Richard Dawkins and The Ignorance of The New Atheism

[Meriweather]

As to their application in this conversation? Practically interchangeable.

Not that I can see. It appears that you are assigning (prejudicially) "magic" onto articles of faith that have nothing to do with magic. The same application of "magic" is used on picturesque descriptions included in accounts. There is no reason to belittle faith philosophies. No one is asking you to adopt them; however, in faith discussions atheists should at least have a basic understanding of what people of faith actually believe. Those who toss in terms such as "magic" betray ignorance and incompetence. The reason it irks me is that I am from a family of intelligent atheists and married to an atheist. I have no wish for people of faith to regard all atheists as ninnies. Intelligent atheists have a lot to contribute and bring up relevant points worthy of careful consideration.

 

[Tumblin Tumbleweed]

As to their application in this conversation? Practically interchangeable.

Not that I can see. It appears that you are assigning (prejudicially) "magic" onto articles of faith that have nothing to do with magic. The same application of "magic" is used on picturesque descriptions included in accounts. There is no reason to belittle faith philosophies. No one is asking you to adopt them; however, in faith discussions atheists should at least have a basic understanding of what people of faith actually believe. Those who toss in terms such as "magic" betray ignorance and incompetence. The reason it irks me is that I am from a family of intelligent atheists and married to an atheist. I have no wish for people of faith to regard all atheists as ninnies. Intelligent atheists have a lot to contribute and bring up relevant points worthy of careful consideration.

Okay.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Have you ever dismissed all of Aesop because you know it would never occur to hares and tortoises to race one another?

As fiction? yes. Do you dismiss the Bible as fiction?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

No. That's not really what you said. You have a terrible habit of parsing posts. It's dishonest.

It is not, because I did not change any of your meaning. You said what you said, and it was whiny and embarrassing.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Magic is invisible force.

haha... wow. Okay. I see we get to just make stuff up, now.

 

[ding]

No. That's not really what you said. You have a terrible habit of parsing posts. It's dishonest.

It is not, because I did not change any of your meaning. You said what you said, and it was whiny and embarrassing.

You did it again.

Here's the full post you parsed.

No. That's not really what you said. You have a terrible habit of parsing posts. It's dishonest.

You condemn respect for people of faith and that's why you are opposed. You don't want to have an honest debate. You want to insult people. I think the worst thing is that you are dishonest about your desire to insult people.

 

[ding]

No. That's not really what you said. You have a terrible habit of parsing posts. It's dishonest.

It is not, because I did not change any of your meaning. You said what you said, and it was whiny and embarrassing.

You are the most disrespectful, rude and dishonest person here. You have no redeeming qualities whatsoever.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

No. That's not really what you said. You have a terrible habit of parsing posts. It's dishonest.

It is not, because I did not change any of your meaning. You said what you said, and it was whiny and embarrassing.

You are the most disrespectful, rude and dishonest person here. You have no redeeming qualities whatsoever.

Oh no! Grumpy internet man say mean things.

Cry it all out, ding.

 

[ding]

No. That's not really what you said. You have a terrible habit of parsing posts. It's dishonest.

It is not, because I did not change any of your meaning. You said what you said, and it was whiny and embarrassing.

You are the most disrespectful, rude and dishonest person here. You have no redeeming qualities whatsoever.

Oh no! Grumpy internet man say mean things.

Cry it all out, ding.

That's probably how the KKK responded to blacks when they complained too.

 

[ding]

No. That's not really what you said. You have a terrible habit of parsing posts. It's dishonest.

It is not, because I did not change any of your meaning. You said what you said, and it was whiny and embarrassing.

You are the most disrespectful, rude and dishonest person here. You have no redeeming qualities whatsoever.

Oh no! Grumpy internet man say mean things.

Cry it all out, ding.

If we were having this conversation in person and you behaved this way, I would beat your ass.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

No. That's not really what you said. You have a terrible habit of parsing posts. It's dishonest.

It is not, because I did not change any of your meaning. You said what you said, and it was whiny and embarrassing.

You are the most disrespectful, rude and dishonest person here. You have no redeeming qualities whatsoever.

Oh no! Grumpy internet man say mean things.

Cry it all out, ding.

That's probably how the KKK responded to blacks when they complained too.

I am always amused by what new, murderous person or group I am compared to, whenever you get sand in your giney.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

If we were having this conversation in person and you behaved this way, I would beat your ass.

Well, I suppose if you believe in zombie kings and magical sky daddies, you can convince yourself of anything.

 

[ding]

No. That's not really what you said. You have a terrible habit of parsing posts. It's dishonest.

It is not, because I did not change any of your meaning. You said what you said, and it was whiny and embarrassing.

You are the most disrespectful, rude and dishonest person here. You have no redeeming qualities whatsoever.

Oh no! Grumpy internet man say mean things.

Cry it all out, ding.

That's probably how the KKK responded to blacks when they complained too.

I am always amused by what new, murderous person or group I am compared to, whenever you get sand in your giney.

I have no doubt you are amused by being disrespectful to others.

 

[ding]

If we were having this conversation in person and you behaved this way, I would beat your ass.

Well, I suppose if you believe in zombie kings and magical sky daddies, you can convince yourself of anything.

I have no doubt you have rationalized your behaviors. I wouldn't need to rationalize mine when I punched you in the throat.

 

[Meriweather]

As fiction? yes. Do you dismiss the Bible as fiction?

I no more dismiss the lessons and themes presented in Aesop's family than I dismiss the same lessons and themes presented in the Bible. I have no axe to grind, just an interest in learning. The Bible has accounts of encounters with God and His ways, and I never dismiss that which is gold.

 

[sealybobo]

Richard Dawkins and the ignorance of 'New Atheism' | The Spectator


I read "The God Delusion" by Dawkins. Anyone who understands Judaism or Christianity can see he is full of crap.

Jews don’t believe the jesus story. Neither do us atheists. Anyone who understands Judaism knows this.

 

[$ecular#eckler]

So, when was the last time a miracle occurred?

If the almighty God answers prayers, then why did we not recognize a response to the prayers and thoughts (which are no different than prayers) after the 2001 terrorist attacks on the Christian nation?

Why does God spare the lives of some during a tornado, yet allows for the death and destruction of everything else?

How far from the tornado's path does one have to be to determine that they were spared by God?

Why can't God answer these questions for himself?

 

[sealybobo]

LOL

I always find it amusing when Christians can't answer my simple questions about large errors in the bible.

Carry on with the bogus attack on Richard Dawkins if that will make you feel better.

The bible is not a science book. Only fools act as if it is.

The Bible is fiction. Only fools act as if it isn’t

 

[sealybobo]

Good God, we were taught Evolution in Catholic school as well as how it was not mutually exclusive from a religious point of view.

They were transitioning with the times. They could no longer deny the science without losing credibility.

Today they are softening on other issues like homosexuality

 

[sealybobo]

And, Dawkins thinks pedophilia is okay

Liar.

Richard Dawkins Defends 'Mild' Pedophilia, Again and Again

Richard Dawkins defended "mild pedophilia" in an interview this weekend. It's not the first time.

www.theatlantic.com

Richard Dawkins defended "mild pedophilia" in an interview this weekend. And while the quote itself is quite jarring, especially to those who look to Dawkins for his influential writings on atheism (but haven't noticed some of his other strange stances), it's far from the first time that the scientist has launched a defense of the behavior — or talked about his own abuse at the hands of boarding school teachers. First, here's what Dawkins said to The Times magazine, as condensed by the Religion News Service:

Referring to his early days at a boarding school in Salisbury, he recalled how one of the (unnamed) masters “pulled me on his knee and put his hand inside my shorts.”

He said other children in his school peer group had been molested by the same teacher but concluded: “I don’t think he did any of us lasting harm.”

“I am very conscious that you can’t condemn people of an earlier era by the standards of ours. Just as we don’t look back at the 18th and 19th centuries and condemn people for racism in the same way as we would condemn a modern person for racism, I look back a few decades to my childhood and see things like caning, like mild pedophilia, and can’t find it in me to condemn it by the same standards as I or anyone would today,” he said.

Like most homos. he really doesn't have any problems with kiddie rape.

What did h3 say? You keep posting he said something pro pedophile but can’t tell us what he said?