1. Jerry Falwell Deconverted on Deathbed!

Comment #44664 by RichardC on May 25, 2007 at 6:50 am

"He had an attack where his heart should have been,"
LOL

Good one, Kristine.

2. Foreword for the UK edition of 'Letter to a Christian Nation'

Comment #22431 by RichardC on February 17, 2007 at 7:09 am

Sam's book is a great read. I gave mine to a religious friend because I thought it was much more likely to be read than the God Delusion, simply because of it's brevity (my friend is, like many Christians, not particularly given to reading large books, especially ones that seem intellectually taxing). In terms of size and physical dimension, Sam's 'Letter to a Christian' reminds me of some Christian prayer books, and for this reason I think it may appeal to many Christians who may be put off his 'End of Faith' book or TGD.
Finally I would like to concur with those who have remarked on Sam's amazing powers of articulating his ideas. It really is something to behold - he never stumbles over his ideas/words, is completely unpeturbable in debate, and in listening to him I always feel privileged to hear his ideas and the wonderful way he has of expressing them. I am currently enthralled by his debate with Andrew Sullivan and amazed that Sullivan is still hanging in there and not yet thrown in the towel, since he suffers badly with each exchange. I will continue to follow Sam Harris's career and work with the greatest of interest.

3. Not Yet The Majority But No Longer Silent

Comment #15452 by RichardC on December 31, 2006 at 12:12 pm

'Bright' seems to imply that we are cleverer and 'brighter' than non brights, which is rubbing it in rather (even though it may be true in many cases!). I can well imagine that many visitors to this website would welcome the implied name-calling of using such a word, but I think its adoption would probably only help confirm religites in their characterisation of atheists as cocksure and arrogant. They love to call atheists arrogant and this is simply providing them with extra ammunition. Consequently, it's not a word that I'd like to use. How about 'non-theist'? I like this. It might not sound as catchy as bright but it says what I am not rather than what I am, which is all I wish to express. Moreover, it doesn't convey any sense of arrogance or superiority. Using 'non-theist' also avoids quantifying my unbelief or fixing my position on the belief/non-belief spectrum. It also puts the shoe on the foot of the theist by implication – the onus is on them to defend their position. They are making the claims, not the non-theist! Obviously, non-theist does sound very similar to a-theist, but at least it avoids the negative connotations.

4. God's Enemies Are More Honest Than His Friends

Comment #15169 by RichardC on December 29, 2006 at 9:10 am

The trouble with the word 'atheism' is that, while it is an etymologically correct description to imply absence of theism, many people assume it to mean someone who is certain that God doesn't exist, so naturally assume such certitude must reflect arrogance. I can understand that this is an easy mistake to make. Before reading TGD I called myself 'agnostic' because I realised I could not be certain that God did not exist. However, in TGD Dawkins defines agnosticism as a position which apportions equal likelihood to the existence or non-existence of God and criticises it accordingly. But I do not think that most self professing agnostics really subscribe to this completely neutral definition of agnosticism, nor do I think that most people understand it in this way, perhaps partly due to the long PR campaign mounted against it by religites! Some of the mud has stuck and now many if not most people think that the proper word for anyone who is not absolutely sure of God's non-existence is agnosticism. Such a definition would in reality embrace nearly all professed atheists. At what point I wonder on the belief/non-belief spectrum does an agnostic become an atheist?

It's all a bit of a semantic tangle. Now we have people coming up with 'bright' to join such traditionally used words as 'freethinker' and 'humanist'. Well 'bright' seems to imply that we are cleverer and 'brighter' than non brights, which is rubbing it in rather (even though it may be true in many cases!). I can well imagine that many visitors to this website would welcome the implied name-calling of using such a word, but I think its adoption would probably only help confirm religites in their characterisation of atheists as arrogant. Therefore, it's not a word that I'd like to use. How about 'non-theist'? I like this. It says what I am not rather than what I am and doesn't convey any sense of arrogance or superiority. Using 'non-theist' also avoids quantifying my unbelief or fixing my position on the belief/non-belief spectrum. It also puts the shoe on the foot of the theist by implication – the onus is on them to defend their position. They are making the claims, not the non-theist! They are the ones who profess to know so they can't turn around and criticise others for being arrogant.

5. Beneath The Surface

Comment #13999 by RichardC on December 20, 2006 at 3:02 pm

I think the song is 'Let the mystery be' by Iris Dement. In fact I liked it so much I have just downloaded it from Limewire. Great singer and great song!

6. The Blasphemy Challenge

Comment #13126 by RichardC on December 15, 2006 at 5:39 pm

I would like to see the DVD 'The God who wasn't there' but I don't think it's available in the UK yet. I could order it from the states but suspect I wouldn't be able to play it in my British DVD player. Dawkins has reportedly seen it and he's also a Brit - I wonder it if watched it from within his English home or on his travels abroad.
Maybe if I could utter some really terrible blasphemy the Rational Response Squad would even pay for the international postage!

7. The Blasphemy Challenge

Comment #13122 by RichardC on December 15, 2006 at 4:38 pm

I agree with Kergillian and don't think this is really the best 'rational response', being rather childish and needlessly provocative.
It's just going to get religious people's back up and entrench them in their own camp.
Better to charm other's by the strength of your arguments rather than simply mocking other people's religion.