent tone about Worship, Sin, and the Sacred (every one of those words carefully capitalized, of course)? You can practically feel the pompousness oozing out of Khiyal's comment.

Worship and Sin are inherently linked to theism, and can be dismissed as ridiculous by all atheists. To pretend otherwise is dishonest; what can "sin" mean if not to go against God's will? And what do you worship (_worship_, not admire) if not a supernatural entity or "supreme being"?

As for the other three concepts, since Khiyal grouped them with the two I just mentioned, I'm pretty sure he meant them all in the religious sense, but I'll be generous and give him the benefit of the doubt. Devotion, in the sense of passion or dedication, is certainly admirable, but what makes you think Kathy Griffin (or I for that matter) don't feel passion for anything? Redeeming oneself is to atone for one's guilt. What is so "deep" about that?

People call something "sacred" when they have irrational beliefs about it (sacred words? sacred relics? sacred cows?), or when they feel awe born out of ignorance. I feel nothing but contempt for both of these meanings. A person like Francis Collins will feel awe at the complexity of the human genome and will attribute this complexity to his magic daddy in the sky. Do you think that makes him a "deep person"?


To me, a person who is not shallow is a person who is capable of many kinds of thinking. For example, when meeting a new individual, a shallow person will only notice one, or a few aspects of this individual (say, his wealth and his physical attractiveness). A "deep" person will give importance to the individual's personality, his intellectual capacities, his professional competence, and other things.
As for meaning, anyone can give meaning to his or her life, all you need is to give yourself a goal, a purpose, and work towards it.

Here's a challenge: Explain to me how "the Sacred" adds anything to a person's life. My guess is that you'll either have to dilute the meaning of the word "sacred" into utter meaninglessness, or you'll be forced to admit that it must be based on religious superstition to be worth anything (and therefore be worth nothing to anyone who realizes that it is superstition).

Other Comments by Janus

28. Comment #71493 by Yorker on September 18, 2007 at 11:23 pm

To all you wankers out there (you know who you are) who think that atheism is being damaged by some people of lesser intellect, I make the following blunt and simple statement.

Take your heads out of the clouds, your arses, or wherever they're buried and get a grip on reality.

WE NEED MORE ATHEISTS OF AVERAGE OR EVEN BELOW AVERAGE INTELLIGENCE; WE HAVE ENOUGH CLEVER PEOPLE ALREADY!

People will NOT see us in a bad light, they WILL see we represent a WIDE cross-section of humanity, the average Joe Sixpack as one of you dumb-asses called them doesn't give a shit about pseudo-intellectual arseholes who look down their noses at them. It is YOUR kind that turn them off; they want to feel there are people like THEM who are atheistic. I know this from meetings I've held with people off the street in my local community. These are their thoughts not mine!

Explaining God's non-existence to the person-in-the-street via philosophical or historical examples from figures they've never heard of is worse than useless, they think you're showing off your knowledge and they end up disliking you! It is the simple true examples that strike home, e.g. why would a loving God allow the death of your baby? The common people are not stupid but most are not well-educated; Prof. Peter Atkinson calls Edinburgh "the home of rationality" (because of Hume and the Enlightenment) but most people in Edinburgh don't know who Hume was!

So stop this pathetic crap masquerading as intelligent comment, we will win public support by wooing the public, not the intellectuals, we have them in abundance. People like Griffin and Sapient are worth a hundred times more than any of you nay-sayers out there, whether you dislike them, or think you're smarter is of no FUCKING IMPORTANCE WHATEVER! You need to grasp that simple fact.

Other Comments by Yorker

29. Comment #71503 by Philip1978 on September 19, 2007 at 12:17 am

Hear Hear Yorker,

Oi you lot, stop being so negative! Do you really think young Kathy there is unintelligent? More to the point does it matter? Just because she has a weird smile and an odd voice, doesn't scratch the surface. I saw the video before I read all the comments and I really think she has got her head screwed on.

There she is saying "Look, I am a D list celebrity, I have just made a load of Christians spend vast amounts of money just because I said the word Jesus out of context"! She has got the religious up in arms over HUMOUR! Wasn't it Sam Harris who mentioned something about how the Klu Klux Klan was brought down by humour?

I am totally behind Yorker in his statement, the fact that some of us are smarter than others is bollocks to the core in most people's eyes. I am highly impressed by the level of knowledge on this site, one of the reasons I come here is because I want to learn a few things and hear different opinions (and slowly bend your will to mine mwwhahahahahahahha etc!) But I also want people to be aware of the damage that religion is doing to this world and explaining the Anthropic Principle to "Joe Sixpack" is not going to wash is it?

So why not have a media savvy D list celebrity show how easy it is to offend the religious, let the world see the hysterical rantings of the Bill O Reilly's and the Donahues of this world for what they are- meaningless rantings! She got an award for some dumb arse reality show, which I think even she admits in this video, she then goes up on stage and makes some funny comments about Jesus and how people seem to think their careers are built because of God! She is going to be making jokes in Madison Square Garden soon, what is the betting she will make fun of this event? Just think about who will be attending that show.

Bravo Kathy, go for it girl!

Philip

Other Comments by Philip1978

30. Comment #71541 by tieInterceptor on September 19, 2007 at 2:06 am

I think she was great,

she is a comedian so she has a bigger leeway to say things and people are expected to take them with a pinch of salt and some sense of fun.

And the fact that they are bringing attention to all the censoring and the newspaper rable rable makes the theist look like a bunch of fascist prima donnas.

.

Other Comments by tieInterceptor

31. Comment #71542 by pewkatchoo on September 19, 2007 at 2:10 am

Yorker

WE NEED MORE ATHEISTS OF AVERAGE OR EVEN BELOW AVERAGE INTELLIGENCE; WE HAVE ENOUGH CLEVER PEOPLE ALREADY!

That is exactly what RD said to me when he begged me to join his website.

Other Comments by pewkatchoo

32. Comment #71559 by Biblebeltheretic on September 19, 2007 at 3:16 am

Thank you Yorker!

Other Comments by Biblebeltheretic

33. Comment #71588 by Logicel on September 19, 2007 at 4:51 am

Yorker wrote: WE NEED MORE ATHEISTS OF AVERAGE OR EVEN BELOW AVERAGE INTELLIGENCE; WE HAVE ENOUGH CLEVER PEOPLE ALREADY!
____________

*IRONY WARNING*

Using all caps obviously shows your lack of intelligence.

*END OF IRONY WARNING*

Agree completely with your comment. Intellectuals are fun to visit, but I wouldn't want to live with one! LOL.

Other Comments by Logicel

34. Comment #71596 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 19, 2007 at 5:08 am

Explaining the obvious to fools is my job.

Janus, the sacred is that which may not, under any circumstances be sacrificed or compromised. Not ever. If you have nothing in your life that you know to be sacred, then it is pointless even trying to explain this.

>>As for meaning, anyone can give meaning to his or her life, all you need is to give yourself a goal, a purpose, and work towards it.<<

"All". Pretty big 'all'. Leaving that aside for a moment, this is _exactly_ what attracts many toward religion. For many, religion is about a search for that kind of purpose, and simply belittling it casually - in the way that Kathy Griffin does - is not intelligent, but nihilistic.

And it also associates atheism with the worst face of hollywood culture. If we are hoping to break the hideous hold that religion has, which is currently driving our civilisation into the ditch, then we need to make the best possible case against it.

And _this_ isn't it.

Nietzsche wrote something very apposite about this kind of nonsense.

>>"Look, I am a D list celebrity, I have just made a load of Christians spend vast amounts of money just because I said the word Jesus out of context"! She has got the religious up in arms over HUMOUR!<<

*dryly* I wonder by what concievable standard that qualifies as humour. I already know what the Christians are going to say. They are going to say that she is taking a cheap shot at a defenseless target that can't fight back, just to score cheap points. They'll say that she's too much of a gutless coward to say something like that about Islam.

And they'll be right. If she _had_ taken on Islam, I would have applauded her. Because that would have taken actual courage. Instead she is pointlessly attacking an easy target when there is not even the slightest chance of repercussions.

Shame on her.

Other Comments by Fanusi Khiyal

35. Comment #71608 by gotterdammerung on September 19, 2007 at 5:34 am

The discussion re: 'sacred' reminded me of this George Carlin riff on the "sanctity of life."

http://youtube.com/watch?v=3Djohakx_FE

Other Comments by gotterdammerung

36. Comment #71609 by Philip1978 on September 19, 2007 at 5:35 am

Fanusi Khiyal

Cheap shot? Easy target? How exactly is that considered a cheap shot when Christianity is as fervent as Islam in some parts of America? I dont understand how she is gutless for attacking Jesus, I think it was a rather brave thing to do!

I dont think you got the joke, it was a joke about how people always praise God for winning awards, scoring goals etc when its perfectly obvious that no divine intervention has taken place. Then suddenly the religious nutbars like O Reilly and co all start flapping about madly as if its the end of the world and willingly spend vast amounts of money censoring her when the word has already got out. I think its hilarious myself, I am sorry you cant see the funny side of it

Chin up

Philip

Other Comments by Philip1978

37. Comment #71627 by Yorker on September 19, 2007 at 11:24 am

34. Comment #71596 by Fanusi Khiyal

"Explaining the obvious to fools is my job."

I already figured you for an elitist asshole - no need to prove it!

"And _this_ isn't it."

Yes it is! It's the final straw, anyone who uses space-wasting, non-informational, non-emphatical underscores is simply stupid!

Other Comments by Yorker

38. Comment #71635 by nothing on September 19, 2007 at 11:39 am

Agreed. LOL.

Other Comments by nothing

39. Comment #71644 by pewkatchoo on September 19, 2007 at 11:55 am

Fanusi
I suggest that you go over and look at the On View thread and the one on the HPV innoculation and I think you will find that both those threads put the lie to your proposal. Ridicule is the only way to get through to some of these fuckwits.

Other Comments by pewkatchoo

40. Comment #71654 by Thelonious on September 19, 2007 at 12:19 pm

Janus - chip on your shoulder much?

I'm sorry if I come off as pompous - I just think that, while religious doctrine is largely superstitious nonsense (and I say "largely" because many of the ethical principles, for example, are sound so it's not ALL nonsense), religion IS the way that most people have attempted to grapple with certain very basic, important and deep issues. As such, many of the concepts in the religious sphere are important concepts, even if they are misconstrued as requiring a supernatural entity to ground them. That, I thought, was Mr. Khiyal's original point.

I might be with you on worship, but then again maybe it applies to the reverence and awe inherent in what Dawkins calls "Einsteinian religion" - naturally you're free to reject that as well, but it's not incompatible with an atheist worldview. But "worship" might well be the wrong word.

Sin, on the other hand, need not be tied to the notion of a deity. At base, it's about guilt and shame resulting from a moral transgression - it's tied to morality, but not necessarily to a deity (it seems so only because people keep insisting that morality is necessarily theistic - something we both understand to be incorrect). As I said before, I have issues with the notion of sin, but it plays an important role in the psyche. It's not specifically Christian, by the way - many cultures have a similar notion.

I think Mr. Khiyal has adequately addressed the notion of the sacred in his follow-up post - it has nothing to do with superstition.

Just to make it clear, I disagree with Mr. Khiyal on Ms. Griffin's speech - I thought it was great and I'm glad to see the "I thank G*d for giving me this award" crowd skewered. Taking on Islam might have been braver, but would have entirely missed the cultural point.

Other Comments by Thelonious

41. Comment #71715 by kev_s on September 19, 2007 at 2:16 pm

Humour is a very good way to attack because it is easily understood by all. Clearly the religious know that humour is the 'universal acid' that can dissolve their false beliefs; that is why they go to such extraordinary lengths to censor it. Keep laughing everyone and recruit comedians.

Other Comments by kev_s

42. Comment #71812 by dazzjazz on September 19, 2007 at 5:51 pm

Despite the fact that she's an annoying Yank it's about time someone took the piss when it comes to thanking God at these awards shows - so I approve of Kathy.

Other Comments by dazzjazz

43. Comment #71814 by dazzjazz on September 19, 2007 at 5:52 pm

PS - I'm sick of censorship in general. If you're offended change the channel or write a letter but get over it...

Other Comments by dazzjazz

44. Comment #71821 by robotaholic on September 19, 2007 at 6:06 pm

An actor/actress thanking jesus for award instead of helping people in Darfor - well my parents do the same thing all the time. We will sit down for dinner and they thank god for the food when it was THEY who earned the money, grew the vegetables, paid for the other things and fed themselves. They should thank themselves!!!-not some invisible nothing that didn't do anything////It just struck me that credit should be given where it is due...

Other Comments by robotaholic

45. Comment #71867 by Robert Maynard on September 19, 2007 at 8:01 pm

Yorker said:

WE NEED MORE ATHEISTS OF AVERAGE OR EVEN BELOW AVERAGE INTELLIGENCE; WE HAVE ENOUGH CLEVER PEOPLE ALREADY!

Consider: why exactly do we 'need' larger atheist demographics?

- to raise awareness and improve the public image of atheism as a respectable worldview, which will in turn improve considerations for non-belief in public policy?
- to counter the influence of religion on public policy?
(if you have any other reasons which don't include issues of intelligence, feel free to note them)

If your all-caps call for widespread atheism is indeed one of political self-interest, and you reason that the future of atheism requires the recruitment of a zombie army of unlettered nonbelievers to improve our representation, I think that in itself smacks of a different kind of cynical elitism.
It's patronising to not encourage your fellow humans to improve their minds, independent of demographics and beliefs, and its unethical to treat atheists as a means to an end, rather then ends in themselves.

Beliefs derive from reasons, and if you're only concerned with the widespread acceptance of a particular conclusion, you're adopting a kind of 'teach the test' policy, which will result in large scale demographics of atheists who lack good reasons for their non-belief (and the beliefs they hold alongside that non-belief), who will easily crumple with pressure. The long term result will be future generations compromised by a much higher incidence of the insidious "I used to be an atheist, but.." believer. If I knew someone who was sliding into atheism as a result of sheer apathy, I wouldn't be content to leave it at that, because I wouldn't want to see that unguarded stance exploited and lured back, more deeply than before, into credulity.

Furthermore, if I had to choose between an across-the-board rise in average intelligence, and a full-scale conversion to atheism, I would without a doubt choose the former. We don't need more atheists irrespective of intelligence, we need more smart people, in general. We need more smart Christians, Muslims and Jews too, because moderation (and skepticism) flows easily from a detailed and nuanced worldview.

It's shocking to read anyone say something as intensely stupid as "WE HAVE ENOUGH CLEVER PEOPLE ALREADY!", and it's even more surprising to see other human beings agree (I have to repeat it for effect), "WE HAVE ENOUGH CLEVER PEOPLE ALREADY!"
Really, truly, honestly:

No.
We.
Don't.

Other Comments by Robert Maynard

46. Comment #71903 by macros_man on September 19, 2007 at 11:38 pm

Why do most people here seem to think that Kathy Griffin is an atheist?

Judging from her video on Larry King... she doesn't really sound like an atheist to me. In this interview, she seemed to be softening her remarks, but saying things like "oh, jesus has better things to do with his time"... which is implying she was more mocking of people misusing religion... rather than mocking religion itself.

Has she been quoted as saying she's an atheist, or something?

Other Comments by macros_man

47. Comment #71906 by pewkatchoo on September 19, 2007 at 11:44 pm

Robert M
Have you, perchance, undergone humour bypass surgery lately! Lighten up. Yorker clearly had his tongue very firmly in his cheek there. Not everything is so finely nuanced!

Other Comments by pewkatchoo

48. Comment #71938 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 20, 2007 at 1:02 am

>>Cheap shot? Easy target? How exactly is that considered a cheap shot when Christianity is as fervent as Islam in some parts of America? <<

Excuse me, but have you taken leave of your senses? You can live in the most Bible belt area of the United States and be an atheist and get by with no problems. Hell, Salt Lake City is a centre for ES cell work and human genetics.

But try coming out in public against Islam. Just try it - _even in the West_. Noone gets killed off for denigrating Christianity. Ask Theo Van Gogh what happens when you call Islam to account.

There is nothing, _nothing_ in American Christendom that even remotely equals the abysmal horror of Islam. Or are there some 36% that believe you should be put to death for leaving Christianity - the way that 36% of Muslims _in Britain_ believe you shoudl be killed for leaving Islam?

We all know the answer.

This argument with religion isn't an academic one, and it is not about abstract Platonic or Kantian principles. It is a matter of life and death, because there is one religion that is hell bent on wrecking this world. And going after that _necessarily_ means attacking its roots, and reason is the only thing that can do that.

Other Comments by Fanusi Khiyal

49. Comment #71946 by Bonzai on September 20, 2007 at 1:23 am

Comment #71867 by Robert Maynard

Brilliant, very well said!

Other Comments by Bonzai

50. Comment #71954 by Robert Maynard on September 20, 2007 at 2:05 am

pewkatchoo said:

Lighten up. Yorker clearly had his tongue very firmly in his cheek there. Not everything is so finely nuanced!

Forgive me for taking the man at his word. :P
I suppose all those who enthusiastically agreed with his flatulent populism were being playfully sarcastic as well.
Yorker consistently displays a weird anti-intellectualism in his comments, a notable example that comes to mind is his recent exchange with commenter Spinoza, who proudly spoke of his intellectual elitism, much to Yorker's irritation. Spinoza's arguments were couched in ugly terminology, but I think they were essentially correct. We don't need more jaded college atheists, with brittle foundations of mere apathy or opposition, the Alister McGraths, the Francis Collins'. Atheists don't need to recruit for recruitments sake.

Other Comments by Robert Maynard