I dare say that Haggard has a point about being arrogant about the whole situation. What we see as painfully obvious, other people don’t, and are put off by the fact that we think they’re blathering fucking retards for even contemplating some of the lunatic fantasies that they whole heartily believe in.
Agreed. I can’t help but wonder what a confrontation like this is supposed to accomplish. Dawkins doesn’t approach the situation as someone intending to observe or understand, he behaves almost as if he’s trying to “convert” Haggard through argument (undoubtedly a futile effort), like he’s just getting off on the thrill of being “in enemy territory.”
Wow. “Don’t be arrogant”. I’m having a difficult time reconciling ol’ Ted talking down to Dawkins about arrogance and the absolute authority of the Bible, when in fact probably a day or two before he was probably doing meth and had some guy’s dick in his mouth. Amazing!
I agree with tiki god and Derek. I also wonder what incidental footage Dawkins left out between the conversation and the truck incident, to make himself seem like a victim.
Dawkins complains that religion is trying to kill science. Meanwhile, he’s a scientist openly trying to kill religion. The guy is a hypocritical fuck, just as obnoxious as the fundamentalists he rails against.
It’s a spectrum, and both extremes are represented here, in Dawkins and Haggard, and both hold positions that are equally indefensible.
Dawkins is not trying to ‘kill religion’, he’s trying to make atheism socially acceptable.
I know this may come as a shock to some, but stating that you’re an athist is not the same as persecuting christians or ‘killing religion’.
I love how these comments refer to Dawkins as the arrogant one. Meanwhile Ole Teddy here was high as a kite on meth while cheating on his wife with male escorts and congregation members.
Perhaps some commenters here need to invest in a science book. Haggard is the arrogant one here trying to pretend he has the first clue on the scientific method when any fifth grader in a good school not in Kansas could rip him apart.
TS Greenie, we don’t need to comment on Haggard because we all know what he is. Dawkins, OTOH, always engenders discussion because he’s genuinely controversial as a charismatic and high-profile self-appointed spokesman for atheism.
“Yes, of course. All that stuff about God being a “pernicious delusion†isn’t intended as an attack on faith. Not at all.”
And the constant attacks from religious people since the day I was born telling me that me and my entire family will burn in an eternal lake of fire and that we will scream for mercy forever but God will ignore my cries isn’t an attack on my beliefs?
My beliefs are damned constantly by very powerful religious organizations. I could use the word “attacked” but I don’t really feel attacked, because it doesn’t hurt me or damage my beliefs.
The fundamentalists are so used to being coddled and patronized, that it comes as a huge surprise to them when someone actually has the nerve to speak openly about their own differing beliefs in a way that doesn’t sound like an adult talking to a child about Santa. Dawkins believes that gods are a pernicious delusion, and he says so in a way that makes no attempt to talk down to anyone. He communicates his beliefs as an adult speaking to other adults. He bypasses the baby-talk that we’ve had to use for so long in an effort to keep the fundamentalists from becoming upset or angry. Fundamentalists on the other hand, make no attempt to hide or even soften their deep hatred of us nonbelievers. They openly express their desire to see us die, burn in Hell, suffer, etc… They use TV, radio and whatever media they can to tell us that we’re evil and will be tormented eternally. Oddly this isn’t considered hate speak, and the idea that it could be seen as hateful is a surprise to the fundamentalists because they’ve been allowed for so long to damn anyone they want to damn.
Many religious people also very openly express that they believe science to be a pernicious delusion, and they even go to a lot of effort to try to change the laws so that their specific belief will be forcefully taught to children in science classes at school. Scientists have never made that much effort to have science and evolution taught in church or Sunday School because they know that science doesn’t belong in those places. Religious fundamentalists feel threatened and become defensive when anyone questions their claims or tries to keep them from changing laws and injecting their own personal belief systems into a diverse society that may not want it or believe it. They don’t seem to understand that the society they live in is filled with people who have many different beliefs, religious and non-religious.
Unfortunately when someone like Dawkins states his opinion just as openly (though not nearly as constantly or as loudly as many religions do), the religious community jumps on him, claiming that he’s arrogant and that he’s trying to “kill” their mythology. They seem to feel that he shouldn’t be allowed to express anything that doesn’t support their own personal beliefs. It always strikes me that these kinds of religious folks aren’t really all that convinced of their alleged beliefs if they feel their mythology can be toppled or even damaged by a man saying words. And the words that Dawkins uses aren’t nearly as damning, violent and condemning as the fundamentalist threats that pour down on the world I live in every day and night.
I am told constantly by organizations who have their rights protected and encouraged by our government that some of my friends are “abominations” who deserve to burn in agony for all eternity. They state that they believe certain human beings are less human than others and don’t deserve the same rights or freedoms as others because of something written (and perhaps misinterpreted) in an ancient book. Science organizations never make such official and sweeping claims about religious people, or try to create laws that force ministers and preachers and rabbis to teach evolution in their churches and temples. These tax-exempt religious organizations come to my door every weekend trying to sell me their horror stories, and they become indignant and defensive when I honestly answer their question, “Have you been saved by the blood of Jesus?” They tell me very directly that I’m wrong and damned because I don’t buy into their mythology. And then they send the heavy hitters back the next weekend. Usually an older man with a cute young girl. It is their “duty” to “save” me. If I wasn’t so sure of my own beliefs I guess I’d feel offended and threatened by this and I might even describe it as arrogance, but honestly it’s just an annoyance.
I don’t see scientists pushing their research papers under my door, sending their soldiers out to my home to try to convert me or setting up their research labs in every American neighborhood with signs out front proclaiming that if you don’t follow them you are evil, and will therefore die in pain and suffer the eternal, vengeful wrath of an infinitely powerful being who demands to be worshipped. A scientist has never told me that my friends are going to suffer for eternity if they don’t adopt the lifestyle, sexual orientation or attitudes toward women and minorities of the average scientist.
Religious people who are threatened by the beliefs of someone who doesn’t buy into their particular collection of ancient scriptures tend to see these beliefs as an “attack” on their mythology. They tend to see those with differing beliefs as arrogant. But they never see the arrogance or the insult that their own organized religion sends out into the world constantly. They never see their own rhetoric as a constant death threat to those with differing religious beliefs or the nonbelievers they share the world with.
Believe us or die an endless death in Hell. Live the way we live or you are evil and don’t deserve to be alive.
Scientists are too busy to make those kinds of threats.
Comments
17 Comments so far. Leave a comment below.I dare say that Haggard has a point about being arrogant about the whole situation. What we see as painfully obvious, other people don’t, and are put off by the fact that we think they’re blathering fucking retards for even contemplating some of the lunatic fantasies that they whole heartily believe in.
Agreed. I can’t help but wonder what a confrontation like this is supposed to accomplish. Dawkins doesn’t approach the situation as someone intending to observe or understand, he behaves almost as if he’s trying to “convert” Haggard through argument (undoubtedly a futile effort), like he’s just getting off on the thrill of being “in enemy territory.”
“Rubbed shoulders”… kekeke…
Wow. “Don’t be arrogant”. I’m having a difficult time reconciling ol’ Ted talking down to Dawkins about arrogance and the absolute authority of the Bible, when in fact probably a day or two before he was probably doing meth and had some guy’s dick in his mouth. Amazing!
I agree with tiki god and Derek. I also wonder what incidental footage Dawkins left out between the conversation and the truck incident, to make himself seem like a victim.
Dawkins complains that religion is trying to kill science. Meanwhile, he’s a scientist openly trying to kill religion. The guy is a hypocritical fuck, just as obnoxious as the fundamentalists he rails against.
It’s a spectrum, and both extremes are represented here, in Dawkins and Haggard, and both hold positions that are equally indefensible.
Will,
you’re an idiot.
Yay, Will’s back.
Dawkins is not trying to ‘kill religion’, he’s trying to make atheism socially acceptable.
I know this may come as a shock to some, but stating that you’re an athist is not the same as persecuting christians or ‘killing religion’.
In short:
Will, you’re an idiot.
I love how these comments refer to Dawkins as the arrogant one. Meanwhile Ole Teddy here was high as a kite on meth while cheating on his wife with male escorts and congregation members.
Perhaps some commenters here need to invest in a science book. Haggard is the arrogant one here trying to pretend he has the first clue on the scientific method when any fifth grader in a good school not in Kansas could rip him apart.
TS Greenie, we don’t need to comment on Haggard because we all know what he is. Dawkins, OTOH, always engenders discussion because he’s genuinely controversial as a charismatic and high-profile self-appointed spokesman for atheism.
@outeast
My mistake.
Is this the same Ted Hagard that got popped for homosexuality and drug use, and who visited President Bush regularly?
Vidar said:
“Dawkins is not trying to ‘kill religion’, he’s trying to make atheism socially acceptable.”
Yes, of course. All that stuff about God being a “pernicious delusion” isn’t intended as an attack on faith. Not at all.
Will,
you’re an idiot.
Im an atheist, and yes, I feel that Dawkins is being arrogant. One can be totally right, and totally wrong about the way of telling the truth
Will said:
“Yes, of course. All that stuff about God being a “pernicious delusion†isn’t intended as an attack on faith. Not at all.”
And the constant attacks from religious people since the day I was born telling me that me and my entire family will burn in an eternal lake of fire and that we will scream for mercy forever but God will ignore my cries isn’t an attack on my beliefs?
My beliefs are damned constantly by very powerful religious organizations. I could use the word “attacked” but I don’t really feel attacked, because it doesn’t hurt me or damage my beliefs.
The fundamentalists are so used to being coddled and patronized, that it comes as a huge surprise to them when someone actually has the nerve to speak openly about their own differing beliefs in a way that doesn’t sound like an adult talking to a child about Santa. Dawkins believes that gods are a pernicious delusion, and he says so in a way that makes no attempt to talk down to anyone. He communicates his beliefs as an adult speaking to other adults. He bypasses the baby-talk that we’ve had to use for so long in an effort to keep the fundamentalists from becoming upset or angry. Fundamentalists on the other hand, make no attempt to hide or even soften their deep hatred of us nonbelievers. They openly express their desire to see us die, burn in Hell, suffer, etc… They use TV, radio and whatever media they can to tell us that we’re evil and will be tormented eternally. Oddly this isn’t considered hate speak, and the idea that it could be seen as hateful is a surprise to the fundamentalists because they’ve been allowed for so long to damn anyone they want to damn.
Many religious people also very openly express that they believe science to be a pernicious delusion, and they even go to a lot of effort to try to change the laws so that their specific belief will be forcefully taught to children in science classes at school. Scientists have never made that much effort to have science and evolution taught in church or Sunday School because they know that science doesn’t belong in those places. Religious fundamentalists feel threatened and become defensive when anyone questions their claims or tries to keep them from changing laws and injecting their own personal belief systems into a diverse society that may not want it or believe it. They don’t seem to understand that the society they live in is filled with people who have many different beliefs, religious and non-religious.
Unfortunately when someone like Dawkins states his opinion just as openly (though not nearly as constantly or as loudly as many religions do), the religious community jumps on him, claiming that he’s arrogant and that he’s trying to “kill” their mythology. They seem to feel that he shouldn’t be allowed to express anything that doesn’t support their own personal beliefs. It always strikes me that these kinds of religious folks aren’t really all that convinced of their alleged beliefs if they feel their mythology can be toppled or even damaged by a man saying words. And the words that Dawkins uses aren’t nearly as damning, violent and condemning as the fundamentalist threats that pour down on the world I live in every day and night.
I am told constantly by organizations who have their rights protected and encouraged by our government that some of my friends are “abominations” who deserve to burn in agony for all eternity. They state that they believe certain human beings are less human than others and don’t deserve the same rights or freedoms as others because of something written (and perhaps misinterpreted) in an ancient book. Science organizations never make such official and sweeping claims about religious people, or try to create laws that force ministers and preachers and rabbis to teach evolution in their churches and temples. These tax-exempt religious organizations come to my door every weekend trying to sell me their horror stories, and they become indignant and defensive when I honestly answer their question, “Have you been saved by the blood of Jesus?” They tell me very directly that I’m wrong and damned because I don’t buy into their mythology. And then they send the heavy hitters back the next weekend. Usually an older man with a cute young girl. It is their “duty” to “save” me. If I wasn’t so sure of my own beliefs I guess I’d feel offended and threatened by this and I might even describe it as arrogance, but honestly it’s just an annoyance.
I don’t see scientists pushing their research papers under my door, sending their soldiers out to my home to try to convert me or setting up their research labs in every American neighborhood with signs out front proclaiming that if you don’t follow them you are evil, and will therefore die in pain and suffer the eternal, vengeful wrath of an infinitely powerful being who demands to be worshipped. A scientist has never told me that my friends are going to suffer for eternity if they don’t adopt the lifestyle, sexual orientation or attitudes toward women and minorities of the average scientist.
Religious people who are threatened by the beliefs of someone who doesn’t buy into their particular collection of ancient scriptures tend to see these beliefs as an “attack” on their mythology. They tend to see those with differing beliefs as arrogant. But they never see the arrogance or the insult that their own organized religion sends out into the world constantly. They never see their own rhetoric as a constant death threat to those with differing religious beliefs or the nonbelievers they share the world with.
Believe us or die an endless death in Hell. Live the way we live or you are evil and don’t deserve to be alive.
Scientists are too busy to make those kinds of threats.