SD on 17/1/2007 at 00:37
Well, it tells me that religious fundamentalism is pretty much mainstream in the USA. Presidents, Supreme Court Judges, Attorney Generals - can't get much more mainstream than that.
No doubt it tells you something different though. Something hackneyed about free speech, probably.
jay pettitt on 17/1/2007 at 00:39
Dawkins tends to agree with me; therefore I like him. But he does have a Bee in his bonnet and he is a bit preachy. Though to be honest it's kind of refreshing to have a preachy atheist.
I loose very little sleep over the need to convert people to atheism. Though I would like the christmas nazis to get out of my face for 3 months of the year. I don't mind working during religious holidays including christmas; not everyone's a christian - it's hardly a protest.
JACKofTrades on 17/1/2007 at 00:42
Quote Posted by Illuminatus
You, sir, are in Preach Mode, and the supreme irony is that you are more dogmatic in your atheism than any of the Christians here are in their faith
LOL. Just imagine what it would be like if StD woke up one day and had a supernatural revelation from God. He'd be Pat Robertson times 10. Or maybe 100. :wot: :cheeky:
Kaleid on 17/1/2007 at 00:45
Atheist Outreach: Group Coaxes Unbelievers Into the Open
(
http://www.nysun.com/article/46659)
"A lot of people are afraid to come out as an atheist, or they don't have a place to come out in," Renzatic on 17/1/2007 at 00:46
Quote Posted by Strontium Dog
Well, it tells me that religious fundamentalism is pretty much mainstream in the USA.
No it's not. I live in Georgia, right in the very heart of the the bible belt. I can look out my window right now and see two churches. And yet despite being in the heart of all things religion, I NEVER hear about Creationism, evolution was taught in my high school, and I know a number of very vocal Atheists.
The Fundamentalist America you fear so much is only a very small minority that can scream very, very loudly. And from my experiences, most people don't listen to them.
Nicker on 17/1/2007 at 00:47
Science makes no category mistakes differentiating itself from religion but religion consistently mistakes itself for science, in that it claims to know what's real and it wants equal time and consideration making decisions it has no business making. This goes beyond semantics.
It's not apples and oranges when the "Leader of the Free World" gets his marching orders from God; it's fruit salad with nuts. It's not a philosophical or rhetorical issue it's a
real people are dying for no good reason issue (as an example).
This is an exerpt from here - (
http://www.edge.org/discourse/bb.html#harris) - Sam Harris' summary works for me:
Quote:
The point is not that all religious people are bad; it is not that all bad things are done in the name of religion; and it is not that scientists are never bad, or wrong, or self-deceived.
The point is this: intellectual honesty is better (more enlightened, more useful, less dangerous, more in touch with reality, etc. ) than dogmatism.The degree to which science is committed to the former, and religion to the latter remains one of the most salient and appalling disparities to be found in human discourse. Scientists spend an extraordinary amount of time worrying about being wrong and take great pains to prove others so. In fact, science is the one area of discourse in which a person can win considerable prestige by proving himself wrong.
SD on 17/1/2007 at 00:52
Quote Posted by Renzatic
The Fundamentalist America you fear so much is only a very small minority that can scream very, very loudly. And from my experiences, most people don't listen to them.
Very small minorities can't repeatedly get their people elected to the Presidency. Everyone knows what George W Bush and George HW Bush and Ronald Reagan stood for, and they still voted them in. And the National Association of Evangelicals alone has 30 million members, and that's just one group of Christian fundamentalists. That's not what I would call a "small minority" - that's a small nation.
Scots Taffer on 17/1/2007 at 00:55
Quote Posted by Strontium Dog
No doubt it tells you something different though. Something hackneyed about free speech, probably.
You can't help but be a prick can you?
No, my point was that the page has been around for a while because the prejudices have been around for a while, there's plenty of gay bashing going on in that page and yet rights are creeping forward for homosexuals everywhere. Take the internet back thirty years and it would've been "nigger" this and "coon" that, and so on.
Starting to see my point here?
People use religion as a shield, an umbrella of cover, to attack with the prejudices and malice in their own heart. These attacks aren't coming from religion itself, they are coming from PEOPLE that happen to be a member of a much wider organisation. It's the same with islamic fundamentalists and your everyday Muslim. Is it really that hard to see?
SD on 17/1/2007 at 01:08
Quote Posted by Scots_Taffer
You can't help but be a prick can you?
u know i love u really bud
Quote:
These attacks aren't coming from religion itself, they are coming from PEOPLE that happen to be a member of a much wider organisation.
But they're justifying the stuff they do with religious texts, using the Bible, the immutable word of God. Without the Bible, anti-homosexual groups wouldn't have a leg to stand on. And to my mind, you cannot separate religion and religious texts.
Renzatic on 17/1/2007 at 01:16
Quote Posted by Strontium Dog
Very small minorities can't repeatedly get their people elected to the Presidency. Everyone knows what George W Bush and George HW Bush and Ronald Reagan stood for, and they still voted them in.
I can remember Bush promising to focus more on the problems at home and keeping the country out of foreign affairs during the 2000 election. The fundie rhetoric was almost nonexistent.
So no, most people didn't know his religious preferences when they voted him in. And even if they did, I doubt it would've swayed many people otherwise.
