Dawkins on The Panel

Goodshape

robindch wrote:

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/18/nyregion/18kearny.html?ex=1324098000&en=87af8b74af1e13cc&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss

From the article :

teacher told his sixth-period students at Kearny High School that evolution and the Big Bang were not scientific, that dinosaurs were aboard Noah’s ark, and that only Christians had a place in heaven.

...

In this tale of the teacher who preached in class and the pupil he offended, students and the larger community have mostly lined up with Mr. Paszkiewicz [the teacher], not with Matthew, who has received a death threat handled by the police, as well as critical comments from classmates.

Wow.

And are you saying, Tim Robbins, that we wouldn't be better off without this?

Tim Robbins

Goodshape wrote:

From the article :

Wow.

And are you saying, Tim Robbins, that we wouldn't be better off without this?

Wow back! Of course I don't support that lunacy.
The problem with your argument here lads is that it is based on anecdotal evidence. I can easily give you anecdotal evidence back.
My neighbour's Dad had Cancer and they were at loose ends, they claims that praying and emotional and empathetic support they got from their Church and faith helped them get through the most difficult time in their lifes.
In fact they say that without their Church and faith they don't know if they would have got through.

Anecdotal evidence can easily be rubbished.
You'd be better off getting a sample set instead of picking off one extreme story lads.
I thought skeptics were supposed to know this stuff.
What are you going to be telling me next, anecdotal evidence from homopathy proofs homopathy works?

The fact is lads, Science is supposed to be accuracy and objectivity. The Dawkins 'Child Abuse' mantra is most unscientific. It's pathetic.

Goodshape

Tim Robbins wrote:

My neighbour's Dad had Cancer and they were at loose ends, they claims that praying and emotional and empathetic support they got from their Church and faith helped them get through the most difficult time in their lifes.
In fact they say that without their Church and faith they don't know if they would have got through.

Nobody is saying that all religion, religious people or religious practices are bad to the core, but I would consider the belief that good will, empathy and support can only come as a result of ones 'faith' in God and the Church to be misguided.

Surly these are human qualities that exist regardless of race, creed or religion? Or are only the chosen few worthy of compassion and care?

Obviously that's not the case, and so I ask - why do we still teach our children of the One True God, as distinct from the other, heathen, gods? Why not instead strip away the thousands of years old bull**** and teach them to truly love one another as Human Beings?

5uspect

Sorry I'm heading away until the new year so apologies if I do not reply to posts (I'm writing this in the airport now!)

I'd argee that parents in general shouldn't be punished. As I've already said that just punishing the already abused. What's needed is better religous education that purely comparative rather than dominated by the predominant religion of the school.

If an adult wishes to engage in religion when sick to make themselves feel better its their choice they cannot force their ideas on their kids to get their warm fuzzy placebo.

I don't think argueing over the word abuse is really productive. I think its quite apt and you do not. Maybe we should leave it there.

Tim Robbins

Goodshape wrote:

Nobody is saying that all religion, religious people or religious practices are bad to the core, but I would consider the belief that good will, empathy and support can only come as a result of ones 'faith' in God and the Church to be misguided.

I would consider that an extreme faith position, not as extreme as the last example but still an extreme example of faith.
There's no point having arguments on this unless we are in aggreement as to how many theists think this way and how much theology is to blame for that type of extreme thinking.
Extremist don't just exist in theology they also exist in democratic politics for example. But we are still far better off with democratic politics even if some of the participants use politics to express an unhelpful extremist stance.

Goodshape

Tim Robbins wrote:

I would consider that an extreme faith position, not as extreme as the last example but still an extreme example of faith.

But isn't that what many religions teach, Christianity included? I don't ever remember being told by a priest or religious teacher that I could pick and choose from the rulebook.

And if you're willing to dismiss so much of what the faith teaches, such as the 'fact' that it is the one and only true faith, to be revered above all others, the only way of truly securing your place in heaven - that Jesus was your saviour, the son of the almighty God, who died for your sins - how much of it can you pick and choose from before it becomes apparent that what's left doesn't require faith or devotion to any mystical God or his earthly representatives, but only love and compassion on a very real and human level?

It's all very well continuing worthwhile cultural traditions and practices (of which many exist within many religions), but surly it's time to grow up and leave the superstitious attachments, backward logic and sectarian segregation behind.

Gibs

robindch wrote:

> Do you seriously think that people who baptise their children are abusing them?

Could you list, please, who has actually made this claim? I've certainly not seen anybody.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vx5RSxHbiZg

The clip is Dawkins on The Panel. Go to 9 mins 36 seconds into the clip to hear Dawkins say it.

Tim Robbins

Goodshape wrote:

But isn't that what many religions teach, Christianity included? I don't ever remember being told by a priest or religious teacher that I could pick and choose from the rulebook.

And if you're willing to dismiss so much of what the faith teaches, such as the 'fact' that it is the one and only true faith, to be revered above all others, the only way of truly securing your place in heaven - that Jesus was your saviour, the son of the almighty God, who died for your sins - how much of it can you pick and choose from before it becomes apparent that what's left doesn't require faith or devotion to any mystical God or his earthly representatives, but only love and compassion on a very real and human level?

It's all very well continuing worthwhile cultural traditions and practices (of which many exist within many religions), but surly it's time to grow up and leave the superstitious attachments, backward logic and sectarian segregation behind.

To be honest, I think there would be a lot of variation as to what degree you can and cannot pick and choose, depending on the Religion / Faith and the Priest / Minister / Vicar / Paster.
Generally those who are admanant that they and only they are right and have no tolerance for any deviance are fundamentalist and IMHO in the minority, (but athesist exist in this category too). You do get those fundamentalist types but they seem to be moving out of mainstream religions and setting up cults.

It would be interesting to see some stats what theists and christians agree or disagree on:
Here's one I know off:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_Seminar