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

← A Revolutionary Idea

A Revolutionary Idea - Comments

Neodarwinian's Avatar Comment 1 by Neodarwinian

Santorum may shake the tree of secularism, but the roots can run too deep for any one theocrat to do much with his shaking. At least one hopes so.

Mon, 27 Feb 2012 22:11:26 UTC | #922574

Daryl 's Avatar Comment 2 by Daryl

The Puritans were essentially persona non grata in England because of the very intolerance they practiced. They were generally too miserable to have around. Anyone who has driven on the Hutchinson River Parkway in New York State should look up it's namesake, Anne Hutchinson, who was miserably persecuted by those same City on a Hill Puritans who seem to live these days to legislate shoving trans vaginal ultrasound probes up unwilling women. As Santorum goes more and more off the deep end, he must be seeing all sorts of polls showing how he's really playing, and needs to really stand out. Or as Bill Maher would say, "The Puritans were batshit crazy and so is Santorum."

Mon, 27 Feb 2012 22:13:33 UTC | #922576

Sara25's Avatar Comment 3 by Sara25

I always hate it when people talk (in forums, on TV shows and such) about how America was founded on religious freedom, and then stupidly point to the Puritans as their prime example. People need to be reminded - or taught in the first place - about Roger WIlliams versus the Puritans.

Mon, 27 Feb 2012 22:18:45 UTC | #922579

rjohn19's Avatar Comment 4 by rjohn19

We got your Puritans and the Aussies got your criminals. Aussies must have won the coin toss and picked first.

Mon, 27 Feb 2012 22:37:28 UTC | #922584

Dave H's Avatar Comment 5 by Dave H

So Rhode Island was the first secular state in the west, then? Fascinating. Isn't that where the angry christian school mobs are giving Jessica Ahlquist such a hard time? Looks like they need a history lesson.

Mon, 27 Feb 2012 23:07:20 UTC | #922593

btheist's Avatar Comment 6 by btheist

I hope to hell (pardon the vernacular) we are not still debating this 200 years hence!

Mon, 27 Feb 2012 23:14:08 UTC | #922595

Sample's Avatar Comment 7 by Sample

An A+ article. Which means, I suppose, that someone else thinks it also deserves an F. I'd like to listen to that person's point of view.

Mike

Mon, 27 Feb 2012 23:55:46 UTC | #922600

Agrajag's Avatar Comment 8 by Agrajag

I must thank my good friend Clif, who called this article to my attention. After watching Sanitarium and his shit-eating grin on Meet the Press yesterday, I was pleased to be able to contribute to exposing his religious agenda.
Steve

Tue, 28 Feb 2012 02:35:52 UTC | #922635

Quine's Avatar Comment 9 by Quine

I saw John M. Barry talk about his book on a C-SPAN program and was very interested. Especially interesting is how the ideas of Roger Williams went through John Locke to get to Jefferson and Madison. Of course, some of those sectarian ideas were around back in the time of the Cyrus Cylinder. I plan to get Barry's book.

Tue, 28 Feb 2012 02:52:46 UTC | #922638

Mrkimbo's Avatar Comment 10 by Mrkimbo

Surely this idiot is so loony that not even Americans will elect him (he said pleadingly).

Tue, 28 Feb 2012 07:30:54 UTC | #922686

Metamag's Avatar Comment 11 by Metamag

Comment 4 by rjohn19 :

We got your Puritans and the Aussies got your criminals. Aussies must have won the coin toss and picked first.

To be fair, Aussies got the poor people, not criminals, since back then you basically had a caste system with unscrupulous usage of criminal system.

Tue, 28 Feb 2012 08:45:46 UTC | #922695

CEVA34's Avatar Comment 12 by CEVA34

This august publication needs better editing! In the third paragraph, they say "no less tolerant" when they mean "no more tolerant".

Tue, 28 Feb 2012 10:06:35 UTC | #922714

irate_atheist's Avatar Comment 13 by irate_atheist

More Wingnut than Wingthrop.

Tue, 28 Feb 2012 10:19:38 UTC | #922718

potteryshard's Avatar Comment 14 by potteryshard

I get a sense that much of Santorum's bellicose religiousity is less a result of a carefully thought-out credo than as an attempt at a justification for his selfish and self-adulant choice to bring seven children into an over-crowded resouced-limited world.

Tue, 28 Feb 2012 13:33:23 UTC | #922781

Tyler Durden's Avatar Comment 15 by Tyler Durden

Comment 14 by potteryshard :

I get a sense that much of Santorum's bellicose religiousity is less a result of a carefully thought-out credo than as an attempt at a justification for his selfish and self-adulant choice to bring seven children into an over-crowded resouced-limited world.

And then send two of them to college. But isn't higher education just for snobs?

Tue, 28 Feb 2012 13:46:23 UTC | #922786

Jonathan Dore's Avatar Comment 16 by Jonathan Dore

Comment 10 by Mrkimbo

Surely this idiot is so loony that not even Americans will elect him (he said pleadingly).

We used to think that. But then there was W.

Tue, 28 Feb 2012 14:16:05 UTC | #922800

crookedshoes's Avatar Comment 17 by crookedshoes

Rick Santorum is Sarah Palin. He has more brains; she has more balls.

Tue, 28 Feb 2012 18:42:22 UTC | #922858

cmb's Avatar Comment 18 by cmb

I take Nocera's idea, but his article seems to lack some nuance when it comes to Winthrop. I thought that Williams was considerably more fanatical in his personal religious views than Winthrop (e.g., he demanded complete separation from the Church of England and the abandonment of the Common Book of Prayer), while Winthrop was more of an accommodationist who tried to hold the Massachusetts Bay Colony together around a general set of shared principles, despite the efforts of extremists. In other words, Winthrop was generally regarded as a moderate voice within the MBC on most issues (perhaps Anne Hutchinson excepted) within the limits of what was generally accepted among believers of his time. I also thought that Winthrop continued to correspond with Williams after Williams left the MBC and seemed to regard him as sincere if somewhat misguided. I may be wrong, but placing Williams and Winthrop on opposite ends of the spectrum seems a bit misleading.

Tue, 28 Feb 2012 21:01:25 UTC | #922891

Odalrich's Avatar Comment 19 by Odalrich

Sometimes I think that most religious creeds that are victims of intolerance what they realy want is to settle in a place where they can practice their own intolerance. Anyway, I wouldn't trust a guy named Santorum. Atheorum would be better.

Wed, 29 Feb 2012 13:09:11 UTC | #923095

Philoctetes                                        's Avatar Comment 20 by Philoctetes

The orthodox view is that the puritans were fleeing to America to escape persecution. Another view; perhaps more accurate, is that they were going to America because it was becoming to difficult to practice their intolerance at home. They wanted to be free to persecute. I think Hitch elaborates in "God is not Great".

Wed, 29 Feb 2012 19:16:09 UTC | #923207