










The List: The World's Worst Religious Leaders2. Comment #159051 by AnthSynthasome on April 11, 2008 at 11:31 am
3. Comment #159052 by Bonzai on April 11, 2008 at 11:31 am
Except perhaps for Nasrallah, they are all nobodies with only limited, local influences.4. Comment #159053 by Animavore on April 11, 2008 at 11:32 am
5. Comment #159056 by yussel123 on April 11, 2008 at 11:38 am
With regard to Dov Lior:6. Comment #159062 by Bigorra on April 11, 2008 at 11:49 am
7. Comment #159086 by Shaden on April 11, 2008 at 12:28 pm
8. Comment #159094 by EvidenceOnly on April 11, 2008 at 12:33 pm
The pope should be on this list for the following reason:9. Comment #159101 by Tyler Durden on April 11, 2008 at 12:41 pm
10. Comment #159118 by black wolf on April 11, 2008 at 1:11 pm
11. Comment #159165 by Raiko on April 11, 2008 at 2:20 pm
12. Comment #159169 by Prankster on April 11, 2008 at 2:26 pm
13. Comment #159176 by Pattern Seeker on April 11, 2008 at 2:33 pm
14. Comment #159180 by robotaholic on April 11, 2008 at 2:35 pm
15. Comment #159197 by JammyB on April 11, 2008 at 3:34 pm
Let's not forget that the current Pope has PERSONALLY and by his own hand helped to cover up the rape of small children of the congregation. Even the most fundie Christian should be putting him up on this list.16. Comment #159214 by babrock on April 11, 2008 at 4:58 pm
EvidenceOnly gave some staggering statistics. My initial responce was to agree w/ him/her totaly on t pope beig singularly guilty. I then got to thinking tho, that those same excact restrictions also come from just about every muslim leader don't they? I donot know hindus take on birth control. I think fundemental judeism is also probably as restrictive, tho on that am only speculating.17. Comment #159219 by cam9976 on April 11, 2008 at 5:11 pm
18. Comment #159238 by MaxD on April 11, 2008 at 5:56 pm
19. Comment #159246 by Hostile2012 on April 11, 2008 at 6:22 pm
How about L Ron hubbard (I don't care about spelling). he led the biggest breach in government security and started the worst cult in modern times.20. Comment #159263 by leviticus on April 11, 2008 at 7:30 pm
If they are somehow used as representatives of religion then indeed most believers can justifiably say "these are not our gods".
21. Comment #159264 by atheist_peace on April 11, 2008 at 7:33 pm
22. Comment #159267 by discipline on April 11, 2008 at 7:54 pm
Where the hell is James Dobson on this list?23. Comment #159272 by dragonfirematrix on April 11, 2008 at 8:13 pm
Wow! It seems many are getting into so much detail.24. Comment #159281 by Koreman on April 11, 2008 at 9:02 pm
Fine examples of Pavlov's operant conditioning in reality.25. Comment #159283 by ZekeCDN on April 11, 2008 at 9:15 pm
I would at least like to see David Miscavige on the list as like a lesser villain.
26. Comment #159284 by Russell Blackford on April 11, 2008 at 9:21 pm
Funny, you know. I can be all calm and tranquil, and then I read something about the latest sactimonious rubbish uttered by the grand poobah of the cult of misery ... and I feel my blood pressure go up. I must go and indulge in some deadly sins and calm down again. The only one I'm really up to, these days, is gluttony, so it'll have to do. Just as well we have guests coming around for dinner.27. Comment #159287 by Edanator on April 11, 2008 at 9:29 pm
These are "just" examples of madmen, one from each of the five world religions. What's disturbing with this article is that the Christian madman is the only one that gets dismissed as not practicing true faith.28. Comment #159296 by _riverrun_ on April 11, 2008 at 10:38 pm
Ugly and despicable people no doubt! But, and I say this as an atheist, secular state worship of the Harris / Hitchens kind has led to far more deaths than any of these individuals could hope to achieve. By constraining and framing the issue within such narrow terms, Foreign Policy Magazine(consciously or not) fulfills its typical criterion of condemning foreign crimes, whilst ignoring ones closer to home.29. Comment #159360 by Peacebeuponme on April 12, 2008 at 2:49 am
RaikoOut of curiosity, who's the worst atheist leader we know?That was tongue in cheek, right? There cannot be an "atheist leader" in same sense as there are "religious leaders".
30. Comment #159361 by Steve Zara on April 12, 2008 at 2:52 am
31. Comment #159365 by epeeist on April 12, 2008 at 3:02 am
I didn't think Pavlov used operant conditioning. Wasn't that brought in later by the likes of Watson and Skinner?
Fine examples of Pavlov's operant conditioning in reality.
32. Comment #159366 by Peacebeuponme on April 12, 2008 at 3:03 am
SteveSorry to be provocative, but why not?By "relgious leader" we mean people like the Pope or Rabbis, Bishops and Imams. They speak on behalf of their religous community and in accordance with whichever religious text they subscribe to. I can't see that there can be an atheist equivalent.
33. Comment #159367 by Steve Zara on April 12, 2008 at 3:07 am
By "relgious leader" we mean people like the Pope or Rabbis, Bishops and Imams. They speak on behalf of their religous community and in accordance with whichever religious text they subscribe to. I can't see that there can be an atheist equivalent.
I think the minute there is an "atheist leader" we lose the argument that atheism is not a belief system.
34. Comment #159368 by Peacebeuponme on April 12, 2008 at 3:20 am
SteveYou don't need a belief system for a leader. Just a point of view, and the wish to have someone else help represent that point of view, or campaign to have that point of view respected.Yes, but I don't see that as being the same as the context in which we use "religious leader".
35. Comment #159369 by epeeist on April 12, 2008 at 3:22 am
But they don't represent their religious community, they represent the particular deity they subscribe to. The religious community simply follows on.
By "relgious leader" we mean people like the Pope or Rabbis, Bishops and Imams. They speak on behalf of their religous community and in accordance with whichever religious text they subscribe to. I can't see that there can be an atheist equivalent.
36. Comment #159370 by Geoff on April 12, 2008 at 3:30 am
37. Comment #159372 by Peacebeuponme on April 12, 2008 at 3:31 am
EpeeistIf there was some kind of atheist organisation it would be more like a political party.Well, we have the National Secular Society.
38. Comment #159374 by Steve Zara on April 12, 2008 at 3:43 am
I just feel uncomfortable with the phrase like "atheist leader", especially with all the theists who come on here and talk about "your prophet Dawkins".
39. Comment #159375 by Steve Zara on April 12, 2008 at 3:46 am
Steve, I'm with Peacebeuponme on the "atheist leader" topic. Sure, people like Dawkins, Harris, Hitchens can and do speak up on behalf of atheists, but that doesn't make them leaders. Do we follow their "orders" in the same way that, say, catholics [are supposed to] obey the pope?
40. Comment #159382 by Peacebeuponme on April 12, 2008 at 4:01 am
SteveIf Richard posted here that he had managed to arrange some kind of campaign, and it would be good if as many people as possible turned up at a certain venue, that would be leadership in my view.Certainly that kind of action would be classed as evidence of 'leadership', and assist with progression, where I work!
41. Comment #159383 by Peacebeuponme on April 12, 2008 at 4:03 am
SteveI feel a bit uncomfortable too, but I also feel we should not allow what we do or say to be restricted by theists.Agreed. But we can restrict ourselves if we think it will help matters.
42. Comment #159384 by Steve Zara on April 12, 2008 at 4:15 am
You wouldn't have to call him an atheist leader though would you? If he started the campaign X, he would just be "Leader of the X movement". This would distinguish atheist followers of X from atheists who do not follow X.
43. Comment #159386 by Peacebeuponme on April 12, 2008 at 4:29 am
SteveThis seems a bit evasive to me. It would be like calling the leader of the Democratic party the "leader of the movement to allow for Democratic views".This comess the crux of what I am saying. The leader of the Democractic Party pushes for the views of democrats as clearly defined by their by-laws and manifesto. Where is the clearly defined set of atheist values that an atheist leader can campaign for?
44. Comment #159390 by Geoff on April 12, 2008 at 4:40 am
45. Comment #159393 by Logicel on April 12, 2008 at 4:52 am
46. Comment #159409 by MakingBelieve on April 12, 2008 at 6:06 am
47. Comment #159443 by bluebird on April 12, 2008 at 7:55 am
48. Comment #159449 by Philip1978 on April 12, 2008 at 8:09 am
49. Comment #159459 by liberalartist on April 12, 2008 at 8:28 am
50. Comment #159470 by soul_biscuit on April 12, 2008 at 8:53 am
1. Comment #159047 by Janus on April 11, 2008 at 11:25 am
Other Comments by Janus