Reply #29

In the discussion thread: Richard Dawkins to atheist rally: 'Show contempt' for faith [View all]

Sat Mar 24, 2012, 09:17 PM

longship (17,573 posts)

29. We're together on that

I strongly think that it's going to take both strong opposition and calm rhetoric to turn the tide. We need Dawkins' flame thrower and Dan Barker's quiet reason and everybody in between. We need people calling themselves atheists, agnostics, liberal theists, and devout ones, too, who see clearly that a religious debate isn't the solution to anything.

All are welcome, including the firebrands. We need everybody who will come to the table.

Reply to this post

Back to OP Alert abuse Link to post in-thread

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum

Replies to this discussion thread

151 replies	Author	Time	Post
Richard Dawkins to atheist rally: 'Show contempt' for faith [View all]	rug	Mar 2012	OP
A good many Protestants also think the Catholic view of the Eucharist is absurd	bluestateguy	Mar 2012	#1
And for centuries many millions have not.	rug	Mar 2012	#4
Actually, your title is exactly the point	skepticscott	Mar 2012	#19
By all means, recruit more asses.	rug	Mar 2012	#20
You're free to call rational people anything you need to	skepticscott	Mar 2012	#36
The term was yours. I do not disagree.	rug	Mar 2012	#41
Refer to your posts 6 and 12	skepticscott	Mar 2012	#68
That refers to Dawkins, who is indeed an ass.	rug	Mar 2012	#70
Exactly..it was the term YOU used to refer to Dawkins	skepticscott	Mar 2012	#107
It should be simple to subject the bread and wine to chemical analysis	FarCenter	Mar 2012	#38
It would be if it was a chemistry experiment.	rug	Mar 2012	#42
Not necessarily, you could use a microscope to look for blood cells.	FarCenter	Mar 2012	#49
You must have skipped Philosophy classes.	rug	Mar 2012	#56
Skipped? Or just doesn't subscribe to bullshit?	cleanhippie	Mar 2012	#60
Skipped.	rug	Mar 2012	#72
He was probably in Science class instead.	cleanhippie	Mar 2012	#74
Maybe. Some people can only handle one thing at a time.	rug	Mar 2012	#76
A Theory of Substances made sense in a Greek context	FarCenter	Mar 2012	#61
Your post has much substance.	rug	Mar 2012	#73
'arton epiousion'	tama	Mar 2012	#117
And wtf does philosophy have to do with it?	skepticscott	Mar 2012	#71
If you could have answered that question you would have avoided the drivel that follows it.	rug	Mar 2012	#77
Christian theology was originally heavily influenced by Greco-Roman philosophy	FarCenter	Mar 2012	#81
Wow, a whole page of philosobabble	skepticscott	Mar 2012	#108
That is only a three paragraph excerpt of a much longer non-explanation n/t	FarCenter	Mar 2012	#112
Claims about	tama	Mar 2012	#116
Got a third choice?	skepticscott	Mar 2012	#136
First,	tama	Mar 2012	#137
HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!	Joseph8th	Mar 2012	#139
Go	tama	Mar 2012	#144
Working on a hospital psych ward	skepticscott	Mar 2012	#149
The Eucharist was originally...	Joseph8th	Mar 2012	#138
Unfortunate. Glad to see that the speaker who said "Stand your ground" got no applause.	cbayer	Mar 2012	#2
I'm a spiritual person. I can't say I hold to 1 belief only. However...	Sarah Ibarruri	Mar 2012	#3
Protestants believe that Catholic Eucharist is literally evil cannibalism.	provis99	Mar 2012	#5
That's incorrect.	rug	Mar 2012	#6
Sheesh, rug	longship	Mar 2012	#7
This is why he's an ass.	rug	Mar 2012	#12
I very respectfully disagree	longship	Mar 2012	#24
That might work if religious believers are in fact in thrall and enchanted.	rug	Mar 2012	#27
We're together on that	longship	Mar 2012	#29
This Sunday school teacher likes the cut of your jib, longship	villager	Mar 2012	#33
Gees. Thank you very much	longship	Mar 2012	#34
Agreed.... We need both ...	Joseph8th	Mar 2012	#140
Aikido of politics	tama	Mar 2012	#39
Don't assume Dawkins' agenda is only political	longship	Mar 2012	#47
My problem	tama	Mar 2012	#88
Well that would be a sweeping generalization	longship	Mar 2012	#91
I was not	tama	Mar 2012	#97
Please define pseudo skeptical org	longship	Mar 2012	#109
Truzzi	tama	Mar 2012	#113
Hmph!	longship	Mar 2012	#115
When someone proclaims that people should show contempt and ridicule, that	humblebum	Mar 2012	#48
Calling somebody an ass is an ad hominem	longship	Mar 2012	#53
You are correct	tama	Mar 2012	#118
Okay, you don't like him	longship	Mar 2012	#121
He's pouring gas on the flames	tama	Mar 2012	#122
Inquisitor?	longship	Mar 2012	#124
I'm enjoying	tama	Mar 2012	#125
It doesn't matter who advocates such a position, advocating such a position is	humblebum	Mar 2012	#126
Well you know that old Whore of Babylon stuff just keeps on rolling for some.	Leontius	Mar 2012	#13
Quite an accusation.	Thats my opinion	Mar 2012	#85
here's plenty, from DUers, Protestants, non-Protestants, and ex-Protestants:	provis99	Mar 2012	#96
I have looked at your list.	Thats my opinion	Mar 2012	#120
obviously, no amound of evidence or facts will satisfy you.	provis99	Mar 2012	#133
People make fun of other's fantasies all the time, indeed, those who take such fantasies...	Humanist_Activist	Mar 2012	#8
Who makes fun of other people's fantasies? And what kind of people are these?	cbayer	Mar 2012	#10
Debunkers of conspiracy theories, Mythbusters did a rather good episode...	Humanist_Activist	Mar 2012	#15
Debunking something or not agreeing with it is not the same thing as making	cbayer	Mar 2012	#17
Not agreeing with it implies its on equal footing with the facts or is equally logical...	Humanist_Activist	Mar 2012	#21
So does the fact that you called a group of creationists	skepticscott	Mar 2012	#35
They're usually in the corner popping each other's pimples.	rug	Mar 2012	#14
Didn't somebody say the purpose of the rally wasn't to ridicule religion or promote	Leontius	Mar 2012	#9
define anti-religious bigotry please. n/t	Humanist_Activist	Mar 2012	#16
The organizers apparently said that. The limited information in the article indicates that	cbayer	Mar 2012	#18
Why is the humorlessness of atheists so close to the humorlessness of fundamentalists?	villager	Mar 2012	#11
We aren't humourless -	mr blur	Mar 2012	#22
Not gauged by this post.	rug	Mar 2012	#28
So then, the fact that some of us find much atheist and skeptical "reasoning" to be	humblebum	Mar 2012	#50
It is OK to ridicule it and show contempt for it, as for any ideas or beliefs	LeftishBrit	Mar 2012	#55
I think that any group that exhorts open ridicule and contempt is	humblebum	Mar 2012	#63
Then you are pro-censorship.	LeftishBrit	Mar 2012	#67
Non-sequitur	tama	Mar 2012	#119
Atheists make fun of beliefs, and we are called humorless, the religious attack people...	Humanist_Activist	Mar 2012	#23
Making fun doesn't mean you know how to tell a joke.	kwassa	Mar 2012	#25
That's true, but Carlin was hilarious! Especially when he made fun of religious beliefs. n/t	Humanist_Activist	Mar 2012	#26
But he honed his humor and timing growing up on the West Side in Corpus Christi parish.	rug	Mar 2012	#30
Carlin was funny about many different subjects.	kwassa	Mar 2012	#31
Of ALL atheists????	LeftishBrit	Mar 2012	#46
It is easy to show contempt for fundamentalists.	Dawson Leery	Mar 2012	#32
Suppose that a lot of people in this country	skepticscott	Mar 2012	#37
An awe inspiring show of tolerance from the leaders of atheism.	LARED	Mar 2012	#40
It was I'm afraid - there was no call at all for intolerance	dmallind	Mar 2012	#44
Advocating ridicule and contempt SCREAMS intolerance. nt	humblebum	Mar 2012	#52
Advocating ridicule and contempt is in the middle range of intolerance	LeftishBrit	Mar 2012	#57
lol, not exactly.	eqfan592	Mar 2012	#59
You would have a point if anyone called for ridicule and contempt of PEOPLE...	cleanhippie	Mar 2012	#62
Nice rationalization, unfortunately reality doesn't work that way.	humblebum	Mar 2012	#65
There IS a difference between ridiculing a belief and a person.	cleanhippie	Mar 2012	#66
The thing is, however, that you do not just criticize atheism as a belief	LeftishBrit	Mar 2012	#69
I would challenge you to backup your statement about hatred, and	humblebum	Mar 2012	#75
OK -since you asked me to back it up - here's the quote I mean	LeftishBrit	Mar 2012	#78
Is his statement any worse than continually linking and comparing	Leontius	Mar 2012	#80
No, but I don't think this this happens very often.	LeftishBrit	Mar 2012	#87
I was not implying that you do. As for it not happening very often	Leontius	Mar 2012	#93
OK...but one point...	LeftishBrit	Mar 2012	#104
We essentially agree with each other but I would like to point out that historical distortions	Leontius	Mar 2012	#106
It varied	muriel_volestrangler	Mar 2012	#111
By their actions	tama	Mar 2012	#123
Yeah, because the oppression of women, gays, atheists by today's believers	cleanhippie	Mar 2012	#110
Where did I ever indicate that "advocating repression, torture and mass murder" was a	humblebum	Mar 2012	#92
The ONLY reason why Soviet atheist movements were evil...	LeftishBrit	Mar 2012	#103
It steps on the wrong side	tama	Mar 2012	#114
There you go again, defining words to suit your agenda	LARED	Mar 2012	#105
How do you rationalize this statement?	LARED	Mar 2012	#100
Intolerance of intolerance is not intolerance. nt	Joseph8th	Mar 2012	#141
Reason did prevail, despite the lying sack of shit reporter	dmallind	Mar 2012	#43
Dawkins' words are quoted in the article.	rug	Mar 2012	#45
If by "quoted" you mean "quote mined", maybe	Rob H.	Mar 2012	#51
Sounds like he was quoted accurately.	rug	Mar 2012	#54
It's tied directly to this:	Rob H.	Mar 2012	#58
Well said. (Nt)	eqfan592	Mar 2012	#64
The "need to be ridiculed with contempt" has scant basis in reason.	rug	Mar 2012	#83
And transubstantiation has NO basis in reason	Rob H.	Mar 2012	#98
The belief is based on faith, the explanation on reason.	rug	Mar 2012	#99
When the explanation is "Just because" its not based on logic or empiricism. n/t	Humanist_Activist	Mar 2012	#130
I see you're unfamiliar with the concept of datum,	rug	Mar 2012	#134
Quote mining is bearing false witness, how does your god feel about that? n/t	Humanist_Activist	Mar 2012	#79
Hard to say since you're assuming a fact not in evidence.	rug	Mar 2012	#84
This coming from someone who believes in Transubstantiation, sorry, I don't think you have any...	Humanist_Activist	Mar 2012	#90
If your posts are any indication, I think I know what you have a grasp of.	rug	Mar 2012	#94
"...you're assuming a fact not in evidence."	Rob H.	Mar 2012	#101
Why don't you watch it and hear for yourself?	mr blur	Mar 2012	#82
I watched it on the live stream I posted yesterday.	rug	Mar 2012	#86
The truth that they won't, can't, admit is that using mockery and ridicule is much like	Leontius	Mar 2012	#89
Since no answer is forthcoming, you may be right.	rug	Mar 2012	#95
I've never participated	tama	Mar 2012	#102
Thank you for your answer.	mr blur	Mar 2012	#150
sounds too strong for dawkins	deacon_sephiroth	Mar 2012	#127
Hate speech. nt	humblebum	Mar 2012	#128
really? REALLY?	deacon_sephiroth	Mar 2012	#129
So then, I guess displaying "ridicule, hatred, and contempt" for atheism is	humblebum	Mar 2012	#131
if you can do it without the tinfoil hat...	deacon_sephiroth	Mar 2012	#132
1st of all about "you'd have to find a major flaw in the rejection itself."	humblebum	Mar 2012	#135
actually, I know EXACTLY what I reject, regardless of what others are convinced of.	deacon_sephiroth	Mar 2012	#148
Ohhh... we're plenty used to it.	Joseph8th	Mar 2012	#143
Straw man. nt	humblebum	Mar 2012	#146
Yes "ridicule and show contempt" for superstitions ...	Joseph8th	Mar 2012	#142
Definitely laughable. nt	humblebum	Mar 2012	#145
Sexist stereotypes aside, what do you mean by "make him feel his ignorance"?	cbayer	Mar 2012	#147
Dawkins is right. Superstitious BS should be mocked.	Odin2005	Mar 2012	#151

Edit History

Please login to view edit histories.