This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.

← Britain being overtaken by 'militant secularists', says Baroness Warsi

Britain being overtaken by 'militant secularists', says Baroness Warsi - Comments

quarecuss's Avatar Comment 91 by quarecuss

The speech represents one of the most strident defences of the importance of religion by a serving British minister.

Well, well! For once "strident" is applied to faith pushers, not atheists. Given that it's in the Telegraph, I suppose that's an improvement.

Tue, 14 Feb 2012 19:32:39 UTC | #917821

Quiddam's Avatar Comment 92 by Quiddam

I guess those 'militant secularists' had better stop pelting her with eggs and accusing her of 'not being a proper Muslim woman'

Tue, 14 Feb 2012 21:34:19 UTC | #917847

woefulb's Avatar Comment 93 by woefulb

Militant secularism??? Oh, right- we're militantly for human rights, critical thinking, evidence-based decision-making and the like.

Who the hell do we think we are?!!

What a complete a**hole.

Tue, 14 Feb 2012 21:51:02 UTC | #917851

Corylus's Avatar Comment 94 by Corylus

A factcheck analysis of whether she is actually right.

Surprise! ... Um, No.

Tue, 14 Feb 2012 22:37:04 UTC | #917865

Dr. monster's Avatar Comment 95 by Dr. monster

how are we in any way millitant? that implys guns and stuff.

Tue, 14 Feb 2012 22:51:11 UTC | #917867

mattersoffact's Avatar Comment 96 by mattersoffact

One thing that really annoys me about all this is the disingeuous linking of 'secularism' with 'totalitarianism'. I don't think it is just ignorance. This tactic of guilt by (false) association is a propaganda device straigjht from the school of Dr Goebbels. It is of course a strategy which the Pope has deployed also. Given the experience of his youth, he is no doubt well qualified in that particular area.

Wed, 15 Feb 2012 00:28:12 UTC | #917897

AtheistEgbert's Avatar Comment 97 by AtheistEgbert

Comment 96 by mattersoffact :

One thing that really annoys me about all this is the disingeuous linking of 'secularism' with 'totalitarianism'. I don't think it is just ignorance. This tactic of guilt by (false) association is a propaganda device straigjht from the school of Dr Goebbels. It is of course a strategy which the Pope has deployed also. Given the experience of his youth, he is no doubt well qualified in that particular area.

This is exactly true, and it is why I'm extremely concerned about what direction our government/state is taking in deploying the fascist tactic of scapegoating and lying about the threat of liberal atheists who actually stand for authentic liberalism.

Wed, 15 Feb 2012 01:08:23 UTC | #917907

KRKBAB's Avatar Comment 98 by KRKBAB

Comment 95 by Dr. monster- "how are we in any way millitant? that implys guns and stuff."- now it's the trendy way to defame a group without actually having any content to the argument.

I proudly wear a sweatshirt (now, apparently called "hoodies"- non stop childish words invading society) that reads "Militant Atheist" sarcastically.

Wed, 15 Feb 2012 02:25:48 UTC | #917911

Schrodinger's Cat's Avatar Comment 99 by Schrodinger's Cat

Comment 96 by mattersoffact

One thing that really annoys me about all this is the disingeuous linking of 'secularism' with 'totalitarianism'. I don't think it is just ignorance. This tactic of guilt by (false) association is a propaganda device straigjht from the school of Dr Goebbels. It is of course a strategy which the Pope has deployed also. Given the experience of his youth, he is no doubt well qualified in that particular area.

It's the classic diversionary tactic. Warsi tries to take the focus off the hordes of demented fundamentalists in her own religion by attacking a harmless scapegoat. Just as Goebels did with the Jews.

Someone really needs to ask Warsi when's the last time 'militant atheists' murdered 52 people in cold blood on London transport. That might just shut the stupid woman up.

Wed, 15 Feb 2012 07:05:03 UTC | #917931

Alan4discussion's Avatar Comment 100 by Alan4discussion

Oooooooh! The "militant" secularists are using the law to stop religinuts high-jacking the agenda at public meetings!

What next? - "Militant" bouncers will be throwing gate-crashers out of parties and concerts when they refuse to leave!
Victimization!!!!!

Wed, 15 Feb 2012 09:27:31 UTC | #917948

William33's Avatar Comment 101 by William33

“But our conversation must also range more widely. I want the British government to consider with the Holy See how inter-religious dialogue – including that between Islam and Christianity - can be strengthened to prevent conflict and discrimination, guarantee respect.”

I found this qoute, maybe in a different article but certainly is an eye opener. It would appear but not surprisingly that Baroness Warsi seeks to protect Islam, even against justified criticism.

If your religion is correct, or even morally correct then we should be able to read and have a honest discussion about Islam Baroness Warsi. There should be nothing to stack the deck in your favour to guarantee respect.

If it is correct and true then Islam and the Qu'ran will win our respect. The problem is it is not true and horrific. You would need a lot of alcohol and a black marker in order to convince yourself that Islam or the Qu'ran has anything decent to offer.

Wed, 15 Feb 2012 09:46:03 UTC | #917957

ghost of numf-el's Avatar Comment 102 by ghost of numf-el

http://newsthump.com/2012/02/14/baroness-warsi-condemns-rise-in-militant-clear-thought-and-logic/

Wed, 15 Feb 2012 12:10:48 UTC | #917995

Rich Wiltshir's Avatar Comment 103 by Rich Wiltshir

Athiests don't alienate, torture, intimately mutilate, murder, lie, misrepresent, propagate ignorance to support their view, filter evidence, subdugate reason for bigotry, use dogma as a roadblock to health and welfare, encourage population growth...

Let's have a world full of 'militant atheists' where decisions are based on a growing pool of available facts, childhood joy and enquiry is encouraged, consequences are accepted as the result of events (no matter how beautifully random they are) and people treat each other with respect and courtesy that's not corrupted by mythological sectarianism.

And Warsi can cultivate her own versatiile psyche without the poison of religion...

Everything is beautiful, but religion would have you change it...

Wed, 15 Feb 2012 12:19:45 UTC | #917998

SaganTheCat's Avatar Comment 104 by SaganTheCat

I think the word "militant" is used by Warsi and her ilk because it implies the use of words, which to a god-botherer is like having a gun put to your head as forcing an individual to question their own presumptions can be viewed as a test of faith. fail one of those and you go to hell apparently. god's listening to how you respond and if you think you know wht the right answer is you're being presumptious which is asking for punishment.

theists have throughout history threatened torture and death to win their argument. secularists are threatening everyone with eternity of hell.

never mind these awful hymns about wearing armour and carrying swords, time to write one about a snug pair of earmuffs

meanwile, Mark Steel calls Poe:

link text

Wed, 15 Feb 2012 12:54:27 UTC | #918009

Odalrich's Avatar Comment 105 by Odalrich

It seems that religions have agreed to attack secularism using a common tactic: secularism leads to a totalitarian state. The Current Pope (Nazi Ratzi) has been preaching this discourse in recent years and it seems that Baroness Warsi (Muslim apologist) wants to join forces with the Pope using the same speech. These religions have a selective memory and forget that they have been part of the totalitarian ideas of the past (and present) by creating an ideological corpus used by many dictatorships. A secular state does not intend to ban religions but to guarantee the respect and freedom to the different religions and beliefs preventing any one of them from dominating the others. It is regrettable to see how some religions that despise each other join forces when they believe others can compete with them.

Wed, 15 Feb 2012 13:02:08 UTC | #918011

Canoli85's Avatar Comment 106 by Canoli85

This is truly disappointing. As an American Secularist, I am saddened by the Baroness' irresponsible use of her position to push a pro-religion agenda. Many of us in the USA see Britain as much closer to accepting secularism (and atheism) as legitimate, and we often feel oppressed by religious zealots (and bigots) like Rick Santorum and Mitt Romney, just to name a pair of ELECTED officials. Tread carefully, Britain: as America's condition shows, a state where elected officials must (de facto) declare themselves religious (or at least faithful) to be elected, intolerance of secularists and atheists is not only the accepted norm, but encouraged.

Wed, 15 Feb 2012 14:32:53 UTC | #918026

Alan4discussion's Avatar Comment 107 by Alan4discussion

Comment 101 by William33

“But our conversation must also range more widely. I want the British government to consider with the Holy See how inter-religious dialogue – including that between Islam and Christianity - can be strengthened to prevent conflict and discrimination, guarantee respect.”

It would appear but not surprisingly that Baroness Warsi seeks to protect Islam, even against justified criticism.

She was appointed as a multicultural gesture to "political correctness", to get a few "minority votes" from Muslims.

It is comical to think of an alliance of the faiths of Xtianity and Islam! as I illustrated @69

After they have agreed on demanding "respect" from atheists, the various sects can get back to fighting each other as usual! (As in Egypt, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Palestine etc.)

Wed, 15 Feb 2012 16:19:49 UTC | #918050

nancynancy's Avatar Comment 108 by nancynancy

As an American, I now understand why so many British people would like to abolish the monarchy. When an obnoxious, polarizing, political figure like "Lady" Warsi is made a baronesss and entitled to prance about in a coronet and coronation robes, the time has come to shut the farce down. The idea of lords and ladies is as much of a fairytale as the Flying Spaghetti Monster and the old man in the sky.

Wed, 15 Feb 2012 18:20:09 UTC | #918082

Matrix7's Avatar Comment 109 by Matrix7

Comment 13 by Ignorant Amos :

I'm recruiting for the New Militant Secular Army...sounds like an 80's new romantic pop group doesn't it?

Where do I sign up?

Wed, 15 Feb 2012 18:21:35 UTC | #918083

fubared's Avatar Comment 110 by fubared

The religion ship is sinking and all religions are now under pressure, let her rant and rave as that's all they ever seem to do these days. All we need now is a push to get scientists into government so we can finally start evolving into a global society that is more positive and productive.

Interesting times we live in ;)

Wed, 15 Feb 2012 18:42:44 UTC | #918093

blitz442's Avatar Comment 111 by blitz442

I have no idea what this woman has against secularism, assuming she understands what the word actually means.

Secularism allows for the flourishing of religion. Take a population of faithheads and impose a secular government on them, and you get a vast ecosystem of open and diverse religious beliefs. Look at the US; in many US towns, you can't throw a rock without hitting some type of church. You can preach pretty much whatever you want in those places. You can set up religious schools to indoctrinate your kids on whatever version of reality you prefer.

All that is asked in return for no government monitoring or interference is that religious institutions will not get any direct, tax-funded support from the government. The government will not favor your religion above all others. For a truly tolerant religious person, this should not be a problem.

If anything, secularism is often religion's greatest ally.

So what is her problem?

Wed, 15 Feb 2012 19:12:47 UTC | #918103

Richard Dawkins's Avatar Comment 112 by Richard Dawkins

Apologies if this has already been said here, but "Baroness" Warsi has no sensible qualifications for high office whatever. She has never won an election and never distinguished herself in any of the ways that normally lead to a peerage. All she has achieved in life is to FAIL to be elected a Member of Parliament, twice (on one occasion ignominiously bucking the swing towards her party). She was, nevertheless, elevated to the peerage and rather promptly put in the Cabinet and the Privy Council. The only reasonable explanation for her rapid elevation is tokenism. She is female, Muslim, and non-white – a bundle of three tokens in one, and therefore a precious rarity in her party. You might have suspected her lack of proper qualifications from the fatuous things she says, of which her speech in Rome is a prime example.

Richard

Wed, 15 Feb 2012 22:09:31 UTC | #918208

Steve Zara's Avatar Comment 113 by Steve Zara

comment 112 by Richard Dawkins

The only reasonable explanation for her rapid elevation is tokenism. She is female, Muslim, and non-white – a bundle of three tokens in one, and therefore a precious rarity in her party. You might have suspected her lack of proper qualifications from the fatuous things she says, of which her speech in Rome is a prime example.

The tokenism might just be excusable if the person you were elevating was at least competent. She isn't. She has always seemed to be out of her depth in broadcast discussions and interviews. She also has a history of messing up and then having to retract things she said.

I feel sorry for her. She has been promoted way over her ability.

Wed, 15 Feb 2012 22:19:08 UTC | #918214

Alan4discussion's Avatar Comment 114 by Alan4discussion

Britain being overtaken by 'militant secularists', says Baroness Warsi

Of course it isn't, but it would be overtaken by lamp-posts if the likes Warsi managed to drag it backwards.

Stick-in-the-muds who like to think they represent Britain, are always being overtaken by secularists. (and snails, tortoises and tectonic plates.)

Comment 113 by Steve Zara

I feel sorry for her. She has been promoted way over her ability.

So have many of the world's politicians. Hugely challenging jobs seem attractive to those to dim to understand what is involved, while the elite, establishment, puppeteers, are happy to have the rights of the population defended by those who are utterly useless!

Wed, 15 Feb 2012 22:19:15 UTC | #918215

Big Gus's Avatar Comment 115 by Big Gus

Comment 108 by nancynancy :

As an American, I now understand why so many British people would like to abolish the monarchy. When an obnoxious, polarizing, political figure like "Lady" Warsi is made a baronesss and entitled to prance about in a coronet and coronation robes, the time has come to shut the farce down. The idea of lords and ladies is as much of a fairytale as the Flying Spaghetti Monster and the old man in the sky.

The appointment has bugger all to do with the Queen. They are made by Politicians to hand out favours to cronies.

Wed, 15 Feb 2012 23:07:45 UTC | #918248

Cartomancer's Avatar Comment 116 by Cartomancer

The only reasonable explanation for her rapid elevation is tokenism. She is female, Muslim, and non-white – a bundle of three tokens in one, and therefore a precious rarity in her party.

If the demographics of the Tory party get any more skewed toward the straight, white, male, elderly, christian, rich and public school then she will probably be required to break her legs and marry another woman just to maintain balance.

Thu, 16 Feb 2012 00:16:04 UTC | #918283

danconquer's Avatar Comment 117 by danconquer

Comment 113 by Steve Zara :

The tokenism might just be excusable if the person you were elevating was at least competent. She isn't. She has always seemed to be out of her depth in broadcast discussions and interviews.

She is not the only one either! See for example the piss-poor performance of Sam Gyimah, one of a miniscule number of black Tories. I'm usually very hesitant to cry 'tokenism!' but it is a fact given that he too is only in Parliament having been parachuted into a safe seat via an emergency short-list specially designed for "non-traditional background" candidates.

He often gets fronted by the Conservatives in media debates concerning poverty and unemployment. The Tory spin-chiefs understand they look staggeringly out-of-touch whenever one of their silver-spoon Etonians appear in such debates so they obviously choose Gyimah purely because he doesn't fit the stereotypical bill. The idea is to try to 'short-circuit' that particular path of criticism. Ironically though, he attended one of the most elite boarding schools in Ghana - almost the equivalent of Eton infact! See him implode quite spectacularly here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-17038832 (listen carefully at 1.05 and he does, quite bizarrely, slip into the accent of the man to whom he is responding - what on earth is that about??!)

Anyway, on the subject of why religions are talking so much about the need for 'interfaith dialogue'. Think of a pair of warring child siblings fighting each other... As soon as Mummy walks in the room to tell them off, what do they do? They suddenly stop fighting and look angelic, uniting in the face of the common threat to them! Religions forge these alliances out of fearful necessity rather than desire. In India last year when the Supreme Court quashed the decrepit British laws against homosexuality, Muslims, Christians, Sikhs and Hindus all suddenly stopped baiting each other and clubbed together to declare the ruling "unacceptable", launching a joint challenge to the ruling. http://www.queerty.com/how-to-unite-indias-hindus-christians-muslims-sikhs-by-backing-the-re-criminalization-of-homosexuality-20100726/

Thu, 16 Feb 2012 10:44:02 UTC | #918424

Schrodinger's Cat's Avatar Comment 118 by Schrodinger's Cat

Comment 113 by Steve Zara

The tokenism might just be excusable if the person you were elevating was at least competent. She isn't. She has always seemed to be out of her depth in broadcast discussions and interviews. She also has a history of messing up and then having to retract things she said.

Tokenism is precisely why I am against positive discrimination.....as I feel that laws against negative discrimination ought to be sufficient to the task and should be made stronger if they aren't.

The best person for the job should get the job. Of course, one then runs the risk of the other issue that can arise.......that of, for example, a creationist getting a job as a teacher in evolution. But we cannot have it both ways. We either argue that the job criteria are all that matter, and anything else is discrimination, or we introduce an element of discriminatory ability into the law itself. Positive discrimination does not resolve this....it merely skirts round it.

People like Baroness Warsi end up in the positions they do precisely because of this dichotomy.

Thu, 16 Feb 2012 16:48:40 UTC | #918484

irate_atheist's Avatar Comment 119 by irate_atheist

Comment 113 by Steve Zara -

I feel sorry for her.

I don't. I've already used this year's quota of 'sympathy for wilfully deliberate idiots'.

Thu, 16 Feb 2012 16:58:52 UTC | #918487

irate_atheist's Avatar Comment 120 by irate_atheist

I think I'm getting harsh in my old age.

Splendid.

Thu, 16 Feb 2012 17:08:32 UTC | #918490