Is Richard Dawkins afraid to debate the best?

I guess we've discovered a potential target for your next trip to the shooting range.

 

"Pull!"

 

Why refuse? Because there's no end to the stream of swirly-eyed nutballs and fanatics, and life is too short. Read and understand Dawkin's books instead of harping on about who is and isn't the master debater.

Creationists have no factual legs to stand on, and so it always comes down to rants about rhetoric and personalities.

 

Chuck, I'm glad you're making an attempt to challenge/criticize atheism. But an ad hominem attack against an atheist is NOT a criticism of atheism. I think you can do better. What are the disadvantages/fallacies of atheism itself? Where does it fail, socially, intellectually, ethically? Set forth how atheism specifically harms or impedes social progress. Do that and you'll establish a legitimate basis for honest discourse.

Religiosity is neither dormant nor passive; it deeply influences societal direction, and therefore imposes an OBLIGATION on all members of society to KEEP AN EYE ON IT, to criticize it, to change it, to redirect it and even eliminate it where it inflicts genuine harm.

Similarly, the religious regard atheism with a wary eye, and are so deeply disposed against it not ONE OF YOU would knowingly vote for an atheist for any public office.

So, spell it out. What, specifically, makes atheism a problem?

 

Off topic but what I would love to see, any sport team that looses and a microphone is shoved in front of one of the team members, to have the say God wasn't with us he was rooting for the other team... That's why we lost.

 

Athletes who point to the sky after scoring, or publicly thank their deity of choice after a win, are extremely offensive. It takes a special kind of arrogance to assume that not only is 'god' on their side, but has nothing better to do than personally assist one individual win a stupid game.

 

Is it really so different than a 'war' of any one religion against another? Do you have similar issues with believers promoting their ideas? How do you feel about missionaries and evangelists?

Funny, most atheists have issues with religion claiming moral authority.

 

Anything is open to being discredited, and there's every reason to do so, if done honestly (where "honestly" means refraining from deliberately specious/disingenuous argument).

Here we disagree completely. You're attempting here to eliminate fully half of all discourse, all satire, all parody, all criticism. Look, nearly 90% of your posts in these religious threads assert your belief that criticism is ONLY counter-productive, which is a REFUTATION of my belief that criticism is often effective. Should I demand you cease making such assertions because they conflict with MY belief?

Tough patooties, buster. Deal with the fact that acting on some of your beliefs do REAL damage to society, and society will speak up and cry foul when religious belief
--- violates the United States Constitution and imposes a de facto religious test for public office as a significant population segment refuses to even consider voting for anyone solely on the basis of either atheism or being of the wrong sect,
--- withholds medical attention and pharmaceuticals from people helpless to escape such bans, mostly children, on a belief that prayer is the morally superior treatment regimen,
--- denies equal treatment under the law to segments of the population based on religious criteria said population is often not party to,
--- attempts to impose religious dogma as a replacement for science education in the public schools,
--- makes public pronouncements that natural disasters are divine punishment, thereby discouraging the flow of aid to victims from people who think aid is undeserved,
--- and so on.

If you get upset when people express disdain, disgust and condemnation for the mindset that makes the horrors listed above possible, that's YOUR problem. It would be a MORAL LAPSE to NOT speak and act against such sociopathic actions - AND speak against the corrupt ideas that inspire them.

The examples of "morality" I see exhibited by religiosity are to my mind repugnant and deeply IMmoral.

So who's right?

90% of the "defense" thrown up in the bible quotes thread is assertions that the passage cited isn't saying what it says but something else. Never mind the intrinsic absurdity of a "moral guidebook" so poorly written it requires interpretation, ON WHAT BASIS DO YOU ARRIVE AT THE INTERPRETATION? You can't say the bible because you're saying it doesn't say what it appears to be saying, it's saying something else. HOW DO YOU GET TO THE SOMETHING ELSE? What informs that?

Whatever it is, it CANNOT be the religious document. And all that's left when you eliminate the religious document is the secular.

 

This is going to sound a little strange given the tone of my response below but I want to acknowledge your honest response to declaring what you see as a problem with atheism, and I appreciate your sincere and obviously thoughtful discourse, and apologize for neglecting to say so in the response itself.

 

To make your case and refute mine.

I see what religiosity does and it makes me angry. You see me assail religiosity and it makes you angry. Alright, do justice for your anger. Dismember my arguments. Rebut their logic, rebut their premises, rebut their conclusions. Show why what you believe demands it be believed in. Show why what I believe is a chimera, a sham, faulty.

But above all quit complaining! That's Palin's job, not yours.

 

No one demands that you believe but we are asked by God to at least make an attempt to make known His love and care for mankind. I admit some are overzealous, annoying or just plain loopy but I'm not so certain the same doesn't occur among atheist too.

I personally see atheism do all the same things you abhor in Christianity. I'll use Christianity here since that is the one belief so often attacked as well as the belief system that answers the charges atheist level against religion or a belief in a supreme being in this forum.

FYI: I see you and your fellow atheist do nothing but complain here APK. I'm wondering why you don't think Chuck should be able to speak out against those that constantly attack his POV or belief? After all you and the other atheist here are largely unprovoked yet constantly put up deriding threads against believers their beliefs and POV's that puts up most of these threads against Christianity.


I've seen numerous charges that Christians are hateful in this forum. Yet several times now I've offered to do a post by post comparison of the hate, derision, mocking and ad hominem attacks leveled between the two sides but so far I've no takers. I'll throw down the gauntlet for you too, care to pick it up?

You seem to believe that atheist are better people than Christian's what is your criteria and how are they better? Because I sure don't see it unless the only criteria you judge by is unbelief.

 

Even among those who aren't over zealous, many of them have no class or taste in their approach. Plus, after a few decades putting up with theists making their attempts at spreading the word, it gets really, really old, no matter how well meaning.

As far as atheists and agnostics go, in real life I have seen few of them engage in discussing religion with theists unless a theist brings the topic up.

 

? Huh? Or perhaps the individual(s) are giving God His due for the wonderful talent they have. Good grief.

 

Here's another example of why this subject should be moved to a "special place" (it's own forum)
One person states exactly what he means(airport) and (chuck) just trash talks and denies the credibility of (airport). Over and over, but if "chuck" were not allowed to keep badgering anyone that wasn't a member of his beliefs unless they entered his "special place" then prius chat could be an auto forum instead of a church pulpit. Now if the powers that be at prius chat enjoy the preaching, well, so be it.