I feel sorry for the girl in this video and her family - people should not be discriminated against simply because they hold different beliefs.

That being said, I have two points to make. Firstly, it is not just atheists who are discriminated against for holding different beliefs. Many religious people are routinely discriminated against for their faith by secularists or atheists - just look at the way Christians and Muslims have been persecuted in China. Secondly, Dawkins is not advocating an end to religious discrimination against atheists. Instead, he is advocating discrimination and intolerance of religious people - and I find that just as distasteful as the discrimination that the girl in this video suffered.

I believe in China, everyone who follows a faith is oppressed. More then Christianity and Islam, it's Falun Dafa.

True - the 70 million plus followers of Falun Dafa/Falun Gong have been terribly persecuted for their religious beliefs.

Instead, he is advocating discrimination and intolerance of religious people
No, he has NEVER argued for anything of the sort, if you've actually listened to what he's said.

He has even stated multiple times how people are free to believe whatever they want. but he is not giving them a free ride, instead he challenges them like political opponents, calling for them to provide reasons for their "faith" This "hurts" the religious because they are not used to being challenged, and expect everyone to just accept "faith" for no apparent reason, other then the fact that none of what they believe makes sense without adding "Its my faith" at the end.

"other then the fact that none of what they believe makes sense without adding "Its my faith" at the end"

Exactly the same charge could be levelled at atheism - it shows how little you know about science and atheism if you think that they are based on anything but theory and conjecture (and no these aren't the ravings of someone who doesn't believe in evolution, but someone with a Masters in the philosophy of science). Religion and science are perfectly compatible. Literalism is the enemy of reason - not faith.

Exactly the same charge could be levelled at atheism

No, because you can explain, reason, and justify atheism and scientific theories with evidence and logic. if someone challenges me on my atheism, I have a very well-founded reasons. If someone challenges a theist, the argument usually ends up as some sort of stalemate where the believer retorts to stuff like "Its just my faith" Atheism is not my faith, its not something I "believe in" its a conclusion reached after examining the evidence as honestly as I can.

Literalism is the enemy of reason - not faith.
This is like saying "Its totally cool to believe improbable nonsense about the universe to a certain degree"

What we believe is real, is what we base our actions on. To the 9/11 hijackers, it was perfectly reasonable to drive planes into buildings, because they actually believed the nonsense in the Qur'an. That you think they interpreted the book wrong, doesnt really matter, what matters is they were given a free pass on their twisted logic, all their life they were told that faith was a virtue, believing something in spite of all evidence to the contrary is somehow a good thing. That kind of unreasonable thinking is doomed to fail, and its doomed to cause serious problems, as indeed it has throughout history, and ultimately, it may cause the whole fucking world to blow up.

The challenge for atheism is in describing irrational and, as yet, immeasurable forces. If you don't believe in a unitary creation (fine), do you advocate a chaotic creation or something fragmentary and de-centered yet still designed? And it is responsible to rationally weigh available evidence, but that approach alone ignores the degree to which we make decisions that are purely instinctual and have little to do with reasoned thinking.

I also believe that religion and science are ultimately compatable. And somewhat unlike Dawkins, I believe that the advances in science actually increase and inform religious thought, but only if religion avoids arguing that science is the Devil.

To say that Al Qaeda is a religion, or a symbol of the problems of religion, misses all of the political and military aspects of that group. To the hijackers, it was reasonable to drive planes into THOSE TARGETS because one was the biggest military base in the world and the other buildings were the biggest symbol of U.S. trade in the world. In the end, it comes down to money and guns and control, and the Qur'an, Bible, Talmud are somewhat beside the point.

"To the 9/11 hijackers, it was perfectly reasonable to drive planes into buildings, because they actually believed the nonsense in the Qur'an."

"To say that Al Qaeda is a religion, or a symbol of the problems of religion, misses all of the political and military aspects of that group. To the hijackers, it was reasonable to drive planes into THOSE TARGETS because one was the biggest military base in the world and the other buildings were the biggest symbol of U.S. trade in the world"


The 9/11 attacks were motivated by anger at America's unobjective support for over fifty years of Israeli aggression against the Palestinians, and America's unobjective support of tyrannical secular regimes in the Middle East and wider Islamic world. That does not in anyway mean that the 9/11 attacks were not a terrible crime.

And once again you wish to condemn the Qur'an as complete nonsense. That is your right - I believe in freedom of speech. But just remember this - you're not helping the current problems - you're part of them; by insulting Muslims you are simply increasing the rift between the Islamic world and the West.

You can't reconcile two peoples by saying that what one of them believes in is bullshit. For example, I don't think atheism has any of the answers, but I am perfectly capable of living, and being friends with atheists - and respecting their beliefs - as long as they don't spend their whole time telling me that my fundamental beliefs are all bullshit - which is what you and other Dawkinsesque atheists do. You are not interested in dialogue or understanding - you just want to convert everyone to your world-view, and as a pluralist I object to this.


"I also believe that religion and science are ultimately compatable. And somewhat unlike Dawkins, I believe that the advances in science actually increase and inform religious thought, but only if religion avoids arguing that science is the Devil. "

Well said Rickegee!!!

Clip seems to be *dead, Youtube just suspended Richard Dawkins account on youtube. I wonder what that's all about?

I posted a new link on BRM's page. It's here, btw: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tmnoPWkVqmM

*dead

The link to this video has been flagged as dead. Fix it within 7 days or it will be discarded (dead called by Gold Star member silvercord)

ooops

*undead

The link to this video has been fixed (undead called by original submitter BicycleRepairMan)

And once again you wish to condemn the Qur'an as complete nonsense. That is your right - I believe in freedom of speech. But just remember this - you're not helping the current problems - you're part of them; by insulting Muslims you are simply increasing the rift between the Islamic world and the West.

And once again, not my fucking problem, if muslims arent grown-ups enough to have their precious faith criticized, then thats a very clear sign they are intolerant fundamentalists, and not just simply taking a different stance than me. Why are they intolerant fundamentalists? Because the book they obey tells them to. Over and over and over and over again. Page after page of the Qur'an is hammering in the "fact" that infidels are worthless garbage to the one true God, page after page argues that only the people who are true believer, who recites holy books in every waking hour, are the only decent people out there. Whereever you get your pluralist views, you didnt get it from the Qur'an, thats for damn sure.

One of the greatest problems with holy books is that those who believe in them continually think that they get their morals from scripture. the overwhelming evidence suggests that that isnt the case.(multiple religions, shifting morals within each religion, moral atheists etc.) If you were indoctrinated with the "fact" that "Mein Kampfh" was the inerrant word of God, you might have the same morals as a modern christian or muslim, or atheist, but you'd go around telling everyone about some obscure line in the book that might suggest everyone has equal rights and its wrong to kill, saying "thats how that book gives me my moral foundation." and "Its got absolutely nothing to do with hating the jews or building the third reich"

With all due respect, I defy you to show me where Dawkins, in any of his media, advocates "discrimination and intolerance of religious people." That's just completely incorrect.

Evangelical Atheism is just as offensive as Evangelical Christianity.
I want neither Dawkins nor Billy Graham telling me how i should think or act or live.

Well said Memorare.

Only the individual can think, and thereby create new values for society, nay, even set up new moral standards to which the life of the community conforms. ... The ideals which have lighted my way, and time after time have given me new courage to face life cheerfully, have been Kindness, Beauty and Truth.

- Albert Einstein, 1954

This is a tedious video where nothing happens. Big shock, mindless theists. What's the next revelation, carnivorous lions?

And the comments make me want to throw up.

*dead

This published video has been declared non-functional; embed code must be fixed within 2 days or it will be sent to the dead pool - declared dead by nibiyabi.

I just watched that entire video and I am fucking sick to my stomach and fuming.

Awarding Ornthoron with one Power Point for fixing this video's dead embed code.

*dead

This video has been declared non-functional; embed code must be fixed within 2 days or it will be sent to the dead pool - declared dead by jonny.