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


← The spectre of militant secularism

Red Dog's Avatar Jump to comment 26 by Red Dog

Comment 20 by jameshogg :

Comment 19 by Red Dog :

Comment 17 by jameshogg :

Sorry, I really have to point this out.

But there is no No True Scotsman fallacy here. The principles of secularism are very much opposite to that of Mao and Stalin.

I agree.

That does not apply to religious behaviour, because when the likes of Pat Robertson or Jerry Falwell cite the Bible, for example, as a reason for their ideologies, you can look them up yourself and find them very easily.

I don't see what you mean there. Yes, you can look up the various quotes that Falwell make but so what? Fascists and communists quote Darwin or secular thinkers as well. Just as you can make a strong argument that secularism is incompatible with totalitarianism you can also make a good case that (for example) the teachings of Jesus are incompatible with the lavish life styles and hypocrisy of the Catholic church and people like Robertson or Falwell.

If totalitarian regimes suppress religious belief, that has nothing to do with secularism, let alone the non-belief in God or the non-belief in astrology, and that is precisely because it is the opposite of secularism.

I'm not sure they have "nothing to do". I mean look at some of the comments above. This thread started as a discussion about secularism and you already had people (aquilacane comment 5 and Sjoerd Westenborg comment 14) implying that the government should legislate what parents can tell their children.

Mon, 19 Mar 2012 21:01:33 UTC | #928735