?

Log in

No account? Create an account

a passionate repentance

What the heck?

What the heck?

Previous Entry Share Next Entry
may God stand
I don't know why I thought that atheists would be less vitriolic than say..a fundamentalist, but I did. I guess because the atheists I know are eminently gentle, reasonable people. Wow.

http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=48252
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dawkins: Religion equals 'child abuse'
Scientist compares Moses to Hitler, calls New Testament 'sado-masochistic doctrine'

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: January 8, 2006
1:00 a.m. Eastern




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
© 2006 WorldNetDaily.com

Controversial scientist and evolutionist Richard Dawkins, dubbed "Darwin's Rottweiler," calls religion a "virus" and faith-based education "child abuse" in a two-part series he wrote and appears in that begins airing on the UK's Channel 4, beginning tomorrow evening.

Entitled "Root of All Evil?," the series features the atheist Dawkins visiting Lourdes, France, Colorado Springs, Colo., the al-Aqsa mosque in Jerusalem and a British religious school, using each of the venues to argue religion subverts reason.

In "The God Delusion," the first film in the series, Dawkins targets Catholicism at the pilgrimage site in Lourdes. "If you want to experience the medieval rituals of faith, the candle light, the incense, music, important-sounding dead languages, nobody does it better than the Catholics," he says.

Dawkins, using his visit to Colorado Springs' New Life Church, criticizes conservative U.S. evangelicals and warns his audience of the influence of "Christian fascism" and "an American Taliban."

The backdrop of the al-Aqsa mosque and an American-born Jew turned fundamentalist Muslim who tells Dawkins to prepare for the Islamic world empire - and who clashes with him after saying he hates atheists - rounds out the first program's case for the delusions of the faithful.


In part two, "The Virus of Faith," Dawkins attacks the teaching of religion to children, calling it child abuse.

"Innocent children are being saddled with demonstrable falsehoods," he says. "It's time to question the abuse of childhood innocence with superstitious ideas of hellfire and damnation. Isn't it weird the way we automatically label a tiny child with its parents' religion?"

"Sectarian religious schools," Dawkins asserts, have been "deeply damaging" to generations of children.

Dawkins, who makes no effort to disguise his atheism and contempt for religion, focuses on the Bible, too.

"The God of the Old Testament has got to be the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous, and proud of it, petty, vindictive, unjust, unforgiving, racist," he says. Dawkins then criticizes Abraham, compares Moses to Hitler and Saddam Hussein, and calls the New Testament "St Paul's nasty, sado-masochistic doctrine of atonement for original sin."

John Deighan, a spokesman for the Catholic Church, took issue with Dawkin's denunciation of religion, telling the Glasgow Sunday Herald, "Dawkins is well known for his vitriolic attacks on faith, and I think faith has withstood his attacks. He really is going beyond his abilities as a scientist when he starts to venture into the field of philosophy and theology. He is the guy with demonstrable problems."

Madeline Bunting, a columnist for the Guardian, who reviewed the series, wrote: "There's an aggrieved frustration that [atheist humanists] have been short-changed by history - we were supposed to be all atheist rationalists by now. Secularization was supposed to be an inextricable part of progress. Even more grating, what secularization there has been is accompanied by the growth of weird irrationalities from crystals to ley lines. As G.K. Chesterton pointed out, the problem when people don't believe in God is not that they believe nothing, it is that they believe anything."


Dawkins, perhaps best know for his much-cited comment that evolution "made it possible to be an intellectually satisfied atheist," appeals to John Lennon in a commentary he authored for the Belfast Telegraph on the eve of his program's premiere: "Religion may not be the root of all evil, but it is a serious contender. Even so it could be justified, if only its claims were true. But they are undermined by science and reason. Imagine a world where nobody is intimidated against following reason, wherever it leads. "You may say I'm a dreamer. But I'm not the only one."
  • I like Dawkins, and I'm looking forward to seeking his program tonight. Very often things he says are taken out of context, but a lot of it is directed at the sort of people who think that teaching evolution in schools is a bad thing - which has now moved on to denying that the Big bang theory because that's contrary to the Bible as well - which does amount to a sort of child abuse surely?
    • I'd be the first to admit a bias. I suppose that it troubles me to think of faith--or the lack of it as child abuse. I always thought he idea of abuse was pretty concrete. Legally defineable and limited.
      • If you saw the program and saw the kinds of people he was talking to - they certainly weren't people I'd want bringing up children, especially girls.

        If you teach girls that they are second class and objects of shame from the moment that they are born, is that not child abuse?
        • Yes. I would. But that's completely incomprehensible to me. I don't see ANYTHING in the Bible or in the Creed that would support such a thing.

          To be fair, I've never found anything in the Qu'ran to support the use of the burka, and yet they wear it. It might be hadith--I haven't studied hadith, but all I see in the Qu'ran is the desire that women dress modestly.

          So maybe it's not all that surprising. There are lunatics everywhere. I'm just sickened that it seems institutionalized, at least by the sound of it, in some versions of Christianity.

          That's sad.
  • It's easy to find shrill, illogical voices on any side of an issue. They're as far away as a Google search. How did this gentleman get on TV? Clearly he's got the bucks or backing to pay for it.

    While there appears to be little point to his show other than to rant about religion this is a show that could never air in the United States as we stand today. The Parent's Televsion Council or some other conservative TV watch dog group would have a nutty and the program would be pulled. However, no one complains about Pat Robertson when, on his television show, he calls for the assassination of foreign presidents and says that Ariel Sharon's stroke is the condemnation of God for giving part of Palestine, taken in war I might add, back to the Palestinians.

    *shrug It is both a beautiful and terrible time we live in, philosophically and theologically.
    • Pat Robertson functions as comic relief for the Far Right. Or maybe to soothe that tiny fraction of the country that believes God actually exists as a giant saltine. PR's presence on television is no more indicative of the mean than Mr. Roger's Neighborhood is of the projects.
    • Professor Dawkins is a Professor for the Public Understanding of Science at one of the UK's best Universities, and is a world-famous authority on biology especially evolutionary theory.

      He has also appeared on US television in programs explaining evolutionary theory.

Powered by LiveJournal.com