Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

rug

(82,333 posts)
Tue Feb 16, 2016, 01:46 PM Feb 2016

'New Atheist' Spokesperson Sam Harris Featured in Explicitly Anti-Muslim Hate Video

Far-right Clarion Project releases viral video based on Harris' dubious concept of radicalization.

February 16, 2016
By Sarah Lazare
Sarah Lazare is a staff writer for AlterNet. A former staff writer for Common Dreams, Sarah co-edited the book About Face: Military Resisters Turn Against War. Follow her on Twitter at @sarahlazare.

From far-right presidential candidates to overt hate groups, the spike in anti-Muslim incitement — and real violence — during the 2016 election cycle has generated widespread concern.

Though they are at least as strident in their denunciations of Islam as any Republican candidate, public figures associated with the “New Atheist” movement still receive some level of acceptance within liberal circles. The virulently Islamophobic comedian Bill Maher, who engages in regular sessions of trashing Muslims with fellow New Atheist Richard Dawkins, has managed to find defenders at progressive publications like Salon.com.

A convergence of New Atheists and right-wing militarists seems inevitable. Many adherents of both political currents share an agenda focused around antagonizing Muslims, supporting Benjamin Netanyahu's Israel and full throated backing for U.S. military campaigns in the Middle East.

While many New Atheists remain relucatant to openly ally with forces associated with the Republican Party's evangelical base, a right-wing organization with ties to GOP mega-donors is adapting the anti-Muslim concepts of New Atheist spokespeople into its own propaganda.

http://www.alternet.org/grayzone-project/new-atheist-spokesperson-sam-harris-featured-explicitly-anti-muslim-hate-video

The video:



The pigsty that produced it:

http://www.clarionproject.org/
109 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
'New Atheist' Spokesperson Sam Harris Featured in Explicitly Anti-Muslim Hate Video (Original Post) rug Feb 2016 OP
Islamophobia is next big civil rights challenge mwrguy Feb 2016 #1
if muslim radicals stopped killing innocent people, i'm sure that will reduce MariaThinks Feb 2016 #30
Recommended. Shining a light on hate. guillaumeb Feb 2016 #2
I must have had to run to bathroom during the vote for spokesperson Goblinmonger Feb 2016 #3
There isn't even a group calling itself "New Atheists" skepticscott Feb 2016 #4
Tsk, scottie, not everything is about "gods". This is about hate. rug Feb 2016 #7
Feel free to point us to any group skepticscott Feb 2016 #12
Now that's lame, even by your standards. Don't you like to invoke NTS? rug Feb 2016 #13
In other words you can't skepticscott Feb 2016 #21
I just did. rug Feb 2016 #24
Wow, there are atheist organizations?? skepticscott Feb 2016 #34
I never would have taken you for a Scholastic, scottie. rug Feb 2016 #40
Diversion noted Major Nikon Feb 2016 #95
Well, that's some super duper Goblinmonger Feb 2016 #37
Ah, resorting to cartoons. rug Feb 2016 #41
Mine wasn't a cartoon Goblinmonger Feb 2016 #42
No, it was a crude drawing of taco sauce. rug Feb 2016 #44
The phenomenon is convergence of views, not being a spokesperson. rug Feb 2016 #5
I have no desire to shield Harris or Maher. Goblinmonger Feb 2016 #6
Maybe they read rationalwiki. rug Feb 2016 #8
They must have overlooked this part Goblinmonger Feb 2016 #9
I've yet to see a single atheist on DU defend ANY of the "New Atheists"... trotsky Feb 2016 #10
You must have overlookeds these parts, assuming you read past the headline. rug Feb 2016 #11
Could you please explain how anyone is "shielding" Harris here? trotsky Feb 2016 #14
If that is the case, I can't help you, trotsky. rug Feb 2016 #16
So, as I figured. trotsky Feb 2016 #18
Attack? I was sympathizing with you. rug Feb 2016 #19
Your utter inability to back up your claims is duly noted. trotsky Feb 2016 #22
Does that harrumph make you feel better? rug Feb 2016 #25
Having you off ignore has given me a chance to go back... trotsky Feb 2016 #28
Feel free to revisit your alleged ignore list. rug Feb 2016 #31
Technically that would be you who would be revisiting it. trotsky Feb 2016 #35
Sorry you couldn't stand more than a dozen posts out in the open. rug Feb 2016 #43
Ohhhh now I get it. trotsky Feb 2016 #45
"I do get updates" rug Feb 2016 #46
Post removed Post removed Feb 2016 #48
I don't know how many times I have to say Goblinmonger Feb 2016 #15
Pointing out the similarities between Harris' words and this hate video is not a "hit piece". rug Feb 2016 #17
OK. Read this slowly so it sinks in. Goblinmonger Feb 2016 #20
Brilliantly put, GM. trotsky Feb 2016 #23
I'm sure I'll be accused of shielding Harris Goblinmonger Feb 2016 #27
Sink is a poor term for a shallow body of water. rug Feb 2016 #47
I would never say something so horrible as that about you. Goblinmonger Feb 2016 #54
That's good since it referred to your post. rug Feb 2016 #56
Good to see you have just completely avoided any real discussion Goblinmonger Feb 2016 #58
QED Lordquinton Feb 2016 #51
Ipso facto. Warren Stupidity Feb 2016 #96
more fun from the Clarion Project MisterP Feb 2016 #26
Thanks for that link. rug Feb 2016 #29
they were the ones handing out "Obsession" and getting a mosque gassed MisterP Feb 2016 #32
They've been on the SPLC hate group list for some time. rug Feb 2016 #36
I don't get it. trotsky Feb 2016 #38
aren't you being atheistphobic? MariaThinks Feb 2016 #33
Hardly. Harris and most of the others cited in the article are antitheists. rug Feb 2016 #39
Which is no doubt why the rather clueless author you cited skepticscott Feb 2016 #49
Let me see, an anonymous internet poster who calls himself "skeptic scott" calls this woman rug Feb 2016 #52
Wow...she wrote a book skepticscott Feb 2016 #60
Wow . . . you woite a post. rug Feb 2016 #61
Keep digging, ruggie skepticscott Feb 2016 #68
That is true. The more I engage you the worse I look. rug Feb 2016 #70
First thing you got right skepticscott Feb 2016 #71
. rug Feb 2016 #73
Why do people who dont believe in make believe get under your skin so much? Jackie Wilson Said Feb 2016 #85
They don't. People who are assholes do. rug Feb 2016 #88
You are the one pointing out that he is an atheist. I have news for you, there is no god Jackie Wilson Said Feb 2016 #89
Actually, he is the one pointing it out. rug Feb 2016 #91
BYW, the difference is that atheism is simply nonbelief in god(s), rug Feb 2016 #53
Jury voted 1-6 to LEAVE IT fleur-de-lisa Feb 2016 #57
Thanks for posting the results. rug Feb 2016 #63
Wow, two fails in the title alone Lordquinton Feb 2016 #50
Funny thing is that the attempt to distract bvf Feb 2016 #55
So where are the #s that refute that video? katsy Feb 2016 #59
Why is The Clarion Project a pigsty? rug Feb 2016 #62
I'm looking at the #s from the pew project katsy Feb 2016 #64
"the Clarion Project, which specializes in rabidly anti-Muslim films" rug Feb 2016 #66
I don't poke around any rw sites katsy Feb 2016 #76
Then make sure you don't click on the youtube channel that uploaded that video. rug Feb 2016 #77
Right right right katsy Feb 2016 #79
The OP has legs. rug Feb 2016 #81
Sure it does. But all fluff. katsy Feb 2016 #93
Written by someone who doesn't know what 'spokesperson' means, and hasn't heard of Donald Trump muriel_volestrangler Feb 2016 #65
How do you like The Clarion Project? rug Feb 2016 #67
Irrelevant non-response skepticscott Feb 2016 #69
Tsk, tsk. You're really agitated. rug Feb 2016 #72
Thought you were "stepping back", ruggie skepticscott Feb 2016 #74
I was. I'm a good six feet from my keyboard. rug Feb 2016 #75
I don't, but the writer seems far more concerned by the existence of New Atheists muriel_volestrangler Feb 2016 #87
The name doesn"t appear in the title but they made it. rug Feb 2016 #90
What does LGBTQIA mean? Lordquinton Feb 2016 #94
What does perseverance mean? rug Feb 2016 #99
Evasion? I expected that Lordquinton Feb 2016 #100
Post removed Post removed Feb 2016 #102
And with that, all things must pass. Warren Stupidity Feb 2016 #103
Maybe he'll be able to answer the question when he gets back Lordquinton Feb 2016 #104
You seem to have a problem with atheists. Jackie Wilson Said Feb 2016 #78
Actually, it's nonbelief in god(s). rug Feb 2016 #82
gods are make believe, so an atheist doesnt believe in make believe Jackie Wilson Said Feb 2016 #84
And antitheists, not atheists, make hate videos about Islam. rug Feb 2016 #86
You're finally getting the distinction skepticscott Feb 2016 #97
I've observed you closely. rug Feb 2016 #98
Really? Warren Stupidity Feb 2016 #105
People here cheer on athiests when they bash Christians (even liberal Christians) bluestateguy Feb 2016 #80
+1 rug Feb 2016 #83
Why do you say 'but'? muriel_volestrangler Feb 2016 #92
Oh the poor persecuted Christians. Warren Stupidity Feb 2016 #106
I didn't bother with this because... AlbertCat Feb 2016 #101
Bye, Felicia! cleanhippie Feb 2016 #107
How on earth is this an "Explicitly Anti-Muslim Hate Video"? Albertoo Feb 2016 #108
In Magical World... NeoGreen Feb 2016 #109

mwrguy

(3,245 posts)
1. Islamophobia is next big civil rights challenge
Tue Feb 16, 2016, 01:49 PM
Feb 2016

And it has to be defeated before it starts any more killing.

MariaThinks

(2,495 posts)
30. if muslim radicals stopped killing innocent people, i'm sure that will reduce
Tue Feb 16, 2016, 03:49 PM
Feb 2016

islamophobia

but I suppose we should expect people to wait around and be blown up by a muslim radical - wearing a smile on our faces

guillaumeb

(42,641 posts)
2. Recommended. Shining a light on hate.
Tue Feb 16, 2016, 01:54 PM
Feb 2016

About the Clarion Project:

The Clarion Project (previously the "Clarion Fund&quot is a nonprofit organization led by U.S. neoconservatives and rightwing Israelis that produces alarmist films and publications aimed at hyping the threat of "Radical Islam."




Also:
In its 2011 report Fear, Inc., the Center for American Progress identified Clarion as an important member of the "Islamophobia network," an informal grouping of prominent foundations, scholars, and opinion-makers that spreads negative impressions about Islam and Muslims in the United States. Indeed, the group's funding is replete with large contributions from major foundations identified in the report.[4] - See more at: http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/Clarion_Fund#sthash.E0z0zmtm.dpuf


http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/Clarion_Fund

And the seeds of Muslim hate are growing at DU also, as witnessed by the far too many posts purporting to discuss the problem with Islam and the supposed incompatibility of Islam with Western values.
 

Goblinmonger

(22,340 posts)
3. I must have had to run to bathroom during the vote for spokesperson
Tue Feb 16, 2016, 02:10 PM
Feb 2016

Being an atheist that publishes does not make one a spokesperson for anyone but himself.

Beyond that, this article is full of fail.

virulently Islamophobic comedian Bill Maher

A convergence of New Atheists and right-wing militarists seems inevitable
 

skepticscott

(13,029 posts)
4. There isn't even a group calling itself "New Atheists"
Tue Feb 16, 2016, 02:16 PM
Feb 2016

Never mind there not being a "spokesperson". Just lame attempts at smear tactics by those who can't even make a shred of an intellectual case for the existence of their "gods".

The last smear attempt is particularly ironic, since the "convergence" of Christians and right wing militarists has been a prominent reality for decades, not just an idiotic prediction.

 

rug

(82,333 posts)
7. Tsk, scottie, not everything is about "gods". This is about hate.
Tue Feb 16, 2016, 03:01 PM
Feb 2016

Odd you consider that a"smear".

And you're not still spreading that canard that there is no new atheist movement, no new atheist leaders, no new atheist spokespersons, are you?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1218223481

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1218221798

 

skepticscott

(13,029 posts)
12. Feel free to point us to any group
Tue Feb 16, 2016, 03:19 PM
Feb 2016

calling themselves "New Atheists". Feel free to point us to their appointing or electing anyone as a "leader" or a "spokesperson".

We both know you can't. But amuse us by trying. Your links didn't even come close.

And yes, attempting to conflate the political views of individual atheists with those of atheists who don't support those people in any way, or with atheism itself, is a smear by (attempted) association.

 

rug

(82,333 posts)
13. Now that's lame, even by your standards. Don't you like to invoke NTS?
Tue Feb 16, 2016, 03:21 PM
Feb 2016

And BTW, this is about antitheism, hate, and Islamophobia, not atheism. Do learn the difference.

 

skepticscott

(13,029 posts)
21. In other words you can't
Tue Feb 16, 2016, 03:38 PM
Feb 2016

Because we both know there is no such group, and hence no "leaders" or "spokespeople". Nice, conspicuous fail, dude.

And if this isn't about atheism, why all the references to "New Atheists"? Since they don't call themselves that, there's no other reason to do so other than to smear all atheists and atheism by association (since it can't be done on any intellectual basis). Seems like you and the author are the ones who have no idea about the difference.

As far as NTS, it doesn't even apply, since no one has claimed that Harris is not a "true" atheist. Do try to keep up.

 

rug

(82,333 posts)
24. I just did.
Tue Feb 16, 2016, 03:43 PM
Feb 2016

You may like to imagine a world full of monads, blissfully making their paths through this wondrous, indifferent universe of ours, but the fact is atheist organizations are as much a political movement as any other. Reality is harsh.

 

skepticscott

(13,029 posts)
34. Wow, there are atheist organizations??
Tue Feb 16, 2016, 03:54 PM
Feb 2016

That is totally surprising and shocking, dude! In that case, you'll have no trouble pointing us to the web site for the New Atheists organization, right?? And I'm sure it'll have Sam Harris listed as Chief Spokesperson, right??

Oh, wait. You already tried. And failed miserably. Reality is harsh, dude. Lent and all.

 

Goblinmonger

(22,340 posts)
42. Mine wasn't a cartoon
Tue Feb 16, 2016, 04:04 PM
Feb 2016

But whatever floats your boat.

Difference between your cartoon and the OP is that there is an actual thing call a "duck."

 

rug

(82,333 posts)
5. The phenomenon is convergence of views, not being a spokesperson.
Tue Feb 16, 2016, 02:56 PM
Feb 2016

Does it cross your mind to wonder why Harris is picked to illustrate theirs?

Oh, it's not about Bill Maher either, much as you may admire him.

It's about a hate group. Maybe you're simply more interested in sheltering Harris, Maher et al.

 

Goblinmonger

(22,340 posts)
6. I have no desire to shield Harris or Maher.
Tue Feb 16, 2016, 02:58 PM
Feb 2016

Harris has said many things that are horrible.

Does it cross your mind why they picked Harris and appointed him "spokesperson for New Atheists"? Perhaps it has something to do with furthering their own agenda. And, as such, I read the rest of the article through that lense.

 

rug

(82,333 posts)
8. Maybe they read rationalwiki.
Tue Feb 16, 2016, 03:04 PM
Feb 2016
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/New_Atheism

Admirable how you dance away from the observation, regardless of motive, of how well his words match theirs.
 

Goblinmonger

(22,340 posts)
9. They must have overlooked this part
Tue Feb 16, 2016, 03:09 PM
Feb 2016
The term sometimes acts as a straw-man, as it can be used to define the tactics or personal beliefs of non-believers en masse, ignoring internal differences and tensions within the movement.


As was done in the hit piece you posted. Though that's just old hat for you and nobody is surprised to see it.

I have no idea what I'm "dancing away from." I have stated I have no desire to shield Harris.

trotsky

(49,533 posts)
10. I've yet to see a single atheist on DU defend ANY of the "New Atheists"...
Tue Feb 16, 2016, 03:14 PM
Feb 2016

as much as some unfailingly defend the bigoted, sexist pope and his bigoted, sexist church.

 

rug

(82,333 posts)
11. You must have overlookeds these parts, assuming you read past the headline.
Tue Feb 16, 2016, 03:19 PM
Feb 2016
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2004/dec/1/20041201-090801-2582r/

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sam-harris/in-defense-of-torture_b_8993.html

http://www.samharris.org/blog/item/in-defense-of-profiling

The links are all in the article. Oh wait, you say it's a "hit piece".

For someone who's stated "I have no desire to shield Harris", you're doing a damn fine job.





trotsky

(49,533 posts)
14. Could you please explain how anyone is "shielding" Harris here?
Tue Feb 16, 2016, 03:25 PM
Feb 2016

Please use small words and quotations because I'm really stupid. Thanks.

trotsky

(49,533 posts)
18. So, as I figured.
Tue Feb 16, 2016, 03:32 PM
Feb 2016

You aren't interested in dialog, you only want to attack.

I'll give you one more chance: please explain how anyone here is "shielding" Harris. That's your claim. Back it up.

 

rug

(82,333 posts)
25. Does that harrumph make you feel better?
Tue Feb 16, 2016, 03:45 PM
Feb 2016

Sorry, trotsky, I have noted for a long time what you do and do not note. I am not impressed.

trotsky

(49,533 posts)
28. Having you off ignore has given me a chance to go back...
Tue Feb 16, 2016, 03:47 PM
Feb 2016

and see just how much you really do care what I note. Wow. I'm flattered. Not enough to actually read any of it, but just impressed with the volume.

trotsky

(49,533 posts)
35. Technically that would be you who would be revisiting it.
Tue Feb 16, 2016, 03:54 PM
Feb 2016

LOL that you think it's "alleged." But perhaps you'll take care of things for me (and everyone else) soon enough.

 

rug

(82,333 posts)
43. Sorry you couldn't stand more than a dozen posts out in the open.
Tue Feb 16, 2016, 04:07 PM
Feb 2016

Here's some traveling music. But I expect you already have it.



I'll look forward for your coded comments about me to others.

trotsky

(49,533 posts)
45. Ohhhh now I get it.
Tue Feb 16, 2016, 04:12 PM
Feb 2016

No rug, your behavior is just that predictable. Sorry to disappoint you. I do get updates about some of your latest exploits in PMs, but that's more than enough to know exactly what you're up to.

So, one last chance - any attempt to demonstrate who here is "shielding" Harris? If you, as I fully expect, do not provide anything but instead answer with yet more snark, it should be clear to everyone here you've got nothing.

Please proceed.

Response to trotsky (Reply #14)

 

Goblinmonger

(22,340 posts)
15. I don't know how many times I have to say
Tue Feb 16, 2016, 03:29 PM
Feb 2016

that Harris has said horrible things about Islam and Muslims. I am not defending him.

I am saying that this is a hit piece because it wants to make Harris the spokesperson for New Atheism. Problem is, there is no "New Atheism" as a formal group and, if there were, nobody has been made the "spokesperson."

But you know that.

Your deflection and obtuse act gets old. Do you really think it plays with those that don't know you?

 

rug

(82,333 posts)
17. Pointing out the similarities between Harris' words and this hate video is not a "hit piece".
Tue Feb 16, 2016, 03:32 PM
Feb 2016

If you are indeed distancing yourself from Harris, it should not be such an uncomfortable observation.

I'll ignore your personal snark. Try to get a grip on it.

 

Goblinmonger

(22,340 posts)
20. OK. Read this slowly so it sinks in.
Tue Feb 16, 2016, 03:36 PM
Feb 2016

I'll even number my points for you so it is easy.

1. I am not defending Harris in any way.
2. The reason it is a hit piece doesn't have anything to do with Harris.
3. The reason it is a hit piece has to do with the concept of "New Atheists."
4. The author wants to make Harris the "spokesperson" for "new atheists," which is
5. total and utter bullshit, because
6. "New Atheists" isn't a real group but something often made up as a strawman (from YOUR source), and
7. even if you go with the other description in your source, there is no way he has been made the "spokesperson." So
8. this is a hit piece on vocal atheists by
9. fallaciously linking Harris to being the leader of atheists.

As for personal snark and getting a grip, I'm not the one sitting on 4 jury hides.

 

Goblinmonger

(22,340 posts)
27. I'm sure I'll be accused of shielding Harris
Tue Feb 16, 2016, 03:47 PM
Feb 2016

Whatever that means. Even though I have said 3 times I have no desire to do that.

 

rug

(82,333 posts)
47. Sink is a poor term for a shallow body of water.
Tue Feb 16, 2016, 04:23 PM
Feb 2016

1. That defies credulity.

2. There must be a body double in the video.

3.4.5. The evidence is overwhelmingly to the contrary.

6. This statement is beyond snark - or reality.

7. You don't need to be elected a press secretary to spread the word.

8.9. Logic, and reality fail.

10. How many were your alerts?

Say hi to trotsky above. I understand he gets updates.

 

Goblinmonger

(22,340 posts)
54. I would never say something so horrible as that about you.
Tue Feb 16, 2016, 05:10 PM
Feb 2016

1. Then please, point specifically to where I am defending Harris in this thread. Shouldn't be hard.

2. I know this might be confusing: yes, the video is about Harris; the reason it is a hit piece isn't.

3.4.5. So please do show me where Harris has been made the spokesperson for a group that calls itself the "new atheists." I'll wait patiently.

6. YOUR OWN SOURCE says that, at best, it's a general reference to some people but that it is used as a straw man. As it is in the article you post.

7. First, show me the official group call "New Atheists" and then we'll go to the next step.

8.9. Keep defending it.

I wish they were my alerts. Can't take credit on this one.

It's kind of sad that you think trotsky has only one friend.

 

rug

(82,333 posts)
56. That's good since it referred to your post.
Tue Feb 16, 2016, 05:12 PM
Feb 2016

Best to avoid embarrassment.

And, it only required one response.

It's kind of sad that you read that post as implying trotsky has one friend. Either gross dishonesty or gross reading miscomprehension is at play.

 

Goblinmonger

(22,340 posts)
58. Good to see you have just completely avoided any real discussion
Tue Feb 16, 2016, 05:28 PM
Feb 2016

of the issue and deflected this away to something else. Good to see things never change.

MisterP

(23,730 posts)
26. more fun from the Clarion Project
Tue Feb 16, 2016, 03:47 PM
Feb 2016
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026099212

New Atheism's a candy coating to get reaction out to the same types who'd condemn the same statement in the mouth of a creationist or whatever
 

rug

(82,333 posts)
39. Hardly. Harris and most of the others cited in the article are antitheists.
Tue Feb 16, 2016, 03:59 PM
Feb 2016

A different thing entirely.

 

skepticscott

(13,029 posts)
49. Which is no doubt why the rather clueless author you cited
Tue Feb 16, 2016, 04:41 PM
Feb 2016

keeps referring to them as "New Atheists"

You really need better writers, ruggie. Maybe the retired yacht club can help.

 

rug

(82,333 posts)
52. Let me see, an anonymous internet poster who calls himself "skeptic scott" calls this woman
Tue Feb 16, 2016, 05:02 PM
Feb 2016

"clueless".

Sarah Lazare is a staff writer for AlterNet. A former staff writer for Common Dreams, Sarah co-edited the book About Face: Military Resisters Turn Against War.


Here's one for you scottie:
 

skepticscott

(13,029 posts)
60. Wow...she wrote a book
Tue Feb 16, 2016, 06:44 PM
Feb 2016

And writes on blogs. I am SO fucking impressed. Would you like a list of completely clueless, brainless, morons who have done both?

And what's even funnier is, YOU'RE the one who said she's calling these people something completely different than what they actually are.

So yeah..at least one of you is clueless. I'll let you pick which one.

Jackie Wilson Said

(4,176 posts)
85. Why do people who dont believe in make believe get under your skin so much?
Tue Feb 16, 2016, 08:49 PM
Feb 2016

Put the anti Muslim thing aside, that stuff is ugly and many christians have exact same attitude.

 

rug

(82,333 posts)
88. They don't. People who are assholes do.
Tue Feb 16, 2016, 08:52 PM
Feb 2016

Let me ask you if you agree with your statement, with one word changed.

"that stuff is ugly and many atheists have exact same attitude."

Jackie Wilson Said

(4,176 posts)
89. You are the one pointing out that he is an atheist. I have news for you, there is no god
Tue Feb 16, 2016, 08:54 PM
Feb 2016

Sorry, just isnt.

Being pissed off anytime a non believer says something will someday be a full time job, as evolution proceeds less and less are believing in make believe.

 

rug

(82,333 posts)
91. Actually, he is the one pointing it out.
Tue Feb 16, 2016, 08:57 PM
Feb 2016

And your "news" is centuries old.

What website did you come from?

 

rug

(82,333 posts)
53. BYW, the difference is that atheism is simply nonbelief in god(s),
Tue Feb 16, 2016, 05:07 PM
Feb 2016

There is nothing in it that compels anyone to attack or hate Islam or any other religion.

Contrary to what's on display here.

fleur-de-lisa

(14,615 posts)
57. Jury voted 1-6 to LEAVE IT
Tue Feb 16, 2016, 05:20 PM
Feb 2016

On Tue Feb 16, 2016, 03:16 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

BYW, the difference is that atheism is simply nonbelief in god(s),
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1218&pid=223793

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

This poster is claiming that Atheists on DU "attack or hate Islam or any other religion."

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Tue Feb 16, 2016, 03:19 PM, and the Jury voted 1-6 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Silly alert.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Grasping at straws because of a personal rage against the poster personally. Nothing out of line in this post.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Oh FFS! This is the SILLIEST. ALERT. EVER.
Juror #7 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given

katsy

(4,246 posts)
59. So where are the #s that refute that video?
Tue Feb 16, 2016, 05:29 PM
Feb 2016

As a feminist atheist I dislike all fundie religious beliefs. All of them and that includes Islamic nutbaggery so what?

I don't condone killing anyone for it. I just don't want their stupid fucking insanity touching my life at all ever in any way shape or form. Fuck no.

What in that video can be refuted by the #s and undisputed fact? I'm all ears. Why is that a pigsty? I'm inclined to listen to a Muslim woman who's laying down some #s, and yet open to contrary facts.

As to Sam Harris... He's entitled to his opinion. So what? I'm against curtailment of free speech.

I am a vocal opponent to Islamic law and find it offensive in every way. Sharia law is misogynistic, homophobic, anti-secular, anti-science, pro-slavery and ok with killing atheists. So yeah basically every value I hold dear, Islam opposes my right to exist without fear of punishment.

katsy

(4,246 posts)
64. I'm looking at the #s from the pew project
Tue Feb 16, 2016, 07:34 PM
Feb 2016

where's the contrary study?

I looked at the SPLC website for info on the clarion project and it's not listed as a hate group.

Beyond "shooting the messenger" bs that is expected... Can you show me where that Muslim woman was lying or making up stats?

Simple question.

katsy

(4,246 posts)
76. I don't poke around any rw sites
Tue Feb 16, 2016, 08:17 PM
Feb 2016

And I don't give a fuck about CTers or their opinions.

That pew research study has been published independently and that's the focus of that film. I've seen the study outside of the clarion project.

So,,, has the pew research study been discredited? If not then why your hysteria over who the messenger of the study is.

Shall I retrieve the study straight from the pew research website for you? Would that help you better focus on the message and not the messenger?

I don't care who is commenting on the message... I don't like the message.

There isn't any amount of poo flinging by you that will change my mind about an archaic, barbaric, misogynistic, homophobic, anti-secular, anti-science, tribalistic religion no matter if xtian or islamic. Their kind of indefensible doctrines offend me and should offend any modern society and democratic, progressive people.

katsy

(4,246 posts)
79. Right right right
Tue Feb 16, 2016, 08:31 PM
Feb 2016

So that pew study has not been discredited.

Sam Harris still has freedom of speech.

SPLC still hasn't listed the clarion project as a hate organization.

I still don't care who the messengers are and Islam is still a douche of a religion.

Check 👍🏼

katsy

(4,246 posts)
93. Sure it does. But all fluff.
Tue Feb 16, 2016, 09:48 PM
Feb 2016

You are critical of the messenger but don't address the stats by the pew study. Have they not been discredited? Is that why you point out the messengers' bkgd and ignore the stats?

We know the anti-muslim players. So what in that video you posted by the clarion project was anti-muslim? Because all I saw were stats. A restatement of stats by pew research. You must have something discrediting the pew research. Because shooting the messenger lacks substance.

You are critical of Sam Harris and yet give islamic douchebaggery a pass. Fail.


muriel_volestrangler

(101,146 posts)
65. Written by someone who doesn't know what 'spokesperson' means, and hasn't heard of Donald Trump
Tue Feb 16, 2016, 07:38 PM
Feb 2016

The absence of any 'spokesperson' for 'New Atheism' has already been proved, at length, in this thread. But we also have "they are at least as strident in their denunciations of Islam as any Republican candidate"; no-one who knows who Donald Trump is, and how he advocates banning Muslims from entering the USA, could write that. Why has Alternet got such an ignorant writer posting stuff there?

 

rug

(82,333 posts)
72. Tsk, tsk. You're really agitated.
Tue Feb 16, 2016, 08:11 PM
Feb 2016

How do you like The Clarion Project, scottie?

You do realize that's part of the article. The other part being Sam & Co.

muriel_volestrangler

(101,146 posts)
87. I don't, but the writer seems far more concerned by the existence of New Atheists
Tue Feb 16, 2016, 08:52 PM
Feb 2016

The Clarion Project, after all, doesn't appear in the title. She imagines an organisation that has 'spokespeople', and then imagines that it will unite with right-wing militarists. And "many New Atheists remain relucatant to openly ally with forces associated with the Republican Party's evangelical base" shows this to be, frankly, a paranoid conspiracy theory - she's imagining an organisation, and since there's no evidence of it, let alone an alliance with right wing evangelicals, she has to say it's hidden its true position.

She's full of shit.

Lordquinton

(7,886 posts)
94. What does LGBTQIA mean?
Tue Feb 16, 2016, 10:42 PM
Feb 2016

While you're asking questions in evasion how about you answer one for once?

Response to Lordquinton (Reply #100)

Lordquinton

(7,886 posts)
104. Maybe he'll be able to answer the question when he gets back
Thu Feb 18, 2016, 11:43 AM
Feb 2016

seems avoiding it has caused him more trouble than it's worth.

Jackie Wilson Said

(4,176 posts)
78. You seem to have a problem with atheists.
Tue Feb 16, 2016, 08:29 PM
Feb 2016

An atheist is simply someone who doesnt believe in make believe.

If this particular person has ugly views on Muslims, so be it, that is wrong, but it has nothing to do with the fact that he does not believe in make believe.

 

rug

(82,333 posts)
82. Actually, it's nonbelief in god(s).
Tue Feb 16, 2016, 08:34 PM
Feb 2016

It has nothing to do with disbelief or make believe.

Meanwhile, read #39 and #53 and get back to me.

 

skepticscott

(13,029 posts)
97. You're finally getting the distinction
Wed Feb 17, 2016, 07:59 AM
Feb 2016

good for you. Too bad you keep posting articles by people who haven't a clue about it.

bluestateguy

(44,173 posts)
80. People here cheer on athiests when they bash Christians (even liberal Christians)
Tue Feb 16, 2016, 08:32 PM
Feb 2016

But when those same atheists start to criticize Islam, then the protective circle forms.

Now there is a genuine Islamophobia out there, and it comes from many parts of the political spectrum. Islamophobia is wrong no matter what, but please, just be consistent.

muriel_volestrangler

(101,146 posts)
92. Why do you say 'but'?
Tue Feb 16, 2016, 08:57 PM
Feb 2016

"People here cheer on athiests when they bash Christians (even liberal Christians)"

well, when there's something worth bashing, eg opposition to LGBT rights, yes.

"when those same atheists start to criticize Islam, then the protective circle forms"

so they're on the side of those atheists, whether criticizing Christians or Islam. Why do you use the conjunction 'but'? They are being consistent.

 

AlbertCat

(17,505 posts)
101. I didn't bother with this because...
Wed Feb 17, 2016, 03:05 PM
Feb 2016

... "new atheist" is a meaningless term.

and it has no "spokesperson".

So the 1st 3 words of the title mean nothing..... why continue?

 

Albertoo

(2,016 posts)
108. How on earth is this an "Explicitly Anti-Muslim Hate Video"?
Tue Feb 23, 2016, 02:30 AM
Feb 2016

I listened to the whole video. All I saw was a moderate Muslim lady presenting the fact a strong minority of Muslims hold views which are antithetical to those of Progressives. She mentions high percentages believing in honor killings and that apostates should be executed.
Where is the hate in that video? PS: and when did Bill Maher insult a Muslim?

NeoGreen

(4,030 posts)
109. In Magical World...
Tue Feb 23, 2016, 07:25 AM
Feb 2016

...facts don't matter.

by analogy, to quote Nixon "If the the president does it, that means it's not illegal"

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Religion»'New Atheist' Spokesperso...