1. Comment #64287 by petermun on August 19, 2007 at 11:54 am

Hasn't Richard Dawkins done this already but in a more heavyweight fashion?

Other Comments by petermun

2. Comment #64290 by roach on August 19, 2007 at 12:05 pm

petermun,

Yes he has. And?

I'd wager there are plenty of people who will enjoy Maher's documentary more than "Root of All Evil?".

Other Comments by roach

3. Comment #64291 by BicycleRepairMan on August 19, 2007 at 12:06 pm

Perhaps, but I think its an interesting idea, and if it reaches the big-screen (I hope it will) it will reach a much greater audience, and hopefully stir up some debate.

Other Comments by BicycleRepairMan

4. Comment #64295 by artemisa on August 19, 2007 at 12:26 pm

The more superstitions get exposed the better.Besides Maher has a very unique funny way of exposing an important issue.

Other Comments by artemisa

5. Comment #64297 by Friend Giskard on August 19, 2007 at 12:39 pm

I think a better title would be Religiotarded.

Other Comments by Friend Giskard

6. Comment #64299 by jimmm33 on August 19, 2007 at 12:43 pm

While RD's "Root of All Evil" is very compelling. Maher will use humor in his effort. I'm looking forward to it.

Other Comments by jimmm33

7. Comment #64302 by Arcturus on August 19, 2007 at 1:00 pm

There will also be a 3 part piece on CNN (Amanpour) called God's Warriors exposing the crazy fundies from all 3 Abrahamic religions.

http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2007/gods.warriors/

Hope it will be good.

Other Comments by Arcturus

8. Comment #64313 by BicycleRepairMan on August 19, 2007 at 2:10 pm

I'm looking forward to God's Warriors as well, but I half expect it to take the "Most faith and religion is good for people, but there are some exceptions"-type of view, that I find to be unhelpful so far. The problem is the unhealthy amount of respect awarded to meaningless terms like "faith"

Other Comments by BicycleRepairMan

9. Comment #64317 by Ev3nt H0riz0n on August 19, 2007 at 2:25 pm

America really needs this. Not many have heard of Dawkin's "The Root of All Evil?" since nobody would air it here or advertize for it. I am also interested in how this will come together as a comedy.

Other Comments by Ev3nt H0riz0n

10. Comment #64345 by eggplantbren on August 19, 2007 at 5:08 pm

I'm a fan and supporter of Richard Dawkins but I think "The Root of All Evil?" was crap. Easily the worst work he's ever put his name to.

Other Comments by eggplantbren

11. Comment #64353 by LeeLeeOne on August 19, 2007 at 5:50 pm

Need more of this Bill Maher movie! This is just such a teaser! Love the proposed name "ridiculous" is perfect. Bill Maher needs to be more main stream to get to the masses. Perhaps this is the first step.

Other Comments by LeeLeeOne

12. Comment #64366 by jamesstephenbrown on August 19, 2007 at 7:47 pm

Giskard, I seriously think you should suggest "Religiotarded", though this might be seen as an insult to genuinely intellectually handicapped people... Pity, it has a nice ring to it.

Other Comments by jamesstephenbrown

13. Comment #64407 by JanChan on August 20, 2007 at 2:37 am

He mentioned something about a 10 minutes preview of the movie, anyone know where I can get that?

Other Comments by JanChan

14. Comment #64419 by tieInterceptor on August 20, 2007 at 3:21 am

eggplant why did you find it crap? I could not find any problem with it at all.

any particular insight you want to share?

Other Comments by tieInterceptor

15. Comment #64477 by sane1 on August 20, 2007 at 7:42 am

"...their own planet after they die."

Good one, Bill.

The more of this the better.

Other Comments by sane1

16. Comment #64520 by Boogie on August 20, 2007 at 12:12 pm

BicycleRepairMan: I was watching a history programme on TV earlier, discussing the history of christianity in Scotland. What annoyed me was the unarguable assumption that christianity was a GOOD thing. More of this unhealthy respect nonsense.

[BTW, love the username - brings back great memories!]

Other Comments by Boogie

17. Comment #64547 by dazzjazz on August 20, 2007 at 4:27 pm

Wow, that Amanpour doco looks amazing. I get the feeling that the atheists side is really really on the rise - let's hope it continues and gets rid of religious nonsense.

Other Comments by dazzjazz

18. Comment #64574 by HappyPrimate on August 20, 2007 at 6:51 pm

At least Maher's show might be shown in the U.S. We have never had Root of All Evil? shown here. We can get most of it on YouTube but you have to look for it. I enjoyed the DVD I purchased. Still Maher's show will make it funny and that could be more appealing for a U.S. audience. Got to dumb it down for most of us here in the good ole U.S.

Other Comments by HappyPrimate

19. Comment #64575 by HappyPrimate on August 20, 2007 at 6:53 pm

BTW they are discussing Amanpour's documentary on Larry King Live (CNN) right now with several of the clergy. Interesting.

Other Comments by HappyPrimate

20. Comment #64584 by CruciFiction on August 20, 2007 at 8:00 pm

As far as Amanpour's upcoming documentary on CNN, I'm not expecting anything in our favor from it. She was raised Muslim and has a very serious condition of what we've come to know as "faith in faith".

Even tonight when Larry King asked her to comment on the several bestsellers that said there is no god, she only responded by stating that there were many more books on believing in god. So I'd bet during the entire six hour documentary she won't even hint that there's an alternative to the divisiveness and violence of god delusion.

Other Comments by CruciFiction

21. Comment #64637 by Fanusi Khiyal on August 21, 2007 at 5:24 am

And we once more have definitive proof that atheist does not translate into "Man of Reason".

I'm homing in on the asinine comment of Michael Moore as a genius. Michael Moore being the man whos grasp of the truth is so tenous that enitre books can, and have, been written on the naked lies and falsehoods of his works. Not to mention that his stuff apologises for, and is used as propaganda by, jihadists around the world.

What is the damn point of criticising religious irrationality if you are going to apologise for the apologists of the worst elements of religion?

This is _exactly_ what many decent, honourable Christians get angry about alot with respect to alot of loudmouth athiests: That these latter are more than willing to mouth off about Christianity but turn green rather than confront the horror of Islam. And they're right to call us to the task about this.

Other Comments by Fanusi Khiyal

22. Comment #64722 by Cerberus on August 21, 2007 at 1:06 pm

By the way, Fanusi Khyyal, Bill Maher once said that he wasn't an atheist, he does hates organized religion however. He said that he believes in some force out there, or god if you will.

Other Comments by Cerberus

23. Comment #64777 by thompjs on August 21, 2007 at 7:53 pm

Michael Moore is a genius (in the artistic sense).
Whether or not you agree with him.

Other Comments by thompjs

24. Comment #64787 by heathen2 on August 21, 2007 at 9:39 pm

Comment #64584 by CruciFiction on August 20, 2007 at 8:00 pm
So I'd bet during the entire six hour documentary she won't even hint that there's an alternative to the divisiveness and violence of god delusion.

That is disappointing. I set the show to tape, and I hope that there is some commentary on how religion is a part of the problem. Maybe people will just see that for themselves? No...too much to hope for. I think we have to rely on pointed criticisms like the Dawkins documentaries and the one from Maher.

By the way, the title "Religulous" is not good. The meaning is unclear and it's hard to say, like a tongue twister. "Religiotarded" is nice, but insulting as jamesstephenbrown noted. I'm not good at thinking up titles, but I bet someone here can come up with better than "Religulous".

Other Comments by heathen2

25. Comment #64886 by Fanusi Khiyal on August 22, 2007 at 7:38 am

BTW, all you need to know about CCN's series on fundamentalism:

http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/archives/017854.php#more

Other Comments by Fanusi Khiyal

26. Comment #67426 by drbreakfast on September 3, 2007 at 11:54 am

I'm looking forward to this movie very much. While Maher is technically a stand-up comedian, I don't think he's very funny, strictly as a comedian. Rather, I view (and approve of), him as a political/social commentator who infuses his commentary with explicit humor. In essence, he's a left of center, (mostly), Rush Limbaugh.

Assuming that the movie is done in a a half way decent fashion, it could start a social debate on the issue of why we as a society are so respectful of religious belief and religions. As articulated by Harris, Dawkins and others, religion is perhaps the sole sphere where one can espouse the most absurd assertions of fact with a serious face without any criticism.

Other Comments by drbreakfast

27. Comment #106996 by the_ultimate_samurai on January 3, 2008 at 8:22 pm

This is _exactly_ what many decent, honourable Christians get angry about alot with respect to alot of loudmouth athiests: That these latter are more than willing to mouth off about Christianity but turn green rather than confront the horror of Islam. And they're right to call us to the task about this.

i imagine it's the difference between getting hate mail and get bomb mail...
i think people are more likely to insult christianity over islam BECAUSE they arent as bad, they can walk down the street without worrying about a christian walking up to them and EXPLODING. now this doesnt mean they are SAFE walking down the street, bible is pretty clear about suicide..if you want to be a martyr you have to be KILLED, but the bible is also very much in favour of killing blasphemers, though you may get away with just being beaten by an angry mob...but you at least see it coming, you can run or fight, bomb...not so much. angry christians are also less likely to use a gun...very much an act of passion, not pre-meditated. so they use what's on them, which hopefully doesnt include a gun. but thats in the extreme, the majority of christians are fine with sending very very very disturbing hate mail. all their venier of peace and love and understanding realy kinda melts away when the isssue of their faith comes in. then there are things ranging from "i hope you burn in hell" on the light side to "i shall personally see to it that you are dismembered, your family stoned, and your courpsed dragged into the street" on the more extreme side, but none the less they are just mail, e-mail, or phone calls. islam has all that and bombs. and insulting islam can lead not just to the person being attacked but any company that promotes it. and there are fundamentalist islamic sects here in the states.

and christians are the only one of the retarded trinity of the abrahmic faiths that you can insult without a major backlash, jews are protected because of the anti-semetics and rcists that make any form of critique of judeaism taboo, the muslim as mentioned have the companies at gun point, and the christians are just annoying. they dont have the post-WWII protection of the jewish nor the fear of the islamic.
but there are many other religions, why the 3 abramic religions? i have a theory...because the other religions arent as retarded. i noticed dawkins and the others all mention the western religions...but where is taoism? where is budhism, where is confusiousism, where is shinto? i suspect these ones are avoided because they are less extreme, they are introspective -that is they incourage one to look within themselves for the answers to their problems, they promote self reflection through meditation and mantras- they dont have dieties as we know them (they have gods, but they acknowlege that their gods arent real, that they are meant to be alagorical, you cant even get some christians to admit thats the purpose of the bible, they admit thats the purpose of their gods), and though they have prayer, its just meant as a meditative practice.
shinto actually has a unique view of gods, to shinto a god is just a thing of beauty and esspecialy reverance. not a being of supream power, just a thing, mount fuji for instance is a god, a perticularly large rock or large tree can be a god, a living person who you very greatly admire can be a god. and for them the term god doesnt hold the meaning that it holds for westerners.
many of the eastern religions hold very large emphesis on the here and now, and little of the world after. for instance taoism (though it does have this wierd idea that one of piety can atain immortality...which always seemed wierd) doesnt have another world, nor a re-incarnation, the emphesis on taoism is the now, and that the greatest virtue of a faithful person is the maintanance of his own body and the prolonging of his life. so a healthy body, is a virtue...something western religion i think fails to mention. many eastern religions focus on the body, the expression "a healthy body is a healthy soul" and so they place much emphesis on work, walking rather than driving, manual labor as a virture, not a chore. and proper health care, shinto notably could very well be the source of the term "cleanliness is next to godliness" (though i dont believe that the term has any connection) because their faith puts so much emphesis on cleaning oneself, the act of bathing is virtuous.
if i had to see a religion taking large hold (though i would prefer none, but if i had to chose) it would probably be an eastern religion, or a healthy fusion of all of them (since some have their more primitive bits, but taoism, though it has some wierd bits, also places emphesis that one should seek their own meaning through meditation and deep thought. im not sure about budhism though. )
though eastern societies have shown a rather large ammount of violence, it hasnt realy been religious (though some is there, but they tended to be the state sponsered religion being changed and the old religions being erradicated, notably more on the political side) for instance japan has had centuries of violence, warring daimyou (feudal land lords) fighting over territory, mostly clan warfare, the religion didnt realy factor in since everyone had around the same religion (shinto or budhist) though some conflicts occured with the introduction of christianity by the portugese, though i admit this was not the christians fault, the japanese viewed christianity as a western influence and were VERY xenophobic, as such violence against christianity happened in japan on a WIDE scale.

but it is odd how all religion kinda get lumped in with the western religions, that the eastern religions tend to be overlooked. (though many times its hard to tell if they are religion, or philosophy, in fact i had one person argue with me that taoism is a philosophy not a religion...perhaps due to the lack of any diety or afterlife)

but anyhow, i would like to hear dawkins views of the eastern religions and maybe a contrast with western religions.

Other Comments by the_ultimate_samurai

28. Comment #107009 by cbvilleneuve on January 3, 2008 at 9:22 pm

For a while, in my youth, I thought that I would see religion disappear in my lifetime. Now I am 65, and lost that delusion! I tried discussions with 'believers' and found that most of them know very little about the tenets of their own religion, but still have a closed mind about reality.

Casey Luskin, program officer for the Discovery Institute, stated that: "Students should learn about the evidence for and against evolution," I bet that religionists would be scared to death is students were required to learn about the evidence for and against the existence of their Bible God.

Other Comments by cbvilleneuve

29. Comment #155877 by rddbug on April 6, 2008 at 7:49 am

This will certainly be an interesting project.
I wonder if he will tackle the faith of atheism.
The difficulty will be to take him seriously. After all, people excuse his unfathomable ignorance on the fact that "he is just a comedian."
I could see people committing the ad hominen based on the fact that even if religious faith is fallacious, if the alternative is to be like Maher then, "No thanks." Let's face it, he is certainly not the best, or even mediocre, example of anything that could even be imagined to be decent.
He thinks that incestuous pedophilia is hilarious (http://lifeanddoctrineatheism.blogspot.com/2008/03/bill-mahers-sad-anniversary.html), he rejoices when people such as Jerry Falwell dies (as did Sam Harris and Christopher Hitchens: http://lifeanddoctrineatheism.blogspot.com/2008/02/quadripartite-equine-riders-were-just.html), etc., etc., etc.
Maher has two difficult mountains to climb: he is a clown trying to make a serious point and he is sadly of very, very poor character even while trying to belittle others.

Other Comments by rddbug