Print
The empty myths peddled by evangelists of unbelief
by Sydney Morning Herald
Thanks to Sven for the link.
Reposted from:
http://www.smh.com.au/news/opinion/the-empty-myths-peddled-by-evangelists-of-unbelief/2007/12/11/1197135459496.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap1
A new breed of missionaries is trying to convert the world. Evangelists of unbelief say religion is a relic left over from the past that stands in the way of human progress. Once the world is rid of religion, immemorial evils such as war and tyranny can be overcome, and humanity will be able to fashion a new life for itself better than any known in history.
Such is the creed of anti-religious missionaries such as Richard Dawkins.
But there is far more to religion than belief, and the most militant atheists display ways of thinking that are inherited from Christianity. In his book The Selfish Gene, Dawkins argues passionately for the Darwinian view that the human species is a product of natural selection: humans are "gene machines" programmed by evolution to replicate themselves. Yet in the same book he declares: "We, alone on Earth, can rebel against the tyranny of the selfish replicators." From where does Dawkins derive this faith in human freedom? Not from science. It comes from Christianity, which has always held that humans are different from all other animals in possessing free will.
In pre-Christian Europe history was seen in cyclical terms. War and peace, freedom and slavery came and went in a cyclical process not radically different from those that can be observed in the natural world. The idea of progress in society - of humanity advancing throughout history to higher levels of life - was unknown. This idea of progress is a post-Christian myth. Unlike in science, where knowledge that is gained today cannot easily be lost tomorrow, ethical advances that are made in one generation are often lost in the next. The prohibition of torture is one of the marks of a civilised country; but that prohibition has been fudged by the Bush Administration, which has refused to rule out water boarding - a form of torture used by the Inquisition and the Pol Pot regime, for example.
Again, the abolition of slavery in the 19th century was a major ethical advance. But slavery returned in the 20th century, when it was practised on a vast scale in Nazi Germany, Stalinist Russia and Mao's China, and at the start of the 21st it has re-appeared as trafficking in humans. These and other familiar evils can never be finally overcome. Continually reappearing under different labels, they have to be fought in every generation.
Like other myths, the idea of progress serves powerful emotional needs. Just as Christians feel themselves actors in a cosmic drama of sin and salvation, so secular humanists see themselves as players in an epic struggle for human progress.
As a sceptic I am struck not so much by how much religious faith and secular humanism differ but more by how much they have in common. Both are tissues of myth, serving a need for meaning rather than an interest in truth.
The chief difference is in the quality of the myths. Though they are not true or false in the way scientific theories are true or false, myths can be more or less truthful in reflecting the human situation. In this sense the Genesis story is a truthful myth. It tells us that knowledge need not give humanity life or freedom; it may only bring slavery and death. There is no prospect of a return to innocence - once the apple has been eaten from the tree of knowledge there is no going back. Modern secular thought contains nothing as profound as this ancient biblical story.
While the myths of religion express enduring human realities, the myths of secular humanism serve only to conceal them. It may be a dim sense of the unreality of their beliefs makes militant atheists so vehement and dogmatic.
One searches in vain in the company of militant unbelievers for signs of the creative doubt that has energised many religious thinkers. While theologians have interrogated their beliefs for millennia, secular humanists have yet to question their simple creed. Evangelical atheism is the mirror image of the faith it attacks - without that faith's redeeming doubts.
John Gray is the author of Black Mass: Apocalyptic Religion and the Death of Utopia (Doubleday Canada).
Reposted from:
http://www.smh.com.au/news/opinion/the-empty-myths-peddled-by-evangelists-of-unbelief/2007/12/11/1197135459496.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap1
A new breed of missionaries is trying to convert the world. Evangelists of unbelief say religion is a relic left over from the past that stands in the way of human progress. Once the world is rid of religion, immemorial evils such as war and tyranny can be overcome, and humanity will be able to fashion a new life for itself better than any known in history.
Such is the creed of anti-religious missionaries such as Richard Dawkins.
But there is far more to religion than belief, and the most militant atheists display ways of thinking that are inherited from Christianity. In his book The Selfish Gene, Dawkins argues passionately for the Darwinian view that the human species is a product of natural selection: humans are "gene machines" programmed by evolution to replicate themselves. Yet in the same book he declares: "We, alone on Earth, can rebel against the tyranny of the selfish replicators." From where does Dawkins derive this faith in human freedom? Not from science. It comes from Christianity, which has always held that humans are different from all other animals in possessing free will.
In pre-Christian Europe history was seen in cyclical terms. War and peace, freedom and slavery came and went in a cyclical process not radically different from those that can be observed in the natural world. The idea of progress in society - of humanity advancing throughout history to higher levels of life - was unknown. This idea of progress is a post-Christian myth. Unlike in science, where knowledge that is gained today cannot easily be lost tomorrow, ethical advances that are made in one generation are often lost in the next. The prohibition of torture is one of the marks of a civilised country; but that prohibition has been fudged by the Bush Administration, which has refused to rule out water boarding - a form of torture used by the Inquisition and the Pol Pot regime, for example.
Again, the abolition of slavery in the 19th century was a major ethical advance. But slavery returned in the 20th century, when it was practised on a vast scale in Nazi Germany, Stalinist Russia and Mao's China, and at the start of the 21st it has re-appeared as trafficking in humans. These and other familiar evils can never be finally overcome. Continually reappearing under different labels, they have to be fought in every generation.
Like other myths, the idea of progress serves powerful emotional needs. Just as Christians feel themselves actors in a cosmic drama of sin and salvation, so secular humanists see themselves as players in an epic struggle for human progress.
As a sceptic I am struck not so much by how much religious faith and secular humanism differ but more by how much they have in common. Both are tissues of myth, serving a need for meaning rather than an interest in truth.
The chief difference is in the quality of the myths. Though they are not true or false in the way scientific theories are true or false, myths can be more or less truthful in reflecting the human situation. In this sense the Genesis story is a truthful myth. It tells us that knowledge need not give humanity life or freedom; it may only bring slavery and death. There is no prospect of a return to innocence - once the apple has been eaten from the tree of knowledge there is no going back. Modern secular thought contains nothing as profound as this ancient biblical story.
While the myths of religion express enduring human realities, the myths of secular humanism serve only to conceal them. It may be a dim sense of the unreality of their beliefs makes militant atheists so vehement and dogmatic.
One searches in vain in the company of militant unbelievers for signs of the creative doubt that has energised many religious thinkers. While theologians have interrogated their beliefs for millennia, secular humanists have yet to question their simple creed. Evangelical atheism is the mirror image of the faith it attacks - without that faith's redeeming doubts.
John Gray is the author of Black Mass: Apocalyptic Religion and the Death of Utopia (Doubleday Canada).
Add to del.icio.us
Posted: Tuesday, December 11, 2007 | PermalinkComments 1 - 50 of 87 |
Reload Comments | Back to Top | Page Numbers2. Comment #97046 by sidfaiwu on December 11, 2007 at 10:39 am
The idea of progress in society - of humanity advancing throughout history to higher levels of life - was unknown. This idea of progress is a post-Christian myth.
How can any cosmology that begins with Eden and ends with Armageddon be considered progressive?
Other Comments by sidfaiwu
3. Comment #97047 by SomeDanGuy on December 11, 2007 at 10:41 am
I have to wonder if posting and reading the constant stream of inanity and illogical 'arguments' from various religion-supporters is going to cause long-term damage to our brains.Other Comments by SomeDanGuy
4. Comment #97048 by Arcturus on December 11, 2007 at 10:42 am
"The chief difference is in the quality of the myths. Though they are not true or false in the way scientific theories are true or false, myths can be more or less truthful in reflecting the human situation. In this sense the Genesis story is a truthful myth. It tells us that knowledge need not give humanity life or freedom; it may only bring slavery and death. There is no prospect of a return to innocence - once the apple has been eaten from the tree of knowledge there is no going back. Modern secular thought contains nothing as profound as this ancient biblical story."HAHAHAHA REALLY FUNNY!
Just read "His Dark Materials", the story is much better than the Bible :))
Other Comments by Arcturus
5. Comment #97050 by Rtambree on December 11, 2007 at 10:44 am
We can see a taxonomy of these standard responses from so-called "intellectuals" - very predictable, superficial and misinformed. Dawkins has addressed the first wave of responses in the prelude to the paperback edition of The God Delusion.Perhaps it's just newspaper editors trying to generate debate by being "balanced" and giving these articles exposure that they normally wouldn't deserve.
Other Comments by Rtambree
6. Comment #97051 by JFHalsey on December 11, 2007 at 10:44 am
I can't even read articles like this any more.It's like when I try to tell my 2-yr old daughter, "No, you can't wear a skirt outside, it's too cold," and she just shakes her head vigorously and says, "No it isn't!" over and over again. I give up!
Other Comments by JFHalsey
7. Comment #97052 by jakelovatto on December 11, 2007 at 10:49 am
Dawkins deals with this in the endnotes to the Selfish Gene.If anyone wants to read the quote, its the end paragraph to chapter 11- Memes: the new replicators.
Other Comments by jakelovatto
8. Comment #97053 by crazy4blues on December 11, 2007 at 10:50 am
This guy makes D'Souza sound positively professorial! Seriously, this is like a really bad freshman essay that assistants have to suffer trough while doing Eng 101. Frankly, I'd have more respect for a top-shelf Liberty U. student than this simpleton! Other Comments by crazy4blues
9. Comment #97054 by Quetzalcoatl on December 11, 2007 at 10:51 am
But there is far more to religion than belief
Say what?
Other Comments by Quetzalcoatl
10. Comment #97055 by Rtambree on December 11, 2007 at 10:52 am
"While theologians have interrogated their beliefs for millennia, secular humanists have yet to question their simple creed. Evangelical atheism is the mirror image of the faith it attacks - without that faith's redeeming doubts."An amazing display of cognitive gymnastics! Up is down, left is right, black is white.
Other Comments by Rtambree
11. Comment #97059 by phasmagigas on December 11, 2007 at 10:54 am
anybody want to join me in deepest peru to convert a few natives to atheism?? Other Comments by phasmagigas
12. Comment #97060 by Don_Quix on December 11, 2007 at 10:55 am
As a sceptic(spoken in Church Lady voice)
A skeptic of what I wonder? ...hmmmmm.....
Could it be...
EVOLUTION!
While theologians have interrogated their beliefs for millennia, secular humanists have yet to question their simple creed. Evangelical atheism is the mirror image of the faith it attacks - without that faith's redeeming doubts.Again, always equating atheism with secular humanism. I guess going by his logic that makes Stalin a secular humanist.
Does. Not. Follow.
Other Comments by Don_Quix
13. Comment #97061 by jeepyjay on December 11, 2007 at 10:56 am
One searches in vain in the company of militant unbelievers for signs of the creative doubt that has energised many religious thinkers. While theologians have interrogated their beliefs for millennia, secular humanists have yet to question their simple creed. Evangelical atheism is the mirror image of the faith it attacks - without that faith's redeeming doubts.
On the contrary "creative doubt" could be one way of describing scientific method, which is the basis for secular humanism.
To describe secular humanism as some sort of blind faith in progress is just a straw man. No humanists I know believe in the inevitability of progress:- who could after the history of the 20th century.
These and other familiar evils can never be finally overcome. Continually reappearing under different labels, they have to be fought in every generation.
Secular humanists are only too well aware of this. The old gains have to be continually struggled for. It's a form of entropy:- without continual action of reasonable men and women, unreason and disorder will return supreme.
Other Comments by jeepyjay
14. Comment #97062 by Arcturus on December 11, 2007 at 10:56 am
He should watch the talks from "Beyond Belief 2", they talk a lot about these issues. Other Comments by Arcturus
15. Comment #97063 by BMMcArdle on December 11, 2007 at 10:59 am
I didn't tell a lie, I told a 'truthful myth'!Other Comments by BMMcArdle
16. Comment #97064 by drl2 on December 11, 2007 at 10:59 am
"In this sense the Genesis story is a truthful myth. It tells us that knowledge need not give humanity life or freedom; it may only bring slavery and death. There is no prospect of a return to innocence - once the apple has been eaten from the tree of knowledge there is no going back."What I get from the Genesis story is "Knowledge and reason = bad. Stay stupid."
"Modern secular thought contains nothing as profound as this ancient biblical story."
If by "profound" you mean condescending, irrational, inconsistent, and often just plain malignant, then I'm in full agreement. I can think of nothing in secular thought that comes close to
For real profundity, a glance up at the sky on a clear night, coupled with a layman's understanding of the sheer size and scope and awe and mystery of what's out there, is an experience that would only be cheapened by slapping on a "GOD DID IT" sticker.
Other Comments by drl2
17. Comment #97069 by notsobad on December 11, 2007 at 11:06 am
"militant unbelievers"And what about the militant moustache-weavers?
From where does Dawkins derive this faith in human freedom? Not from science. It comes from Christianity, which has always held that humans are different from all other animals in possessing free will.
What's next? Are they gonna tell us Jesus invented democracy? Or that Greeks were Christians?
Other Comments by notsobad
18. Comment #97070 by Theocrapcy on December 11, 2007 at 11:06 am
Wow, can you distill so much crap into one short anti-atheist rant? Did he miss anything? Other Comments by Theocrapcy
19. Comment #97072 by Spinoza on December 11, 2007 at 11:08 am
Err... well... it is certainly true that there is more to "religion" than belief... Any atheist who denies that is lying to themselves... or is just an idiot...One of the reasons religions are so pervasive is that they encompass culture and nationalism and law AS WELL AS resting on a foundation of supernaturalism.
But that foundation is not the religion itself, that foundation is God-belief (or theism).
We atheists need to quit making the same error the religious are making.
When we criticize RELIGION, we need to focus only on religion. When we criticize god-belief/theism, we can safely ignore religion and abstract away from it.
They are two separate issues.
Other than that though, this article is quite stupid.
Other Comments by Spinoza
20. Comment #97074 by Theocrapcy on December 11, 2007 at 11:10 am
"A new breed of missionaries is trying to convert the world. Evangelists of unbelief..."See what I mean, they always wheel out the "you're just as bad as us, so there" argument. Every single time.
Other Comments by Theocrapcy
21. Comment #97075 by Rational Thinking on December 11, 2007 at 11:10 am
Has he actually read the Selfish Gene? If he has read it, I have my doubts about whether he understood it.The article is just plain dreadful. Then again, having glanced at the synopsis of the book he has written, that sounds dreadful too. Methinks a mutant flea arises ...
Other Comments by Rational Thinking
22. Comment #97079 by Quine on December 11, 2007 at 11:19 am
Truthiness in Genesis, isn't that Steven Colbert's territory? Other Comments by Quine
23. Comment #97081 by PJG on December 11, 2007 at 11:23 am
dr12 What I get from the Genesis story is "Knowledge and reason = bad. Stay stupid."
What I get from Genesis (apart from a good laugh) is that, by his own admission, God is a liar... so why would anyone:
a) believe a word he says?
b) take moral guidance from him?
c) worship him?
God told Adam that if he ate of the fruit of the tree of knowledge, he (Adam) would die (on that day). The serpent told Eve that this was not true. Eve believed the serpent and ate, and gave some to Adam, and they didn't die but, as the (honest) serpent had told them, they gained knowledge of good and evil.
Then God punishes them (basically because he got found out!) The serpent was also punished, presumably for ratting on God the Liar.
Other Comments by PJG
24. Comment #97082 by HumanisticJones on December 11, 2007 at 11:25 am
In his book The Selfish Gene, Dawkins argues passionately for the Darwinian view that the human species is a product of natural selection: humans are "gene machines" programmed by evolution to replicate themselves. Yet in the same book he declares: "We, alone on Earth, can rebel against the tyranny of the selfish replicators." From where does Dawkins derive this faith in human freedom?
I'd have to say observational evidence. Behold my central heating and air and constructed shelter removing the need for me to be selected for or against based on my ability to adapt to the heat and cold. Marvel upon out contraceptive devices that allow humans to enjoy sexual intercourse with no reproduction or swapping of genetic material. Stand in awe of hair dyes, colored contacts, botox, face lifts, plastic surgery and cosmetic devices that allow us to alter our phenotype to ones more visually appealing than our own.
It's nothing to do with some intrinsic privilege that we can do it, its that our evolutionary branch happened to angle towards tool building, society constructing, language development, and environment tuning. No longer do our genes have to tune us to the environment, we now tune the environment to our genes. When another species on the planet demonstrates a persistent ability to do the same, I'm certain that Prof. Dawkins would revise that line to read "Only two rare specimens, humans and *species here*, can rebel against the tyranny of the selfish replicators." After all, scientist gladly correct old mistakes, unlike religion that would have us believe that people 2000 years ago never got anything wrong about human nature and how the universe works.
Other Comments by HumanisticJones
25. Comment #97083 by sidfaiwu on December 11, 2007 at 11:28 am
Hello HumanisticJones! I haven't seen you around in quite a while. Great comment, by the way. Other Comments by sidfaiwu
26. Comment #97084 by JemyM on December 11, 2007 at 11:28 am
"Let's keep this bad ideology because other bad ideologies which we have already abolished were just as bad". Other Comments by JemyM
27. Comment #97085 by Jack Rawlinson on December 11, 2007 at 11:34 am
From where does Dawkins derive this faith in human freedom? Not from science. It comes from Christianity, which has always held that humans are different from all other animals in possessing free will.Okay, that's a whole new level of stupid. That's double-concentrated stupid to the power of ten.That's a level of stupid several kilometres below whale shit.
This... utter IMBECILE... seriously thinks that:
a) Humans are the only animals that possess free will?
b) Christianity is the only belief or philosophy that accepts free will?
Dawkins derives his "faith" in human freedom the same place most of us do: simple observation of how humans actually behave.
This writer displays a level of unintelligence which leaves me gasping for air.
Other Comments by Jack Rawlinson
28. Comment #97087 by Gymnopedie on December 11, 2007 at 11:43 am
Hilarious. Sad.Other Comments by Gymnopedie
29. Comment #97095 by BicycleRepairMan on December 11, 2007 at 11:56 am
Looks like we are back to square one again, Dawkins does something public (an interview on Have Your Say) and the same nonsense comes back once again, "Hitler/Stalin/Mao", this time from a Fox news house-priest, and now "Atheism is also a religion" from this nutter.Seriously folks, you just HAVE to do better than this. Please, for the love of Goodness, atleast TRY to come up with a good argument in support of Gods existence, just one. Infact, forget "good" , just an argument.
This is just getting boring.
Other Comments by BicycleRepairMan
30. Comment #97097 by 3legcat on December 11, 2007 at 12:00 pm
i just scan for stalin nowcrimini
Other Comments by 3legcat
31. Comment #97098 by Rtambree on December 11, 2007 at 12:08 pm
Four responses to "Stalin was an atheist..."1. There's no plausible logical path from "I don't have any evidence of God" to "Send all my political enemies to the Gulag"
2. The last time when Christianity had complete totalitarian control over every aspect of life (i.e. the Dark Ages), Europe was regressing in every field. Even Islam was more enlightened 1,000 years ago. Europe only began to pull ahead when the influence of religion waned.
3. Christian USA is behind non-Christian Europe across an entire range of social indices: longevity, literacy, foreign aid, egalitarianism, political participation of women, etc. The less you believe in Jesus, the more you follow Him.
4. Political ideologies are secular religions. Whether it's left-marxism or right-fascism, they have all the trappings of religions: sacred symbols such as flags and holy texts such as manifestos, the promise of a future utopia if you obey and subjugate yourself to the cause, prophets to be revered, aversion to empirical evidence, the elevation of an abstract ideal above the individual, and the consolidation and perpetuation of centralised power.
Other Comments by Rtambree
32. Comment #97100 by GodlessHeathen on December 11, 2007 at 12:10 pm
An open letter to religion's apologists, especially those claiming to be skeptical;Get some new material. Read up on the common (read: Ubiquitous) arguments that have been quite thoroughly rent asunder so often as to make the whole debate tedious and dreary. I suggest a site like "Iron Chariots".
If you have something to offer that's not already been examined to tiny bits, I assure you everyone is eager beyond description to hear it.
Otherwise do please stuff a sock in it.
Signed, seriously tired of the same old dreck.
Other Comments by GodlessHeathen
33. Comment #97103 by konquererz on December 11, 2007 at 12:24 pm
"It comes from Christianity, which has always held that humans are different from all other animals in possessing free will."My answer to my son:
Don't stand to close billy, you'll catch his stupid.
Other Comments by konquererz
34. Comment #97107 by onclepsycho on December 11, 2007 at 12:42 pm
Oh! the profoundness of Genesis... I-D-I-O-TOk, can anyone tell me if this John Gray is the John Gray who wrote "Men are from Mars, women are from Venus"?
Other Comments by onclepsycho
35. Comment #97108 by jimbob on December 11, 2007 at 12:45 pm
One of the "four horsemen" needs to satirize this sort of view. I.e, write the script for such articles in a way that reveals the cliches, the straw men, and the lies.Kind of "how the be a flea" manual?
Other Comments by jimbob
36. Comment #97111 by Elcristoph on December 11, 2007 at 12:53 pm
These articles are just getting boring, same old arguments, even in debates the only reason people like D'souza win is because they can shout and wave there arms......either come up with a new argument or just leave it...
Chris
Other Comments by Elcristoph
37. Comment #97114 by whig on December 11, 2007 at 12:55 pm
I got a copy of Gray's Straw Dogs for Christmas last year, and of all the critics of liberalism I've read of late, I find him the most vile and insidious (and I read Ann Coulter's latest book recently). He has an odd way of looking at the descent of political thought, he really does seem to believe that modern liberalism is just Christianity without God, and follows on such religious lines.One of the things that I want to comment on in this article is what he says about myths, how the apple story is a good fable. Personally, I think it's one of the worst aspects of Christianity, for the reason given by PJG above and as Ford Prefect said, "if you're dealing with somebody who has the sort of mentality which likes leaving hats on the pavement with bricks under them you know perfectly well they won't give up". Further, the cursing of knowledge implicit in the this is, I believe, the root of most evil, encompassing as it does religion and other forms of unquestioning following of a leader.
But isn't the scientific creation story and cosmology much more compelling, to understand the vastness of time and space, and the sheer randomness that led to us being here today, that each of here today came from an unbroken line of successful ancestors. I don't know how he link progress and Christianity, given that in the first century Christians believed that the second coming was on its way, which was why there is such drivel in Jesus' teaching as "live not for the morrow".
Good old Grayling had a go at him recently in an article in the New Humanist.
Other Comments by whig
38. Comment #97115 by whig on December 11, 2007 at 12:57 pm
onclepsycho wrote:Ok, can anyone tell me if this John Gray is the John Gray who wrote "Men are from Mars, women are from Venus"?
No, see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Gray
Other Comments by whig
39. Comment #97117 by jimbob on December 11, 2007 at 1:02 pm
This notion of atheism, or secular humanism as just other kinds of religion, and having lots in common with religion is such a pain!I keep on thinking of the Fundamental Bill of Human Rights (http://www.un.org/Overview/rights.html) when this comes up. To me, the FBHR is akin to the US Constitution as a secular "We the people" kind of script.
A good question for writers such as John Gray is to ask how they would categorize the FBHR. Is it some sort of religious proclamation, or is it a secular statement of a moral code. If it's the latter, then how do most religions measure up to it?
In my opinion, such a comparison highlights how religion typically constitutes an obstacle to humanistic morality --- which is quite a contrast to the views the Pope expressed recently!
Other Comments by jimbob
40. Comment #97125 by Vaal on December 11, 2007 at 1:16 pm
Same as, same as. The usual rant. Funny how the same key words come up in these diatribes, "militant atheist", "militant unbelievers", "new breed of missionaries" etc etc...Please can we have somebody to engage us, to actually give us something to get our claws into, to make us think ... hmmm, maybe he is right? Is there an argument we have missed and any evidence of this supernatural being? So far, I haven't heard any of the flea's address with any conviction, a single one of the God delusions premises. All I see are hissy fits by the religiously demented, like a child in a playground whose toy has been stolen. I suspect that they realise they have been found out, and they DON'T have an answer, other than obscurantism, with a unhealthy dash of insult and misrepresentation, almost to the point of slander.
It is a bit tedious now, endlessly answering the same inane nonsense, there are enough straw men out there to make an army. Come on.. is THIS the best you have got? Challenge us, DON'T insult us!
Other Comments by Vaal
41. Comment #97130 by Don_Stubbs on December 11, 2007 at 1:21 pm
To 24. Comment #97082 by HumanisticJones on December 11, 2007 at 11:25 am"....contraceptive devices that allow humans to enjoy sexual intercourse with no reproduction or swapping of genetic material....."
I always thought that swapping bodily fluids was part of the fun!!!!
Other Comments by Don_Stubbs
42. Comment #97136 by Diacanu on December 11, 2007 at 1:27 pm
I'm increasingly comforted that the religionists not only don't have anything new, but present it so shoddily.All the easier to lazily pick off their little stationary bullshit piles with our tommy guns.
If you ever feel guilty or bored, keep reminding yourself, if they had the power they used to they would have fuckin' burned you.
And keep reminding yourself, they want that power back.
Other Comments by Diacanu
43. Comment #97140 by J.C. Samuelson on December 11, 2007 at 1:40 pm
I think Quetz said it best:Say WHAT???
Other Comments by J.C. Samuelson
44. Comment #97148 by cowalker on December 11, 2007 at 2:00 pm
It may be a dim sense of the unreality of their beliefs makes militant atheists so vehement and dogmatic.
Or it might be seeing religious fanatics bring down the Twin Towers, killing thousands and providing Bush with the perfect excuse for an everlasting "War on Terror." Or it might be reading polls that say an atheist can never be elected to a high office in the U.S. Or it might be witnessing a set of events like the Terry Schiavo obstructionism, or seeing the anti-choice brigade outside Planned Parenthood every day. Or perhaps it's seeing the teen pregnancy rate in the U.S. beginning to rise after six years of exhortations to abstinence instead of sex education. Or maybe it's hearing that gays must be denied the right to marry because that's how God wants it. Or maybe it's seeing mobs demanding that a British teacher be put to death for allowing her students to name a teddy bear "Muhammed." Or maybe it's the endless slaughter of non-Muslims in Africa. Perhaps it's seeing embassies attacked over some lame cartoons of Muhammed.
Has the author considered whether any of these things might get us a little hot under the collar?
Other Comments by cowalker
45. Comment #97150 by Diacanu on December 11, 2007 at 2:04 pm
I'm trying to imagine WTF an "evangelist for unbelief", would look like.All I can picture is a guy with a crunchy white pompadour, painfully white capped teeth, and a baby blue suit running up and down the stage with a leather bound copy of TGD in one hand, while a choir of black chicks shout "test-i-fyyy!! test-i-fyyy!!!".
Other Comments by Diacanu
46. Comment #97153 by SilentMike on December 11, 2007 at 2:08 pm
So the worst thing that christians can think of to say about atheists critical of religion is that they're like christians?Yes, this is false. But aside from that you have to apreciate the irony.
Other Comments by SilentMike
47. Comment #97155 by aquilacane on December 11, 2007 at 2:13 pm
I made it all the way to: "From where does Dawkins derive this faith in human freedom? Not from science. It comes from Christianity"
then I had to give up.
Give me a break
Other Comments by aquilacane
48. Comment #97157 by Godless Heathen on December 11, 2007 at 2:15 pm
Q. What does this John Gray have in common with a constipated horse's rectum?A. They're both full of shit.
Other Comments by Godless Heathen
49. Comment #97159 by Inferno on December 11, 2007 at 2:17 pm
Once the world is rid of religion, immemorial evils such as war and tyranny can be overcome, and humanity will be able to fashion a new life for itself better than any known in history.
Oh come on! Well has Dawkins, Hitchens or Harris ever said that the golden age will come after the destruction of religion? From the first paragraph this guy shows his complete lack of understanding of what the atheist cause is all about.
At least this article can't get any worse....
From where does Dawkins derive this faith in human freedom? Not from science. It comes from Christianity, which has always held that humans are different from all other animals in possessing free will.
Oh. My. Space fairy.
It's not even worth finishing my response to this tripe.
Other Comments by Inferno
50. Comment #97160 by Corylus on December 11, 2007 at 2:17 pm
Sigh.John Gray. He has been spouting this drivel for a while. As Whig rightly pointed out his book Straw Dogs (a critique of humanism) is somewhat irritating (to say the least)
He says that he doesn't like postmodernism but spews out the passe Foucault type "where there is power there is resistance" arguments like nobody's business.
Atheism as a response to christianity. FFS!
Nihilistic, relativistic bollocks.
N.B. He is not a theist: just a f&*kwit.
Other Comments by Corylus
Upcoming Events:
About this site
Mailing List Signup: Enter your email
Go to The Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science
Richard Dawkins Articles | Comments | Tour Journal
Atheist Resources | Local Groups
Debate Points | Latest Responses
Links:
Quotes of Note:
"It is an article of passionate faith among "politically correct" biologists and anthropologists that brain size has no connection with intelligence; that intelligence has nothing to do with genes; and that genes are probably nasty fascist things anyway."
Richard Dawkins
"When I think of all the harm the Bible has done, I despair of ever writing anything to equal it."
Oscar Wilde
"Leon Lederman, the physicist and Nobel laureate, once half-jokingly remarked that the real goal of physics was to come up with an equation that could explain the universe but still be small enough to fit on a T-shirt. In that spirit, Dawkins offered up his own T-shirt slogan for the ongoing evolution revolution:
Life results from the non-random survival of randomly varying replicators."
Richard Dawkins
"A universe with a God would look quite different from a universe without one. A physics, a biology where there is a God is bound to look different."
Richard Dawkins
"There may be fairies at the bottom of the garden. There is no evidence for it, but you can't prove that there aren't any, so shouldn't we be agnostic with respect to fairies?"
Richard Dawkins
Other Recommended Reading
The Secular Conscience
Austin Dacey
Read the 1st Chapter!
Infidel
Ayaan Hirsi Ali
Evolution: What the Fossils Say and Why It Matters
Donald R. Prothero
Your Inner Fish
Neil Shubin
The End of Faith
Sam Harris
More Books
Adjust font size: 
"If this book doesn't change the world -- we're all screwed."
-Penn (Penn & Teller)
The God Delusion
by Richard Dawkins
Over 1.5 million copies sold
DVDs
'Break the Science Barrier' DVD
'The Four Horsemen' DVD
'AAI 2007 Conference' DVD
'Root of All Evil? The Original Program' DVD
'Root of All Evil? The Uncut Interviews' DVD
'Growing Up in the Universe' DVD
Books by Richard Dawkins
The Oxford Book of Modern Science Writing
by Richard Dawkins
The Ancestor's Tale
by Richard Dawkins
The Selfish Gene
by Richard Dawkins
The Blind Watchmaker
by Richard Dawkins
Unweaving the Rainbow
by Richard Dawkins
1. Comment #97045 by toddaa on December 11, 2007 at 10:38 am
How stupid is it? You can actually smell the stupid.Other Comments by toddaa