Should Richard Dawkins be arrested for incitement to religious hatred?
By [UPDATE - REPLY FROM CRANMER]
Added: Mon, 01 Feb 2010 00:00:00 UTC
Thanks to Grania for the link.
If you are unfamiliar with English history take a look at the Wikipedia entry for Archbishop Cranmer. Basically the archbishop who legitimized the break by Henry the VIII with the Roman Catholic church. Later tried and executed for treason and heresy by Mary I who was catholic. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Cranmer
âAnd the Lord said unto Satan, Hast thou considered my servant Dawkins, that there is none like him upon the earth, a perfect and upright man, one that obsesseth ad nauseam about the non-existence of God, and escheweth all reason?â
With apologies to Job, is there a man on earth more obsessed with establishing beyond doubt the non-existence of that which does not exist than Professor Richard Dawkins?
Cranmer was asked during the week to fisk/respond to Professor Dawkinsâ rant in The Times, but it is hardly worth it. He displays a sub-GCSE level of comprehension of theology and an utterly simplistic caricature of religious philosophy. If one were to critique evolutionary biology in such crass terms, Professor Dawkins would be the first to dismiss one as being an intellectually deficient ignoramus.
Yet it is a provocative piece of writing, inciteful even, for he appears to presume that the Revd. Pat Robertson is the archetypal Christian, and lauds him for his adherence to Christian orthodoxy.
What fate would befall Cranmer if he equated all Muslims with the âobnoxiousâ Osama Bin Laden?
What persecution and injustice would he endure of he criticised the Qurâan; parodied the ânauseatingâ and âbarbaricâ teachings which emanated from the ânasty human mindâ of Mohammed; or said the âentire religion is founded on an obsessionâ with killing the infidel? What if he mocked the âmoral depravityâ of the âbe-frocked and bleatingâ imams; lampooned the âodious doctrineâ of Allah; or denigrated the sincerely-held beliefs of the âfaux-anguished hypocritesâ who constitute the ummah?
Might he find himself in court, like Geert Wilders, accused of inciting hatred for daring to articulate a religious opinion?
A reply from "Cranmer" on Richard's post.
A response to Richard Dawkins
Cranmer has been accused of all manner of nasty and hurtful things by the loyal disciples of Professor Richard Dawkins; even of rabid censorship on the grounds that so many of the contributions on the previous Dawkins post were âsupportiveâ of His Graceâs position.
No contributions have been censored (other than one anonymous two-liner of foul language), but doubtless the false allegation and numerous accusations of cowardice and ineptitude give them a superior degree of self-satisfied comfort.
Even the Professor himself appears to have expected that his letter might be censored.
Not upon this blog anyway, which appears is fast-becoming the last bastion of unfettered religio-political speech in the United Kingdom.
Professor Dawkinsâ letter appears to be genuine, for he himself has said so. He will have to forgive His Grace for his doubting cynicism: when the White House emailed His Grace Ã propos of nothing, it took him a little while to realise that it was genuine; after all, Lambeth Palace has never bothered to write, and neither has Her Majesty's Leader of the Oppposition, let alone Number 10. So one might understand and excuse a little skepiticism when someone visits who purports to be the eminent and distinguished Richard Dawkins.
But the good Professor has been timing His Grace on the passing hours it has taken to respond (which is a little unfair, for His Grace does not have an abundantly-funded foundation behind him). Cranmer is content to respond to the Professor's series of comments and questions thus:
Chris Chambers and Petroc Sumner -... Comments
Science has an uneasy relationship with journalism, so what can be done by both sides to improve coverage
Will Self - BBC News Magazine 100 Comments
We chase "fast culture" at our peril - unusual words and difficult art are good for us, says Will Self.
Annie Murphy Paul - New York Times 26 Comments
New support for the value of fiction is arriving from an unexpected quarter: neuroscience.
Nick Cohen - The Spectator 40 Comments
If you turn on the news tonight and hear of a bomber slaughtering civilians anywhere from Nigeria to the London Underground, I can reassure you of one point: the bombers will not be readers of Richard Dawkins.
Amol Rajan - The Independent 39 Comments
Their assault illustrates the extent to which defenders of religion still dominate our press, the brutal retaliation exacted on clever opponents of faith and the incorrigible stupidity of Sayeeda Warsi's claim about "militant secularism" last week.
Richard Dawkins - RichardDawkins.net 341 Comments
I can’t help wondering at the quality of journalism which sees a scoop in attacking a man for what his five-greats grandfather did.