RDFRS US:
The mission of the Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science is to support scientific education, critical thinking and evidence-based understanding of the natural world in the quest to overcome religious fundamentalism, superstition, intolerance and suffering.
The Magic of Reality
for the iPad
Sean Faircloth:
Attack of the Theocrats!
PERSON
Let me tweak that statement of mine for a bit more accuracy.
âIt falsely assumes that everyone who believes in a deity is in fact not enjoying life and is instead worried.â
There is no evidence that indicates that theists by virtue of their belief in deities are not enjoying life and are in fact worried.
robotaholic
Evidenced by the likes of Brian Tamaki and Simon Fisher, the latter of which has a problem in that he appears to be in lock-step with Richard Dawkins.
alovrin
Yeah, well that personal bias is clouding your judgement and inhibiting your objectivity.
This is not a dialogue you people want; rather you want to start war. You canât figure out why it is that people believe in things for which there is no evidence, like deities and the supernatural, so rather than trying to comprehend it you just want to eliminate it. Simon Fisherâs own words were that he wants people to âquestion their own beliefsâ, and since the atheist campaign is targeted at theists what reason other than conversion to atheism could there possibly be for the adverts? It appears that you are irked by people believing things that you yourself canât believe, which is why youâre basically objecting to religion. Any reasonable person would turn the other cheek to different beliefs.
In the words of Thomas Jefferson:
âIt does me no injury if my neighbour chooses to believe in no god or twenty gods. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.â
How about the economy? It may slowly be improving but there is still a high unemployment rate. The recent problems with the NZ telecommunications sector are of legitimate concern. How about the growing number of attacks on police officers here? Even the recent spate of dog attacks and animal cruelty incidents are of pressing concern. Those are real issues that need to be addressed; religion in New Zealand is not. Like I said, the vast majority of Kiwis arenât fond of religion and politics mixing, so it is unlikely that we are going to ask our politicians to get involved with religious issues, which is justifiable really. If you desire church/state separation why would you want government getting involved in religious debates?
War. You said it yourself, you perceive there to be a conflict. Atheists are trying to set things up where it is an âUs vs. Themâ situation, one where people must necessarily take sides and fight. And youâre doing it as part of an unwarranted attempt to marginalise religion. It is not debate or conversation that atheists want, as there is no civility and respect in their statements; instead sentiments of the exact opposite effect are what they are expressing. Itâs pretty clear that what the New Atheists want is conflict or war. You necessarily view people who disagree with you as being your enemies, which is a view that I would think any reasonable person would want to avoid.
Are you even aware that fundamentalism is largely reactionary? The first fundamentalists emerged as a response to German Higher Criticism in the 19th century, and the Moral Majority and Religious Right originated from a perceived marginalisation of religion in America in the mid 20th century. Islamic fundamentalism in Iran originated out of grass-roots opposition to the Shahâs oppressive regime, and the fundamentalism that emerged from Sayyid Qutbâs writings was the product of disaffection with certain Islamic governments and Western involvement in the Middle East.
So Iâm the moron, despite the fact that you just misinterpreted what I said. There was no implication that atheism itself creates divisions and closed minds, rather what I said is that it is a certain type of âdebateâ that does that; a type of debate that atheists among others, are trying to perpetuate.
Based on your comments, it wouldnât be so easy for you. Although chances are you would probably end up significantly changing your beliefs if you were to ever take any Religious Studies courses.
Aquaria
Because of all the feedback that NZ Bus received, the majority of it appears to have been opposed to the adverts. You would then have to assume that all that feedback the bus company received, both positive and negative, provides an accurate cross-section of New Zealand society for your question to have a legitimate point. But what do you base that assumption on?
As for why the advert is controversial, read my statement above about what the ad is in fact saying.
Permalink Thu, 25 Feb 2010 23:09:00 UTC | #444151