Gender: Unspecified Location: With Cinderella and the 9 Dwarves
It does affect me though. Christians are against abortion. They could possibly make abortion illegal. Then if my girlfriend got pregnant she couldn't get an abortion, because of Christians (and some other nutjobs)....
Damn...my reply didn't make it to the thread...so: abridged version.
Perhaps you sohuld execute anyone who is ever misinformed about issues. Besides, couldn't the bible be metaphorical?
You suffer some of the same problems as Dawkins, you paint anyone who is religious as the same (and as a Christian fundamentalist).
.
I used to like him until i realized what a danger to science and athiesm he was.
.
He is an all out athiest, regardless of how he occasionally presents himself. Besides, (unfortunately as Digimark already noted) when Dawkins debates intelligent people, like Fancis Collins (a scientist whose achievements outpace Dawkins' imo) he still is an ass to them.
Why? He paints anyone who is religious as an idiot. (an irony that is not kind to him)
..which is exactly why is is the same damn type of psycho fundamentalist that he whines about. The man is more than anti-fundamentalism...he's anti RELIGION. Big differnce and its a distinction that he's too dull to make. Unfortunately, he drags science and athiesm down with his idiocy. Hes not an idiot, he just has one idiotic belief that corrupts his being...just like most other fundamentalists Dawkins' points failed in a lot of places too. He was too worried about toppling religion and barely realized he was actually talking to one man. Collins was the clear winner in that debate.
There is an awesome debate between Resa Aslan and Sam Harris kickin around on the internet. Resa Aslan makes some great points in it that are entirely pertinant to this discussion of Dawkins.
Basically, people who take the radical stance against all religion (as opposed to fundamentalism or religious violence and oppression) make the same very mistakes in the interpretation of religious texts as the religious extremists do.
Its not necesarily that it is a bad position to have, but like Alliance is saying, it is certainly not conducive to winning over the hearts and minds of the converted, and honestly, seeing as he is so media savy, it paints a picture of all athiests as ignorant radicals.
Letme just plug the new Christopher Hitchens book again: PLUG!
Gender: Unspecified Location: With Cinderella and the 9 Dwarves
Might be an idea.
How does that relate to what I said? I said creation as it is stated in the bible. Not as it might be possibly interpreted.
No, I don't.
In what way (note to the reader: He isn't, I just want Alliance to tell me why he thinks he is.)
Great, he's an ass (iyo), that really relates to his point.
No he doesn't...remember the interview I posted a while ago.
Well, he is an atheist and thinks that is the best way to be...I wouldn't call him a fundamentalist as he can be very reasonable and is not against everyone religious.
Also, I don't think he comes of as ass that much, the interviews and videos I watched with him were all very fair and he seemed to be a reasonable person.
So clear even that Digimark thinks Dawkins was the winner.
Working on it.
Then again, one would say that living in a democracy is not just about accepting whatever happens but also advocate what one wants themselves....****ing radical democracists.
How can you possibly read it without interpreting it?
(note to reader: bardock knows sh*t about the historical and current relations between science and the public...therefore he is credible)
Besides, what was wrong with this list?
1. He damages the credibility of science by claiming that science actually disproves religion. This is a blatant fallacy.
2. He is rabid and ruthless in his attacks, constantly failing to account for nuances and diversity. He paints all those who are religious as though they are Christian fundamentalists.
3. He ignores flaws in his own argument, globalizing it to the point where it is no longer supported by the "facts" he provides, making him as guilty of religous zealotry as other fundamentalists who claim that they have a monopoly on "truth."
No, it simply compunds the fact that he's a menace to civilized society.
Which one was that...rember the Collins debate.
Reasonable? He yells at the Pope for not taking god out of science when the Vatican makes the biggest step toward science since the church accepted heliocentrism. He's an utterly mypoic man. He IS agianst all religion...he thinks religious is a sign of a flawed mental state...maybe this is new to your corner but thats against anyone who is religious.
Just like Ann Coulter is reasonable to JackieMalfoy.
He's an incredible ass who is more bent on showering himself with pseudo-intellectual glory than actually promoting good thought.
Gender: Unspecified Location: With Cinderella and the 9 Dwarves
It's a story book, you don't have to see it as big metaphors (many fundamentalist Christians don't). You didn't know that? Odd.
Where did he claim that? I mean, we have this one video where he says that of course there might be a God, it's just as likely as believing in a teapot orbiting Saturn. In fact, that is not saying that it disproves it at all. Have we seen different videos?
Also, good job on taking my little joke there, very creative of you.
Not true, didn't with the Archbishop of Canterbury for one. I am sure there are more Christians he also respects. But...well, that one is really enough to disprove your stupid claim
Well, you were wrong with the first two points, lets see you bring up some evidence for the third.
Bullshit
The one I posted. He interviewed the Archbishop of Canterbury. You replied to the thread.
And no, I don't remember the Collins debate, I believe it was not posted..and I happen to not own any Time Magazines.
Well, we saw that he isn't against anyone religious. That doesn't mean that need for religion is not a flaw in the human brain. And not only did you use myopic wrong, I also have no idea in what way you think he is it. Yeah he wants all Religion gone....and? If you think about it it kinda makes sense to not want religion...
Yeah, yeah, you don't like him. You rebel, you.
Assault? Are you out of your mind? Do you lack the most rudimentary of reading capabilities? The part you quoted neither attacked DigiMark nor you.
N-no. It's democracy. Once again you show that you do not understand the word.
All the ways you wish you could be, that's me. I look like you wanna look, I **** like you wanna ****, I am smart, capable, and most importantly, I am free in all the ways that you are not.
Furthermore if we lived in a real Democracy we would not have gone to invade Iraq. Sure we can elect who comes into power but we have limited power in changing policies (demonstration).
Even then im sure that elections sometimes are rigged.
Further furthermore I dont give a **** wether its a democracy or not I dont want any religous fundies telling me what to do!
__________________ Watch what people are cynical about, and one can often discover what they lack.
- General George Patton Jr
KMC Community Forums
Jul 11th, 2007 01:43 PM
