51. 'Atheistic fundamentalism' fears

Comment #102527 by AdrianB on December 23, 2007 at 5:55 am

I've just read this article again, and I must say this is getting quite tedious now. We have a list of Christian name calling and complaints against us, which include the following:

"Christianophophia"
"militant atheists"
"fundamental atheists"
"secular fascists"
"secular tyranny"

When pushed for actual examples to back up their complaints, it is always the same three; banning Christmas, the British Airways woman not allowed to wear a cross, or the girl not allowed to wear her purity ring. And that is the total sum of their complaints. In this article the archbishop repeats two of them as his examples.

Well even if any of these could be argued with any justification then it would still puzzle me how they could possibly think, even in their wildest dreams, that any of this is in any way comparative to the hatred, discrimination and murder that leads from "fundamental theism".

Of course none of these example can be argued with any justification.

The idea that we want to ban Christmas is refuted quite well by Polly Toynbee.

http://richarddawkins.net/article,2055,Sorry-to-disappoint-but-its-nonsense-to-suggest-we-want-to-ban-Christmas,Polly-Toynbee

The real truth behind the British Airways cross controversy is presented by Terry Sanderson of the National Secular Society. (A very good read)

http://www.secularism.org.uk/editorialchristianbulliespressth.html

And anybody that thinks for a moment that the purity ring girl was a victim of secular tyranny should listen to Marcus Brigstocke.

http://richarddawkins.net/article,1440,Can-the-rest-of-us-have-our-planet-back,The-Now-Show-Marcus-Brigstocke

So I'm still waiting for a good example, I suspect it might be a while.

52. 'Atheistic fundamentalism' fears

Comment #102253 by AdrianB on December 22, 2007 at 7:43 am

So let's just think this through shall we.

A fundamental belief in religious texts can lead to ..... oh, just too many horrible things to list here. I'd be typing all day.

And a fundamental lack of belief in a god can lead to ..... tumbleweed floats by ..... can't think of anything.

Oh hang on, there's the purity ring girl, oh and the BA checkout lady, oh and they won't let us do nativity plays. Sob, sob.

53. 'Atheistic fundamentalism' fears

Comment #102248 by AdrianB on December 22, 2007 at 7:33 am

Horrible, just horrible.

I 'fundamentally' believe in my love for my wife and children. Is this to be feared?

54. 2007, a bad year for God squadders

Comment #101771 by AdrianB on December 21, 2007 at 12:43 am

If you were lucky enough to be one of those shepherds on the hills around Bethlehem who got the news from the angelic host, or one of the wise men who followed that star, you were lucky. No long, dark night of the soul for you. Instead, just one brilliant flash of celestial light and the secret of the universe was revealed.

55. Interview with Richard Dawkins: On Christmas

Comment #100866 by AdrianB on December 19, 2007 at 1:24 pm

Bonzai - and when did you stop beating your wife?

:roll:

56. Interview with Richard Dawkins: On Christmas

Comment #100822 by AdrianB on December 19, 2007 at 11:49 am

83. Comment #100813 by Bonzai on December 19, 2007 at 11:30 am

We were all appalled by the Talibans for blowing up the big Buddha statues. We don't need to be Buddhists to understand that these statues were a heritage of human civilization. The statues had a meaning beyond the specific Buddhist ideology that inspired them.

So how are the atheists here who insist that we must remove all religious reference to Christmas for the sake of ideological purity any different from the Talibans?

57. Interview with Richard Dawkins: On Christmas

Comment #100653 by AdrianB on December 19, 2007 at 4:00 am

Just another thought for those Christians that think us atheists should not sing carols.

Some of those carols were actually composed by atheists, presumably with their fingers crossed behind their backs as they composed them.

Are Christians that sing these carols being seduced by the dark side?

:-)

58. Jesus ad angers church groups

Comment #100582 by AdrianB on December 19, 2007 at 12:08 am

Well, I thought it was quite funny.

:)

59. Interview with Richard Dawkins: On Christmas

Comment #100570 by AdrianB on December 18, 2007 at 11:24 pm

20. Comment #100458 by heathen2 on December 18, 2007 at 4:28 pm

There seems to be a lot of anger (from some theists) around atheists enjoying or participating in Xmas festivities. As if they own it. They don't. But the anger is really interesting. More like outrage, is my sense. It's like they are saying "you atheists are speaking out against the god part and all of the other religious evils, so how dare you presume to enjoy the fun parts of it".

25. Comment #100472 by DNAtheist on December 18, 2007 at 5:01 pm

I wish theists would make up their minds. If we don't want to celebrate the holiday then we are insulting Christians. If we do celebrate the holiday then we are insulting Christians. The only way we could stop insulting them would be to become Christians.

60. Interview with Richard Dawkins: On Christmas

Comment #100428 by AdrianB on December 18, 2007 at 3:35 pm

Listen to the whole article, which starts at 1:37 in the programme. The comments by GP Taylor after Richard Dawkins slot are painfully hilarious, including the following:

"Radical atheists like Dawkins should start having the courage of their convictions and keep their mouths firmly shut."

61. God rest you merry atheist

Comment #100397 by AdrianB on December 18, 2007 at 2:55 pm

Actually I have really enjoyed listening to this debate develop since Richard Dawkins outed himself as a "Cultural Christian".

You can hear the screeching of brakes as the Christians have done u-turns in the last couple of days.

One min they are complaining that Christmas traditions are being eroded and taken away, and now it's but of course you atheists can't have them they're ours.

62. God rest you merry atheist

Comment #100391 by AdrianB on December 18, 2007 at 2:49 pm

104. Comment #100080 by Richard Morgan on December 18, 2007 at 8:19 am

I've just been e-mailed by someone in England who apparently heard Richard Dawkins on Radio 2 call Christianity a "harmless myth".
Can anyone substantiate this scandalous rumour?

Please, someone, anyone, tell me it's not true.

63. Way of the Master Radio talks about Dawkins' Christmas Comments

Comment #100352 by AdrianB on December 18, 2007 at 2:14 pm

Just want to further add a recommendation to listening to the debate between Friel and Barker that has been linked by Quill. I have it on my iPod and listen now and again when I want a good laugh.

:)

64. An Open Letter to Richard Dawkins

Comment #96910 by AdrianB on December 11, 2007 at 4:52 am

Don't forget that Mr Morris has probably spent some considerable time composing this letter at the expense, ultimately of his employer the church.

In turn he is expecting a reply, which would take longer to compose, from Mr Dawkins in his own time, at his own expense.

Only a small thing, but it bugs me. A response will only lead to another response, and they have all the time in the world.

65. Is Infant Male Circumcision An Abuse Of The Rights Of The Child?

Comment #96836 by AdrianB on December 11, 2007 at 2:05 am

Well said jkr87, I agree 100% with your comments.

I once watched a TV debate on circumcision with three guests, one Muslim who was pro-circumcision, one doctor who was anti-circumcision, and one so called neutral who was the (Jewish) Edwina Currie. What she said made me fume, she shrugged her shoulders about MGM and said it was just a matter of choice, but then proceeded to say "but of course FGM is different, it's horrible and should be outlawed everywhere." Well I was outraged and tried to get some emails through to Major's shagmeister. So what if I just want to chop of the prepuce of my daughter's clitoris, that's horrible and should be outlawed, whilst to chop off the prepuce of my son's penis is just a choice?

So jkr87 is right to point out that there are degrees of FGM, and if we seem to have no problem in agreeing that all degrees of FGM are wrong, then we need consciousness raising to realise that all MGM is wrong as well.

Oh and yes, this is all about memes. Just like any other virus, this mind virus waxes and wanes. Why the increase in the US during/after WW2 I was asked earlier. Well of course the war threw many young men together, and many would have noticed differences between "roundheads" and "cavaliers" for the first time. Is it reasonable to expect the "roundheads" to tell their colleagues that they wish they had never have it done? No, of course not, they would have told them about all the nonsense benefits, and the virus would have spread.

Scratch at the surface of everybody that thinks MGM is okay, is just a choice thing, or even has benefits, and I guarantee you will find somebody who has in turn been circumcised, be married to somebody who is circumcised, or agreed to have a child circumcised.

It's about time we inoculate against this virus with a heavy dose of reason.


.

66. Is Infant Male Circumcision An Abuse Of The Rights Of The Child?

Comment #96237 by AdrianB on December 10, 2007 at 8:05 am

I'm glad I bet my money when I did. The odds have just dropped dramatically!

:)

67. Is Infant Male Circumcision An Abuse Of The Rights Of The Child?

Comment #96223 by AdrianB on December 10, 2007 at 7:33 am

I am willing to put good money on pyota being circumcised.

68. Is Infant Male Circumcision An Abuse Of The Rights Of The Child?

Comment #96138 by AdrianB on December 10, 2007 at 3:49 am

Bonzai, you don't get it do you? While ever EVERY circumcised father does the same to his sons then the practice will spread whatever the cause. Most certainly beyond the boundaries of the cause. It takes a lot of rational thought to break away from the cultural ritual, and thankfully we are starting to see the practice decrease in the US as it has already done so in Europe.

In the US the cause was not Jewish as you seem to think I claim, but it was still religious. A certain cornflake pioneer had a lot of influence.

.

69. Is Infant Male Circumcision An Abuse Of The Rights Of The Child?

Comment #96128 by AdrianB on December 10, 2007 at 3:21 am

Then how do you explain the vast number of circumcised men who are not Jewish? I know quite a few circumcised non Jewish men and I can tell you this is utter nonsense.

BTW, I know it is not going to be popular in Rd.net here but "memes" is not even a scientific concept. It is only a notch better than magic spells and the holy spirit.

70. Is Infant Male Circumcision An Abuse Of The Rights Of The Child?

Comment #96113 by AdrianB on December 10, 2007 at 2:43 am

The last time this subject appeared, I was quite surprised to see that many people were quite unimpressed that it was a subject worth discussing at all. It soon became apparent that most of these people, Richard Dawkins himself included, turned out to be circumcised.

Isn't this just a form of Stockholm syndrome at work? Sort of like the women who are coerced to wear a birqa, and then appear in front of the media to announce that it is their own choice?

It's a barbaric religious procedure that has continued with the help of memes. A circumcised father is likely to have his sons circumcised for religious reasons, because everybody else is doing the same, or to do otherwise could just sow the seeds of doubt about his own manhood.

71. Richard Dawkins on 'Have Your Say'

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.

72. Richard Dawkins on 'Have Your Say'

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!

73. Richard Dawkins on 'Have Your Say'

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#

74. Keith Olbermann talks about the Romney 'Religion' Speech

Comment #95473 by AdrianB on December 8, 2007 at 12:20 pm

What a nice scary country the US is evolving into. I really do feel for the sensible minority there. Thank FSM there are people like these two talking heads, and the fact that the sensible minority still adds up to a lot of people.

75. 'Teddy' teacher jailed in Sudan

Comment #92273 by AdrianB on November 30, 2007 at 7:31 am

Mohamed Teddy Bear for sale:

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Mohamed-Teddy-bear_W0QQitemZ330193980849QQihZ014QQcategoryZ117QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

Buy it before the listing is pulled.

76. In the name of God: the Saudi rape victim's tale

Comment #92143 by AdrianB on November 30, 2007 at 12:29 am

Sorry, I don't disagree with you guys (far from it), it's just that you've got the "wrong end of the stick" about what I am saying.

I agree that without oil money, "the Wahabis are back to living in tents and molesting goats" and their threat TO US is greatly reduced.

BUT isn't this story is about the nasty effects of religion on it's own society? How is removing oil money going to stop these people behave like shits to each other?

Religion poisons everthing, give them money and they will try and poison us too. Agreed. But isn't that for another thread?

77. In the name of God: the Saudi rape victim's tale

Comment #91795 by AdrianB on November 29, 2007 at 10:43 am

24. Comment #91777 by briancoughlanworldcitizen on November 29, 2007 at 8:21 am

21. Comment #91771 by AdrianB on November 29, 2007 at 7:57 am
In the context of this story, isn't our reliance on Saudi oil a bit irrelevant?

No it's pretty pivotal. Zimbabwe gets a fair bit of justified stick for their governments dodgy behaviour. While all we get on Saudia Arabia, is a little intermittent muted mewling.

Whats the difference? Oil.

78. In the name of God: the Saudi rape victim's tale

Comment #91771 by AdrianB on November 29, 2007 at 7:57 am

In the context of this story, isn't our reliance on Saudi oil a bit irrelevant?

This sort of thing has always happened, and if the oil stopped tomorrow, it would still continue to happen. It would mean of course that our great leaders could afford to criticise them from afar, but these inhumane acts would still happen.

Isn't all that is happening now that in our day of telecommunications, and increasing fear of Islam, we are hearing about more of these kinds of things? I'm not sure if the West being allowed to be critical of The Saudi regime would ever achieve anything.

As I get older and less optimistic, the more I think we should just let them get on with it and reap what they sow in these barbaric countries. Sorry if that sounds awful, but I just see our interventions making things worse. I would just like to see the West leading by example, pushing the enlightenment forward here at home.

I'm sure the penny will drop in these barbaric countries eventually, it might take a long time, but eventually the criticism will come from within. And I think it's only criticism from within, led by the example of the West, that will provide the inertia for change.

79. Islam and the modern world don't mix

Comment #91365 by AdrianB on November 28, 2007 at 6:53 am

Just to highlight what a tricky crossroads we find ourselves in, I find myself reading the comments of both Fanusi and brainsys and agreeing with you simultaneously!

And it is a crossroads.

When I was at school I can count on one hand the number of Muslims in my year, and yet their religion was never an issue and they fitted seamlessly into our way of life.

Now my children go to the same school, and it is about 25% Muslim, it is obvious to me that multiculturism has failed for the following reasons:

The friendships formed in primary school between Muslim and non-Muslim males slowly disappear as the children move up through the years. It is there to see in the groups of young males that "hang around on the street corners." Even on my road, which is as middle-class as is possible, you will witness groups of males that are totally Muslim, and another 200 yards away there will be a group of non-Muslim males. You can feel the tensions being stoked between these two different groups.

It's a though there is some sort of comfort in numbers, if you are a minority below a certain %age you will integrate, but above it and you will not. It worries me a lot.

80. 'Muhammad' teddy teacher arrested

Comment #91026 by AdrianB on November 27, 2007 at 2:43 am

Perhaps one line of defense for her would be to say that the Bear was, in the tradition of bear naming, actually called Ed.

It's all just a simple misunderstanding, they were all out on a picnic, teacher, children and bear when she was overheard saying to the bear, "More Ham Ed?"

On second thoughts .....

81. Tony Blair: Mention God and you're a 'nutter'

Comment #90501 by AdrianB on November 25, 2007 at 11:04 am

They discussed this on the Rachel Burden programme on Radio 5 this morning:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio/aod/networks/fivelive/aod.shtml?fivelive/burden

Click to 10 mins into the programm and you will be able to hear Cllr Alan Craig, a founder member of the Christian People's Alliance, call Richard Dawkins a "nutter."

82. Dr Bari: Government stoking Muslim tension

Comment #87525 by AdrianB on November 12, 2007 at 11:20 am

Dr. Benway

"If that demonisation continues, then Britain will have to deal with two million Muslim terrorists — 700,000 of them in London"

83. Dr Bari: Government stoking Muslim tension

Comment #87447 by AdrianB on November 12, 2007 at 6:42 am

Exactly Russell, you've hit the nail on the head there.

Where are they?

Tumbleweed.

I know they are there, and I know they are the majority of the 3% in the UK. I even know some.

I guess it's always been the same, that the 90% decent majority just want to get their heads down and live decent lives. Because the majority do not issue threats, we give too much unwarranted control to those that do.

84. Dr Bari: Government stoking Muslim tension

Comment #87433 by AdrianB on November 12, 2007 at 5:38 am

"I think it is creating a scare in the community and wider society"

"If that demonisation continues, then Britain will have to deal with two million Muslim terrorists — 700,000 of them in London"

85. I didn't know the FLEA CIRCUS was back in town!

Comment #85017 by AdrianB on November 4, 2007 at 2:07 pm

Tina Beattie is a catholic feminist, I'm already out of my depth here how does she make that work?

86. Jury Awards Father $11M in Funeral Case

Comment #84033 by AdrianB on November 1, 2007 at 3:24 am

As many have already said this is a tricky one.

The Phelps are lawyers, and I believe much of their money has come from winning court cases, probably after somebody has threatened them or tried to restrict their free speech. They are undoubtably nasty ****s, so they have many enemies, but the law protects them.

For this reason it would be nice to see the system they rely on to spout their wicked nonsense actually be their downfall in the end, but I am sure this will be overturned.

In fact as I write this, the more I hope it is overturned. Partly because the idea of free speech demands it, but mainly because the Phelps probably do as much for the cause of atheism as Richard Dawkins.

87. Don't write off religion - it can be the key to a stable family

Comment #83135 by AdrianB on October 29, 2007 at 3:28 am

Amazing. This article is, without the personal bits, almost word for word the same as a sermon I heard in church a couple of weeks ago.

(Don't panic - it was a christening!)

I have it on good authority that Dawkins and the so called "new", "militant", "fundamental" atheists are getting quite a bit of attention in many sermons these days.


A catholic friend referred to Dawkins as "that horrible man" recently. When I asked her why she thought that she mentioned that he thought she was a paedophile for taking her children to church, and some other strawman reasons she had heard from the pulpit.

88. Hitler, Stalin, Mao, etc. were atheists, and they were terrible! Answer that!

Comment #81297 by AdrianB on October 24, 2007 at 2:47 pm

The other day a theist mentioned Hitler/Stalin/Mao in a discussion with me about atheism.

I was ready to pile in with the usual replies when I paused for a moment and then said the following:

ME: Look, can we can both agree that every day thousands of people are committing horrendous crimes?

THEIST: Err, yes.

ME: And some of those people will be Christians, some will be Muslims, some will be atheists?

THEIST: Err, yes.

ME: So why don't you blame atheism for all today's crimes that are committed by atheists, or Christianity for all today's crimes that are committed by Christians?

THEISTS: Err, because it's not relevant.

ME: Surely they are more relevant, these crimes are happening today. Some of them are horrible, murder, rape etc?

THEIST: Err, well their atheism or faith has nothing to do with their crimes.

ME: Exactly. Most peoples beliefs have absolutely nothing to do with whether they are a good person or not. The same goes for Hitler, whether he was an atheist or a Christian is not relevant. Can we agree on that?

THEIST: Err, I guess so.

ME: There is one type of crime however that can only be committed by the believer. And that is the crime that is committed with god's authority. The Muslim suicide bomber, or the murder of the abortion doctor for example. The vast majority of crimes are committed by bad people, but some are committed by the deluded.

89. Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams criticizes popular atheist writers

Comment #80576 by AdrianB on October 22, 2007 at 7:48 am

I wish these "New Theists" would learn more about atheism so they could better understand it.

The god that Williams criticizes me for not believing in is certainly not the god that I really don't believe in.

:-)

90. Atheists aren't a bad lot

Comment #80512 by AdrianB on October 22, 2007 at 3:11 am

11. Comment #80508 by BMMcArdle on October 22, 2007 at 3:00 am

This article is setting up the straw man that "Believers do not not act less ethically than non-believers can not not haven't done"

91. Atheists aren't a bad lot

Comment #80505 by AdrianB on October 22, 2007 at 2:33 am

Nice article.

"I think that the 'atheism = immorality' assumption is one that is so deeply rooted in some parts of the world."

This is why Hitchen's challenge is so relevant. (No matter what a certain poster might think)

92. Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams criticizes popular atheist writers

Comment #78837 by AdrianB on October 15, 2007 at 3:47 am

I started a thread stating that believers can be deist one minute, and evangelical the next. It would seem that I was wrong.

The "New Theist" now has a new "Holy Trinity" where they can be pantheist, deist and evangelical all at the SAME time.

If John Carpenter ever considers doing a sequel to his movie The Thing, then he need look no further than the Archbishop to take the role as the evil shapeshifter.

93. Fox News Attacks 'Godless' Free Thought Radio

Comment #78289 by AdrianB on October 12, 2007 at 11:15 am

Now is a good time to recommend Annie and Dan's programme. I never miss it, and podcast it.

The last programme with Hitchens is a good introduction for those that have never heard it.

94. Do you have to read up on leprechology before disbelieving in them?

Comment #71025 by AdrianB on September 17, 2007 at 2:30 pm

Stanford's trump card is his observation that "religion is not primarily about belief, as we understand the word today, but faith." Religion, as he sums it up, "simply isn't about facts." Exactly. I couldn't have put it better myself.

95. Young Muslims begin dangerous fight for the right to abandon faith

Comment #69337 by AdrianB on September 11, 2007 at 12:00 am

As the population from the a Muslim background grows within Europe, it is of the utmost importance that there are more people like the brave Mr Jami.

It must always be stressed that any criticism of the Islamic faith is NOT about race, but it is often used to stuff out criticism. Islam must be criticised from within.

96. The Rise of Atheist America

Comment #68893 by AdrianB on September 9, 2007 at 3:14 am

No question about it. America was founded by Christians. Its very purpose for being was the furtherance of biblical Christianity, according to the Pilgrims and succeeding generations....."This is a Christian nation."

97. We need a more intelligent religion debate

Comment #68558 by AdrianB on September 7, 2007 at 3:26 pm

This is just tedious now. But positive to realise from the repetition of the same Old Thesist arguments that they are on the ropes.

Careful though, people on the ropes can get real dangerous, so it shouldn't be long before they turn to the courts to try and shut us up.

What gets me is that despite the thousands of pro-religious books that we have had to live with over the years, we get 4 or 5 atheist books in a couple of years and without exception ALL the authors are in 'militant atheist' mode.

So once again the real underlying message is, "please please just shut up and don't upset my delusions or I will call you nasty names."

98. Honest Mistakes or Willful Mendacity

Comment #68378 by AdrianB on September 7, 2007 at 3:25 am

Richard Morgan - public debate is a vital part of any democracy, enabling the airing of conflicting ideas/ideologies, usually allowing people to form intelligent opinions after having seen both sides of the case.

99. Like any half-decent atheist, I'm fond of a bit of religion

Comment #67856 by AdrianB on September 5, 2007 at 2:28 am

Listening to the Toynbee tirades one might imagine that this country was in the hands of a latterday Torquemada, or that Thomas Cromwell was once again sending heretics to the rack.

100. What do these atheists understand of religion?

Comment #67600 by AdrianB on September 4, 2007 at 1:29 am

Three cheers for Ella. Hip hip ....