1. Comment #95863 by LawJik on December 9, 2007 at 11:22 am

Here is an additional BBC link that might work for more people.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/player/nol/newsid_7130000/newsid_7135200/7135231.stm?bw=nb&mp=wm&news=1&bbcws=1

Other Comments by LawJik

2. Comment #95867 by maton100 on December 9, 2007 at 11:30 am

Thanks for the continued posts during this hectic time of year.

Other Comments by maton100

3. Comment #95873 by AdrianB on December 9, 2007 at 11:36 am

Better still WATCH it here:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/talking_point/talking_point_programme/default.stm#

Other Comments by AdrianB

4. Comment #95875 by Vinelectric on December 9, 2007 at 11:43 am

RD

You can recommend Brian Greene's "The fabric of the Cosmos" for a reader friendly discussion on Quantum effects. Quantum weirdness does not and can not apply to the macro-world. You can't invoke these effects in a discussion on religious type miracles at all.

Other Comments by Vinelectric

5. Comment #95878 by Communist on December 9, 2007 at 11:51 am

I saw the program, and I must say I was a little bit disappointed. Richard Dawkins did fabulously well as always, but the opposition was weak. Did any of you notice how much that catholic cleric sounded like Dinesh D'Souza? I am reminded of Dan Dennett's description of how the parasitic liver fluke changes the mind of it's host. D'Souza and their like sound like they are reprogrammed by some malicious computer virus.

Other Comments by Communist

6. Comment #95879 by AdrianB on December 9, 2007 at 11:56 am

Watching this now. A 1/3rd of the way in and FSM this is painful. It's just the format and the questions, even RD looks like he wishes he was somewhere else!

Other Comments by AdrianB

7. Comment #95882 by Don_Quix on December 9, 2007 at 12:02 pm

Watching this now. A 1/3rd of the way in and FSM this is painful. It's just the format and the questions, even RD looks like he wishes he was somewhere else!

Same here. Many of the questioners seem extremely simple-minded and several of them are just rambling and babbling nonsense. And of course the questions are the same old mindless theist tripe that has been shot down a thousand times over. RD is doing a great job dealing with them, as usual, though.

EDIT: Someone needs to throw this catholic priest off a roof. What a fool. IN THE NAME OF ATHEISM! IN THE NAME OF ATHEISM. SHUT UP!

Other Comments by Don_Quix

8. Comment #95883 by eno on December 9, 2007 at 12:08 pm

AdrianB - thank you for the video link.

Other Comments by eno

9. Comment #95884 by ADH on December 9, 2007 at 12:11 pm

I have just listened. Dawkin's was cool calm and collected as always. Unfortunately that might give some people the impresion that he was right.

He's concerned about the grip that religion has on so many people's minds, very rightly where some religions are concerned. All those people banging the shafts of hammers on the ground and calling down thunder and lightning on the unsuspecting in the name of the Great Odin ought to be stopped in their tracks. They are not doing anybody any good at all.

I'm concerned about the grip that a certain kind of "Christianity", with its "God can make you prosperous - just put a tenner in the plate and watch it multiply in your bank balance", has on the minds of some. But this is rather the grip that greed and materialism have on their minds. They are just using religion (or being used by their equally greed-driven manipulators) to gild the walls of the prison-cells of their own egos - just as many others use atheism for the same purpos. I'm very concerned about the grip that Jesus Christ and his words and example DOES NOT have on the minds of many so called Christians.

Other Comments by ADH

10. Comment #95885 by Vinelectric on December 9, 2007 at 12:14 pm

Many of the questioners seem extremely simple-minded and several of them are just rambling and babbling nonsense.

Towards the end RD is asked whether he felt more pessimistic and he seeks to clarify the question "more pessimistic than the start of this program?.."

!!!

Other Comments by Vinelectric

11. Comment #95887 by AdrianB on December 9, 2007 at 12:14 pm

You know, Father Morris has made the debate more interesting but I actually think he must be EVIL.

He just sounds like a politician, and I can see that RD (as I do) find his words quite offensive.

I don't know whether to laugh or cry.

Other Comments by AdrianB

12. Comment #95888 by AllanW on December 9, 2007 at 12:19 pm

Kudos to you ADH for the ability to question. As you seem to recognise, the money-driven ministries have very little to do with spiritual truth and everything to do with fear, ignorance and economic exploitation. Can you think why the poor, ignorant people who support these ministries may be in a position to be exploited? For me it has something to do with credulity and a value-system that praised unthinking acceptance and faith above critical and skeptical thought.

Other Comments by AllanW

13. Comment #95889 by Vinelectric on December 9, 2007 at 12:20 pm

ADH

What about the effect of Jesus Christ's concept of the eternal fire and other forms of emotional blackmailing have had on the millions of people who trust and believe in him?

Please add to your list (greed and materialism) that form of twisted psychology that the world needs to be rid off.

Other Comments by Vinelectric

14. Comment #95892 by Don_Quix on December 9, 2007 at 12:25 pm

What exactly is a "fundamentalist atheist"? There are no "fundamentals" of a non-belief that I am aware of.

Other Comments by Don_Quix

15. Comment #95893 by steve99 on December 9, 2007 at 12:27 pm

They are just using religion (or being used by their equally greed-driven manipulators) to gild the walls of the prison-cells of their own egos - just as many others use atheism for the same purpos.

The issue is not really between theism and atheism. It is between faith and rationality. Atheism is simply a frequent consequence of not believing claims without corroborated evidence.

Other Comments by steve99

16. Comment #95894 by ADH on December 9, 2007 at 12:28 pm

"What about the effect of Jesus Christ's concept of the eternal fire and other forms of emotional blackmailing have had on the millions of people who trust and believe in him?"

A liberating effect I would say, if the warnings happen to be true.

Other Comments by ADH

17. Comment #95895 by Scandinavian07 on December 9, 2007 at 12:32 pm

It was seriously revealing. None of the people who asked questions seemed to have read ANY of Dawkins books.

Painfully clear.

Scandinavian07

Other Comments by Scandinavian07

18. Comment #95896 by AdrianT on December 9, 2007 at 12:33 pm

I was annoyed that people make complaints without having even read the book in the first place!
For example, the lady from Turkey, the first question about atheist vs agnostic, the question about the eye...

As for that Father Morris - the resident Fox News spiritual guide - amazing to hear him accuse Richard of stepping outside his area of authority! The Catholic Church does this all the time, on sex, sexuality, contraception, the point where life begins... need I go on.

Other Comments by AdrianT

19. Comment #95897 by robhowe on December 9, 2007 at 12:34 pm

The BBC team had done their homework well; they selected a good range of callers to trot out the time-weary arguments of design and morality, as well as a couple who just babbled typically obscurantist theist tripe. It was clear that very few of the callers had read TGD. Splendid performance as always from RD, especially his admirable refusal to respond to the meaningless postmodernist drivel spouted by one caller.

Other Comments by robhowe

20. Comment #95901 by Stephen Maxwell on December 9, 2007 at 12:42 pm

Fr. Morris made me laugh out loud at the 'secular humanist utopia of Stalin and Hitler' comment. Also when Morris called Jesus 'The Prince of Peace' all that ran through my head was "Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire." :P

I loved when Morris remarked how ridiculous it was of Dawkins and that caller to label Stalin as a practicing Christian. Oh Wait! They didn't even suggest he was.

Prof. Dawkins hit it on the head when he asked what would be the point in killing someone in the name of atheism.

Denying the fact that Hitler was religious is delusional. Denying the fact that the Nazi's were influenced by Christianity/Catholicism is delusional. Asserting that Hitler, Stalin and Mao committed their crimes in the name of atheism is delusional.

As for the small numbers killed in the Inquisition etc. I guess we can just be grateful that the inquisitors and the Vatican didn't have weapons of mass destruction, otherwise that number would be a lot higher.

Finally, going on what he said, I simply think Fr. Morris doesn't know anything about the atrocities of Hitler, Stalin and Mao.

Straw-men flying everywhere.

Other Comments by Stephen Maxwell

21. Comment #95903 by Liveliest Crib on December 9, 2007 at 12:45 pm

13. Comment #95889 by Vinelectric on December 9, 2007 at 12:20 pm
What about the effect of Jesus Christ's concept of the eternal fire and other forms of emotional blackmailing have had on the millions of people who trust and believe in him?

16. Comment #95894 by ADH on December 9, 2007 at 12:28 pm
A liberating effect I would say, if the warnings happen to be true.

And therein lies the rub.

To convince a rational atheist like myself that I am forever doomed to suffer the torments of the damned for not following, or believing in, Christianity, you must first provide evidence for you claims. You must prove that the supernatural tenets of Christianity are, in fact, true.

Without the evidentiary case, merely resorting to scare tactics (i.e.: You must take my propositions on faith. If you don't, you have a room reserved for all eternity in the most exquisite torture chambers conceivable.) is deplorable.

Other Comments by Liveliest Crib

22. Comment #95904 by Dog Boots on December 9, 2007 at 12:49 pm

I still think the most concise answer to the "Argument from Stalin" is:

Religions
Contain
Instructions

Period

Other Comments by Dog Boots

23. Comment #95905 by Vinelectric on December 9, 2007 at 12:49 pm

ADH

I don't know why this form of intimidation appeals to you or to anyone else.

I remember, as a child, feeling hopefull that I'd make it to heaven and speak to God personally about all my troubles (as is promised in Islam). I would've made it clear how disappointed and resentfull I was of his petty little evil masterpiece.

The theistic god sounds pretty capable but unworthy of respect, don't you think?

Other Comments by Vinelectric

24. Comment #95906 by Mark Till on December 9, 2007 at 12:50 pm

"As for that Father Morris - the resident Fox News spiritual guide - amazing to hear him accuse Richard of stepping outside his area of authority! (Adrian T)"

I know. During his debate with Dan Dennett, D'Souza also questioned RD's authority on theology and philosophy, saying, "That's what happens when you let a biologist out of the lab." Yet he doesn't seem to doubt the authority of a hack political writer to make grand claims about theology, philosophy AND science.

Other Comments by Mark Till

25. Comment #95908 by Vinelectric on December 9, 2007 at 12:54 pm

True , Mark Till, that was pure lack of discipline.

Other Comments by Vinelectric

26. Comment #95909 by Don_Quix on December 9, 2007 at 12:58 pm

Denying the fact that Hitler was religious is delusional. Denying the fact that the Nazi's were influenced by Christianity/Catholicism is delusional. Asserting that Hitler, Stalin and Mao committed their crimes in the name of atheism is delusional.

Indeed. I think the priest's denial of Hitler being a Catholic is made either out of ignorance, or it is a deliberate attempt to mislead people. I would tend to suspect the latter. There is probably quite a lot of guilt in the Catholic clergy about the church's relationship with the Nazis, which leads them to bend over backwards in order to try to disavow it and instead blame all "evil" on someone else (atheists).

On March 23, 1933, Hitler addressed the Reichstag: "The National Government regards the two Christian confessions as factors essential to the soul of the German people. It will respect the contracts they have made with the various regions. It declares its determination to leave their rights intact. In the schools, the government will protect the rightful influence of the Christian bodies. We hold the spiritual forces of Christianity to be indispensable elements in the moral uplift of most of the German people. We hope to develop friendly relations with the Holy See"

Other Comments by Don_Quix

27. Comment #95910 by Northern Bright on December 9, 2007 at 12:58 pm

I don't know why this form of intimidation appeals to you or to anyone else.

More than that, I don't know why anyone should believe it. There isn't the remotest smidgen of evidence to support it ... Wouldn't you think you'd want some kind of evidence before basing your entire life on a proposition such as this?

Other Comments by Northern Bright

28. Comment #95911 by Liveliest Crib on December 9, 2007 at 1:00 pm

Father Morris, a regular contributor for FOX Noise Channel, is laughable. As to Communist's question, [5. Comment #95878 / December 9, 2007 at 11:51 am], yes, he reminds me of D'Souza, insofar has he has an apparently inexhaustible enthusiasm for repeating hackneyed arguments as though no retort to them has ever been delivered.

For Morris, atheism is either mere cognitive dissonance or an evil agenda. He says,

I have a lot of atheist friends. . . . They really suffer their atheism, I would say. In other words, they suffer the fact that they don't believe, because they know because they know that the world makes a whole lot more sense if god does exist. But these, on the other hand, people like Richard Dawkins, are not these people who are suffering their atheism. They're pushing their ideas on the general public, and saying we who do believe are silly, we have no common sense, and they are the only elite who know what they're talking about.

It is very difficult to take him seriously on anything he says.

Other Comments by Liveliest Crib

29. Comment #95914 by ADH on December 9, 2007 at 1:09 pm

2"The National Government regards the two Christian confessions as factors essential to the soul of the German people. It will respect the contracts they have made with the various regions. It declares its determination to leave their rights intact. In the schools, the government will protect the rightful influence of the Christian bodies. We hold the spiritual forces of Christianity to be indispensable elements in the moral uplift of most of the German people. We hope to develop friendly relations with the Holy See"

Hitler repudiated Christianity and he is on record as despising Christ for his weakness. Nevertheless he was an astute politician. He wanted to get the Church on his side and kow toed to them left right and centre. He used Christianity.

The Confessing Lutheran church fell foul of the regime (unlike the Protestant establishment it has to be said). Dietrich Bonhöffer and several other key Christians dared to stand up to him. Sadly the rest of German Christianity allowed itself to be persuaded by his religiouis rhetoric.

Other Comments by ADH

30. Comment #95917 by steve99 on December 9, 2007 at 1:16 pm

He used Christianity.

Which helps illustrate the dangers of faith.

Other Comments by steve99

31. Comment #95919 by Zzyx1170 on December 9, 2007 at 1:25 pm

I placed an mp3 of this on RapidShare at:
http://rapidshare.com/files/75468337/Have-Your-Say_2007-12-09_Richard-Dawkins.mp3

Other Comments by Zzyx1170

32. Comment #95922 by Mark Till on December 9, 2007 at 1:28 pm

The Hitler-Stalin argument is really getting tired now. Whether religious or not they certainly weren't acting rationally. Atheism is, for most I suspect, just one inevitable facet of a rational, sceptical mindset. Hitler, Stalin and any other mass murderer you care to mention, were acting upon BELIEFS. And those beliefs were not open to sceptical enquiry. The wider problem is irrational dogma - religion just happens to be responsible for a lot of it.

Other Comments by Mark Till

33. Comment #95924 by Liveliest Crib on December 9, 2007 at 1:31 pm

27. Comment #95910 by Northern Bright on December 9, 2007 at 12:58 pm

I don't know why this form of intimidation appeals to you or to anyone else.

More than that, I don't know why anyone should believe it. There isn't the remotest smidgen of evidence to support it ... Wouldn't you think you'd want some kind of evidence before basing your entire life on a proposition such as this?

I would imagine that it is the lack of evidence that makes the intimidation appealing. Can't persuade 'em, so we'll scare 'em.

Other Comments by Liveliest Crib

34. Comment #95925 by BathTub on December 9, 2007 at 1:31 pm

Wow that was painful, I'm certainly glad Prof Dawkins didn't back down, but I do wonder what kind of shreds Christopher Hitchens would have torn off Father Morris.

But yeah, so much waffling, and rambling. You could see that the host would bring up an email to cut off the questioner in a slightly subtle way.

Other Comments by BathTub

35. Comment #95932 by Liveliest Crib on December 9, 2007 at 1:46 pm

32. Comment #95922 by Mark Till on December 9, 2007 at 1:28 pm
The Hitler-Stalin argument is really getting tired now. Whether religious or not they certainly weren't acting rationally. Atheism is, for most I suspect, just one inevitable facet of a rational, sceptical mindset. Hitler, Stalin and any other mass murderer you care to mention, were acting upon BELIEFS. And those beliefs were not open to sceptical enquiry. The wider problem is irrational dogma - religion just happens to be responsible for a lot of it.

Exactly.

This is part of the problem with the word "atheism" of which Sam Harris complains. It's already associated with certain evils that it really shouldn't be. (I don't quite agree with Harris that the word ought to be abandoned, but he has a good point here.)

Dawkins' retort that Stalin acted not "in the name of" atheism has been inevitably misconstrued by the Morrises and D'Souzas of the world, who already associate the term "atheism" with the evils Stalin inflicted on the world. "Of course," they say, "he acted 'in the name of atheism.' Just look at his words about how he wanted to rid the world of theism, and how he wanted to kill all the priests, and how anti-theism was part and parcel of Marxism."

Unfortunately, this jives with the intuitions of so many who misconstrue atheism as a set of beliefs, in and of itself. It's not. Atheism is a lack of belief, namely in a personal deity. There are no tenets, no compulsions, no commands, that accompany a lack of belief. You first need a dogma before you can be a Stalin.

The point isn't so much that Stalin acted not in the name of atheism as that lack of belief in god is not enough to drive someone to behave as Stalin did. On the other hand, certainty that everything he believed in accordance with his version of Marxism/Lenninism was absolutely correct, and that anything he did to further its cause was just, is. One need not believe this certainty is sanctioned by an omniscient deity in order to commit atrocities, but that belief sure seems to help a lot of people get there.

Other Comments by Liveliest Crib

36. Comment #95937 by ADH on December 9, 2007 at 1:52 pm

"He used Christianity."

"Which helps illustrate the dangers of faith."


Just as the World War 2 illustrates the dangers of steel!

Other Comments by ADH

37. Comment #95939 by steve99 on December 9, 2007 at 2:02 pm

Just as the World War 2 illustrates the dangers of steel!

Well, if you consider people to be simply a material to be manipulated for whatever ends those in authority wish.

Faith makes people malleable, it allows people to be shaped and molded by the wicked.

Other Comments by steve99

38. Comment #95943 by Samsayananda on December 9, 2007 at 2:09 pm

RD was cool, relaxed and answered very well. He showed tolerance, acceptance and mature judgement.

Other Comments by Samsayananda

39. Comment #95947 by ADH on December 9, 2007 at 2:14 pm

"RD was cool, relaxed and answered very well. He showed tolerance, acceptance and mature judgement."

I agree 100%! He's a master of coolness, poise and good manners.

Other Comments by ADH

40. Comment #95948 by briancoughlanworldcitizen on December 9, 2007 at 2:18 pm

The Confessing Lutheran church fell foul of the regime (unlike the Protestant establishment it has to be said). Dietrich Bonhöffer and several other key Christians dared to stand up to him. Sadly the rest of German Christianity allowed itself to be persuaded by his religiouis rhetoric.

This is exactly the point, the vast majority of Germans fell for Hitlers rethoric hook, line and sinker. Prepped by millenia of Christian credulity. The exact same reason that a personality cult sprung up so quickly around the "raised by jesuits" Stalin. Both Hitler and Stalin behaved like the God of the old testament, they expected the worship accorded to Gods and crushed all competitors, including the adherents of other religions.

Hitler and Stalin's death toll doesn't go on atheisms tab, it goes on religions tab, as does the actions of every totalitarian lunatic who convinces a credulous populace to hand over the reigns of power.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gmsis-motuY

Other Comments by briancoughlanworldcitizen

41. Comment #95949 by ADH on December 9, 2007 at 2:19 pm

"Well, if you consider people to be simply a material to be manipulated for whatever ends those in authority wish."

I don't consider them so. But sadly history and the modern media show that they are all too prone to allow themselves to be treated as such.

Other Comments by ADH

42. Comment #95951 by Vinelectric on December 9, 2007 at 2:23 pm

Just as the World War 2 illustrates the dangers of steel!

Yeah. There was nothing more to it, really.

Other Comments by Vinelectric

43. Comment #95954 by Corylus on December 9, 2007 at 2:30 pm

ADH

Blimy, you've been posting all over the place with lots of people disagreeing with you. Bet you're knackered. Two things.

1) Nothing wrong with saying 'I'm off to bed now'. Tis OK to sleep and come back to fight another day :)

2) When you type into the little comment box you will see a clickable link above it called 'comment posting guidelines'. Click on that. It will tell you how to put quotes into little boxes and write in bold the names of the people you are responding to. Makes arguments easier to follow for those of us who read more than post.

Other Comments by Corylus

44. Comment #95955 by ADH on December 9, 2007 at 2:32 pm

"Hitler and Stalin's death toll doesn't go on atheisms tab, it goes on religions tab, as does the actions of every totalitarian lunatic who convinces a credulous populace to hand over the reigns of power."

It depends on how broad your definition of religion is. The greatest enemy of religion in 1st century Palestine was Christ himself. But it's a bit o a stretch to blame Stalin's and Hitler's atrocities on the Christian milieu and/or background. It was the religion that they constructed around themselves that brought such disaster on their contemporaries, not that of the Churches that they had once been associated with! The same could be said of Mao. It was not his atheism per se that brought about his massacres and purges, but his self-deification: the religion of Maoism that he invented. He was obeying exactly the same instincts within himself as the other two, which goes to show that such a tendency does not require a prior religious "reservoir" in order to operate. It has to do with the fact that people are very prone to deify power (including political power) or to allow it to deify itself, and fall in line. They have done that with atheist statesmen just as they have done it with unscrupulous religious leaders. But look at what Jesus' response was to power. He allowed himself to be apparently defeated by it rather than seek it and make use of it. He actually calls his followers to do the same. Sadly they have not always done so!

Other Comments by ADH

45. Comment #95959 by AfraidToDie on December 9, 2007 at 2:40 pm

"Whether religious or not they certainly weren't acting rationally..." M Till

That is the best point! Religion = Irrational, Atheism = Rational. I suppose someone could be irrational and still be an atheist, but I'd also suppose a higher probability of someone who is irrational embracing some religion or other dogma!

Even though it gets tiresome hearing the same old arguments by theists, I enjoy these forums because I think there are a lot of theists out there who are hearing RD's (and others) rationalizations for the first time, many of which will ever so slightly be swayed away from the "dark side".

Other Comments by AfraidToDie

46. Comment #95960 by ADH on December 9, 2007 at 2:44 pm

Thank you for the tips Corylus.

That probably does it until Christmas, many of you will be glad to know.

So a happy Christmas to all of you!

Other Comments by ADH

47. Comment #95964 by Dr Benway on December 9, 2007 at 2:51 pm

I suppose someone could be irrational and still be an atheist...

No question about that. If most people were atheists the point would be more obvious.

You might put the right answer down on a math quiz because:
1. your reasoning is sound
2. you copied from the guy next to you
3. lucky guess

Insurance against mass irrationalism doesn't depend upon the answer so much as the method used to arrive at that answer.

Other Comments by Dr Benway

48. Comment #95965 by gensek on December 9, 2007 at 2:52 pm

GodDAMNit, I go livid every time some bloody numpty from Rome claims that USSR was atheist. Thankfully registering on this here forum took a while so it's mostly worn off by now. Still, it's a laughable position. 'Christianity was repressed under regime X, ergo X was atheist'. The level of intellectual dishonesty this position displays is absurd. Is Saudi Arabia atheist?

I grew up under the holy trinity of Lenin, Marx and Engels, having missed uncle Joe by quite some years. Nonetheless, whatever dogma or ritual christianity has, the 'communism' of my youth had an equally dogmatic/ritualistic answer for. Just because christianity was suppressed (and this in itself is false, orthodox clergy learned to 'get along' with new masters fast enough and lived happily ever after) doesn't mean the system wasn't deeply religious.

In fact, this lead to my own atheism. After the fall of USSR going to church became quite popular. But many, like myself, quickly noticed the obvious similarities. Didn't help that I was the only one in the congregation (quite probably including the pastor) who had actually read the bible from end to end.

Other Comments by gensek

49. Comment #95968 by Geoff on December 9, 2007 at 2:55 pm

Everything was too easy for Richard really; just the same old arguments that, had any of them read TGD, they would have realised had already been shot down.

One he missed though; when that Tory MP was on about "preserving traditional Christian holidays such as Christmas.." (or words to that effect), it should have been pointed out that the Christians stole them in the first place.

Other Comments by Geoff

50. Comment #95969 by Northern Bright on December 9, 2007 at 2:57 pm

Welcome to the forum, gensek! With life experience like that, you are going to be an extremely welcome addition.

Other Comments by Northern Bright