On Faith Vs. Reason: "It's Become Bloodsport" (AUDIO)

Thank GOODNESS Lionel played the religion card! That's one way to liven up a forum that seemed to have died when this fancy new Silverlight fancy pagent walk'n forum went live. Rowan Atkinson (Mr Bean) has a hilarious Youtube where he plays that dreaded "DEB'L where (rofl) Rowan welcomes everybody
to .. Hades.
:(
Aka, Hell (if I'm allowed to say that word without censure).

"Murderers on the left, lawyers on the right" he quips adding,

"Yes. You folks bet WRONG".

Mr Bean. Gotta love him. Since an all-knowing, omnipotent deity DOES NOT EXIST, it's kind of baffling how any mere mortals can go around telling everybody exactly what lies on the "other side" (cue scary 360 muzak). Unless they themselves ARE that all-knowing, omnipotent deity. Like Star Trek's "Q" guy (he could turn the Enterprise into a chick-let then back again).

Many revel with glee and mock the sheer stupidity of those believer folks, thinking that they (the mockers) themselves are infinitely wiser and smarter than the believer folks .. not knowing that many believer folks are indeed brilliant scientists, engineers, anthropologists, geologists, etc who fully understand quasars, the Doppler effect, the age of the universe, carbon dating, Planck's constant, quantum mechanics, dark matter and all that other jumbo mumbo most folks forget the split second they pocket that college diploma.

"If there's a hell" (LOL), I'll enjoy partying with my friends (ROFL)!!!"

So goes the mocking chant of untold millions. Ok then. Good luck to ya on THAT roll of the dice.
Pete? See if you can convince Lionel to toss politics, FOX news and global warming into this discussion. That should really blow the post count off right off the scale and maybe revive this joint.

How does speaking French, liking golf, or being a fan of the Yankees correlate to a belief that is, by definition, impossible to prove while altering the direction of many civilizations? Lionel, please. You have no comprehension of what you are talking about and are doing exactly what you accuse these particular atheists of. Do a little study or, at the very least, invite one of them on the show to address this critical topic a little more, well, critically.

DDH represent a new age of assertive atheism, and a fringe that I (a long time, fire-breathing atheist) have come to see as "anti-theists". They mirror other elements of our society in that extremist voices are being heard with increasing regularity and popularity. Yet there is still a knee-jerk reaction to defend religion and religious belief when atheists discuss why they have chosen to withhold or withdraw their belief in the divine.

Lionel is correct in identifying DDH as extreme voices, and notes that "atheist" is commonly and effectively used as a perjorative, but he doesn't connect the dots - a group, or class of people who are always treated with mistrust, disdain or contempt will when given an opportunity speak out against their oppressors. And when they do, the loudest and most popular voices will be the more extreme ones.

As usual, Lionel treats a serious subject as a time filler, focusing on controversy while providing little illumination.

I see a fair amount of anger here. Obviously in the limited time they couldn't cover very much. I haven't read the article yet but I will get back on that. Anyone else read it first before complaining? I am an Atheist but I don't denigrate believers. I found it to be useless for convincing anyone, if that was the motive, and just useful for producing emnity in all. Not a good Idea where the majority of the population of the earth is in one or other of the major religions out there who are becoming aggressive and restive again. Antagonism is a poor diplomatic model and I disagree with the big three on their tactics. However it is ideal to cause contraversy and to sell books and get screen time for interviews it works well. They see that the Enlightenment is on its last legs before the earth is enfolded in the dark shroud of religion and mysticism and they are trying to stop it. A rear guard action, if-you-will, to the final fall of Reason. Personally I see the earth going through another round of religous wars and flowering of more fundamentalist terror on a global scale. We are seeing it not just in the Middle East, but in Asia and the USA. The very rich wants us to become a corporate theocracy and they can still get it.

You must remember that the core of those who accept evolution as science is still 14% and the rest believe God is doing it in those studies. All that "secular" education hasn't affect the believer at all despite all the horror stories of the theocrats in their move to make every school a church and place of military training for all the wars of conversion they wish to wage to prepare the earth for the return of their Great White Father. There are more believers proportionally than in 1776! We are the most theocratic 1st world nations on the planet. {We are swiftly becoming a 3rd world nation because of the top 10%.}

You bet it has turned into a "bloodsport". Christian extremists are the ones who picked the fight with mainstream America and now they're crying "foul" as the unintended consequences bury them. Of course, the mainstream is pushing back. Consider who carries on an unrelenting attack on women's reproductive rights? Who puts up the big money to defeat legislation that would give our gay and lesbian citizens their all constitutional rights? Who is it insists that we continue wasting money on ineffective "abstinence only" sex education for our kids? Who has opposed the free breakfast and lunch program in our area for low income kids (because it would undermine the family)? It's time for us to enter a new "age of reason".

Oh, and like Lionel, I too am "r-e-e-eally interested" in religion, but for the same reason that Dr. Ehrlich was interested in bacteria.

This is an example of why we need people like Dawkins, Harris and Hitchens. The ignorance and shallowness of thought of Miller and Lionel is astounding.

If you want to witness the mentality of "believers" and see their searing and demented hatred for anything they feel contains a hint of disbelief or liberalism, see some of the right-wing "news" sites and blogs--Canada Free Press being a glaring example. You will especially find some of the weirdest religiosity in the comment sections.

Speaking of atheists, I can't believe I sacrificed 15+ minutes of my limited existence listening to these clueless pinheads attempt to say something of substance or intelligence about a subject they clearly have no knowledge of, or even the capacity to differentiate Hitchens's, Dawkin's, et al, points of view. The only anger present is my own, having to listen to your pointless claptrap! Are you even curious enough to investigate what these people have to say, or is it too much for you fragile eggshell minds? I would rather listen to homeless people talk about the machine elves that come out every night, or Orally Taitz make a complete ass at of her self skewering common sense - at least that's somewhat entertaining in a dismissive mien. Listening to you bobos is like listening to two idiots argue about what came first, the chicken or the egg.

The reason that people like Dawkins, Hitchens, and Harris take such umbrage with religion is the simple fact that religious people have the definite propensity to force their views down the throats of everyone else. We do not want to live in a theocracy, but that's exactly what most religionists want. What about those of us who simply want freedom FROM religion?

Well like virtually everyone here has already said.
You have no idea what you are talking about.

A terribly superficial piece that makes no attempt to really look at the positions the atheists you deride actually hold. Anyone willing to spend a couple hours watching clips of them on YouTube would be better informed than you and Ms Miller seem to be.

1) You have grossly mischaracterized the position of Hitchens, Dawkins, etc. They are not angry, they do not hate believers. They do think that believing in the supernatural and using that to inform decisions that impact all of us, particularly those who do not hold the same beliefs. The problem is not what they believe, it's that they tend to try to force their unfounded beliefs onto others often in the form of public policy. For example blocking stem cell research because some think a collection of 150 cells has a soul, or preventing gays from marrying because some book full of iron age morality says it's bad.

2) If you think atheists are only picking on the irrationality of religion you have not done your research. It's more evidence you did little or no research on the subject at hand. Take a look at the recent tasking to task of Bill Maher for his irrational position on vaccination as an example.

3) Dawkins and Harris at least have no need to sell books, they have had jobs as professors since long before they were writing popular books.

Lisa Miller has very limited knowledge on this subject,and is planting her foot firmly in her mouth. This very thin understanding gives atheists belly laughs and she is expressing intolerance for something she doesn't really understand.

I suggest that the reason atheists get furious with the irrationality of religious practice and less so with other expressions of irrationality -- to use your examples, drinking too much, driving without a seat belt, marrying the wrong person -- is when religion ceases being private and becomes self-righteous, pious, smug, prosyletizing to the point where it is the best and only answer because it is God's answer, and who can defy The Supreme Being? Horrible crimes against humanity have thus been committed in perfect bliss. But who is to say many Nazis and Tutsi and genocidal Turks, etc. weren't atheists?

We atheists sometimes commit our own dangerous condescensions. We tar believers with the sticky brush of ignorance and stupidity, when they are just frightened or happily deluded or routinized or something that is, at worst, their own problem.

Dawkins, Harris, Hitchens have done a great public service. Maybe "atheist" will lose some of its perjorative poison. Till then I prefer nonbeliever.

Blake: "God appears and God is Light / To those poor souls who dwell in Night / But does a Human Form display / For those who dwell in realms of Day. * (On Christianity)

People are entitled to their religion...until they try to force it down the throats of people who want nothing to do with it. I have no problems with Mormons....until they show up at my door, trying to talk to me about their religion even after I say I'm not interested, (I've found that if I lie to them and tell them I'm a Satanist, the conversation immediately ends!). I have no problem with muslims....until they try to blow me up in order to convince me to be a muslim. I have no problems with christians....until they try to take over my government.

Every religion has probably been oppressed at one time or another in their history, and in return, they have also been oppressors. In doing so, I think they gave up the right to act as if they have the only "true" answer about how to live one's life.

Lisa Miller has very limited knowledge of this subject and she is placing her foot firmly in her mouth. Criticism from thin knowledge gives atheists belly laughs, She is way over her head.

Oops. Sorry. I meant in the name of his atheism.

Lionel you sound like a jackass. What do you mean "lighten up"? Who started the "bloodsport"? Not the atheists. I've never heard of an atheist killing a religious person in the name of his religion.

"Newsweek's Lisa Miller and Lionel discuss why such enmity, hatred and unmitigated and unfiltered contempt are exhibited for those who happen to believe."

Wow, that's not biased at all.

So you see religion in "some cases" doing good things. So what? These people could be doing good things without their stupid religion as well. What about all terrible things historically done in the name of religion? And if atheists are angry, its probably because of the hypocrisy of the religious. Don't ignore the fact that religious people are just as angry at atheists, even more so. I've never met a religious person who was willing to accept one's atheism without trying to convert the atheist to religion.

How can you ask a believer if those who don't believe actually make sense? What do you expect her to say? Of course its stupid to believe in an invisible friend in the sky.