Root Of All Evil on Network 2 7pm 5/01/09

MackDeToaster

Húrin wrote: »

I'm not saying that Dawkins has no good arguments at all. His demeanor also ruins them as I was discussing. The arguments themselves are just not as amazing and flawless as some people perceive them to be.

This seems very weak to me, as in what's his demeanour got to do with anything ? That's just an ad hominen same as those who say he's 'shrill' and all that crap - ideas speak for themselves and if they're rational and plausible I couldn't care less who they come from.

On another note, I could be wrong but I doubt many of his ideas are particularly original, most of them have probably previously been expounded many times, hecks, I came up with a lot of them by myself when I was a teenager struggling with my faith. Dawkins just happens to have come along at the right place and time to make a bit of an impact in our times.

ironingbored

kelly1 wrote: »

He conveniently ignores the excellent self-sacrificing work done by missionaries and Christian aid organizations to bring relief to suffering people.

Christopher Hitchens' response to similarly erroneous observations is extremely useful. Name one virtuous act perfromed by or phrase uttered by a religious person that could not have been spoken or performed by an atheist?

kelly1 wrote: »

He also conveniently ignores the evil acts of genocide commited by atheist communists.

This is just untrue and has been pointed out again and again to religious people. Hitler was brought up a Roman Catholic. Gott mit uns. Stalin's genocide had nothing to do with the fact that he was an atheist. It is disingenuous on your part to repeat this mistaken mantra.

kelly1 wrote: »

If everyone lived according to Christian principles, the world would be a far better place in which to live.

Substitute "Christian" for Buddhist, Humanist or Democratic. Same thing.

If people who believed in things for which there is not a shred of evidence devoted their time to subjects which would really advance human existence the world would also be a better place.

PDN

ironingbored wrote: »

Name one virtuous act perfromed by or phrase uttered by a religious person that could not have been spoken or performed by an atheist?

Jesus healing the blind man.

Hitler was brought up a Roman Catholic.

Einstein was brought up as a Jew. Richard Dawkins was brought up as an Anglican. So what?

Gott mit uns.

So the Wehrmacht kept their old slogan under the new regime? How shocking!

PDN

PDN wrote: »

Jesus healing the blind man.

Modern Doctors are making great progression into "healing" the blind. Infact, there are numerous kinds of blindness that they can "heal" now. And, I've no doubt that many of them are atheists.:pac:

Húrin

ironingbored wrote: »

Christopher Hitchens' response to similarly erroneous observations is extremely useful. Name one virtuous act perfromed by or phrase uttered by a religious person that could not have been spoken or performed by an atheist?

Turning someone's life around for the better by helping their conversion to Christianity.

This is just untrue and has been pointed out again and again to religious people. Hitler was brought up a Roman Catholic.

So were most atheists here. However, the evidence that Hitler abandoned any and every form of Christianity is abundant.

Stalin's genocide had nothing to do with the fact that he was an atheist. It is disingenuous on your part to repeat this mistaken mantra.

Stalin upheld an image of a political system and ideology firmly based in progress informed by science rather than superstition and metaphysics. He didn't do much other than demolish churches explicitly in the name of atheism, but his ideology depended on atheism. His record discredits the notion that atheism has something special that will make the world a better place, as many in the 19th centuy believed.

If people who believed in things for which there is not a shred of evidence devoted their time to subjects which would really advance human existence the world would also be a better place.

I seriously doubt that most people who flippantly claim that there is "not a shred of evidence" for God have actually bothered to look beyond the culurally ingrained thought processes of daily life, and check out the abundant evidence.

There is very little evidence however, that atheism makes people do things that advance humanity. That's what Stalin thought. I suspect you know very little history. Protestant Christianity has probably done more than any other belief system to advance human rights in the world. (cue someone saying "unless you're gay")

What is a much more noticeable trend, especially in the present age, is that people living Godless lives just slip more and more into individualism and self-interest, rather than actually helping other people.

Húrin

-JammyDodger- wrote: »

Modern Doctors are making great progression into "healing" the blind. Infact, there are numerous kinds of blindness that they can "heal" now. And, I've no doubt that many of them are atheists.:pac:

Did you actually type this with a straight face? I expect you would at least flat out deny that Jesus ever healed anyone. (because for you it simply must be false)

Húrin

Húrin wrote: »

Did you actually type this with a straight face? I expect you would at least flat out deny that Jesus ever healed anyone. (because for you it simply must be false)

I do flat out deny that He healed anyone. I posted that comment with a hint of sarcasm, hence the :pac: at the end. That was to indicate the sarcasm, see.

pH

PDN wrote: »

Jesus healing the blind man.

Imagine a tank full of people, and you turn on a hose and start filling it up, then just before they all drown you pick one at random and "save" him, leaving all the others to drown.

You know what PDN you've done it! You've discovered a virtuous act performed by a theist that couldn't have been performed by an atheist, better write to Hitch, there may be a prize.

MackDeToaster

Húrin wrote: »

Turning someone's life around for the better by helping their conversion to Christianity.

Omg, that's one of the most pathetic articles I've ever had the misfortune to read. The title is cringeworthy and it only gets worse from there. If he is an atheist how could he possibly want to put the shackles of faith on others, the cognitive dissonance is epic. How could substituting one deity for another possibly be a solution? Rather than spending money on bringing in one more religion how about actually spending it on an education?
Not to mention the sheer arrogance if not actual racism inherent - he casually takes an entire continent of many diverse countries and cultures and pigeonholes them into one little superstitious box, saying that the only way they can emerge is to swap their current set of faiths for one other, one which by supposedly claiming to be an atheist he dismisses himself. I feel like puking after reading that steaming pile of hypocrisy.

Oh, can't resist this, I suppose the evangelical christians killing and torturing children accused of being witches in eastern Nigeria aren't really christian either? Of course that wouldn't be part of the 'real' faith that he's talking about.

Dades

Húrin wrote: »

Protestant Christianity has probably done more than any other belief system to advance human rights in the world.

Unless you're gay.

PDN

Dades wrote: »

Unless you're gay.

Especially if you're gay.

Unless you'd prefer being gay in Iran or Cuba than in Sweden?

robindch

Dades wrote: »

Unless you're gay.

Or black. Or unmarried. Or born outside of marriage. Or jewish. Or islamic. And especially if you're an atheist. Lots of things really

.

Tomk1

PDN wrote: »

Jesus healing the blind man.

1st was he blind or partial sighted, could basic laser treatment done the job.

People are hungry, have leprosy, the god-jesus preforms a miracle changing water to alcohol, lets go barbie, lets have a party !!!.

PDN wrote: »

Einstein was brought up as a Jew. Richard Dawkins was brought up as an Anglican. So what?

So the Wehrmacht kept their old slogan under the new regime? How shocking!

Yeah, so the pope signed an agreement with the Nazi's, so they would only go after the jewish, as they where the ones that crucified jesus. After the war the RC provided shelter and helped many of the SS get to South America. From a christian point of view, Hitler only did what any Roman Emperor did in the past, if it was 14th century he probably be considered a crusader, and made a saint.

Long live the Roman Empire, wait I'm a Celt not Roman.

Tyler MacDurden

Concluding part starting presently on RTE 2. Enjoy.:D

Shigsy

kelly1 wrote: »

but then he conveniently ignores the excellent self-sacrificing work done by missionaries and Christian aid organizations to bring relief to suffering people...
If everyone lived according to Christian principles, the world would be a far better place in which to live.

Why must people consistently confuse religion with 'good living'? Religion is a very specific thing... a set of beliefs based on foundationless ramblings of vague texts with questionable pasts.
I think Dawkins did a good job of highlighting the difference here, but obviously this was the bit you missed

"With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion." -Steven Weinberg

Húrin

Shigsy wrote: »

"With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion." -Steven Weinberg

he was wrong

Húrin

robindch wrote: »

Or black. Or unmarried. Or born outside of marriage. Or jewish. Or islamic. And especially if you're an atheist. Lots of things really

Wow, you missed the point spectacularly. I almost feel embarrassed to have to highlight this to you: I didn't say that human rights were at their best in a Protestant theocracy.

Go back a few pages and read what I wrote, and PDN's longer explanation of it.

barneylakes

Me uncle says if only half of them got in there must be a very big crowd in there, Where is that your talking about? Heaven he says ...
As if to say I suppose that although he is a catholic he is not devout and I guess he is not convinced about the whole thing
I watched the Root of all evil and have read the prior threads it very interesting , I have the luxury of sitting on a nice fence at the moment though, my belief in God has waned somewhat lately and that programme sort of affirmed certain things for me.
It would have been great to have been exposed to that sort of freethinking at an earlier age though - but that opportunity would not present itself in a catholic primary school in the middle of this country
What do you think about Dawkins belief that children should not be subjected to whatever faith their parents practice just for the sake of sharing their beliefs? I think its a very fair point but not as easy to practice as to preach.

stakey

Húrin wrote: »

Stalin upheld an image of a political system and ideology firmly based in progress informed by science rather than superstition and metaphysics. He didn't do much other than demolish churches explicitly in the name of atheism, but his ideology depended on atheism. His record discredits the notion that atheism has something special that will make the world a better place, as many in the 19th centuy believed.

Stalin and to a lesser extent other Bolsheviks didn't work towards the eradication of the church based on some unwritten document of atheist principles. The Bolsheviks and specifically in Stalin's time saw the church as competition for the hearts and minds of the people. His ideology didn't depend on atheism, his ideology depended on wiping out any competition to the word of the Bolsheviks be it Trade Unions, striking sailors or other political parties. Were these groups also destroyed out of his ideology of atheism?

The Bolsheviks were a political entity that wished to run all facets of society and for that they could have no competition from anyone, but that's not an atheist doctrine!

AtomicHorror

Yeah, Stalin liked atheism because he could use it as an excuse to remove another competitor for the Love of Mother Russia and Her Founders (at least the ones who weren't deleted).

Flamed Diving

I fired off a quick email to RTE to congratulate them on having the balls to show it.

To those who are using the tired old 'atheism has led to atrocities' nonsense, you may notice that an alarming number of tyrants through the ages sported mustaches.

Coincidence?

PDN

Flamed Diving wrote: »

To those who are using the tired old 'atheism has led to atrocities' nonsense, you may notice that an alarming number of tyrants through the ages sported mustaches.

Coincidence?

Not if they singled out those without mustaches for persecution, or made mustaches a compulsory subject in schools.

Flamed Diving

PDN wrote: »

Not if they singled out those without mustaches for persecution, or made mustaches a compulsory subject in schools.

They were only a few steps away from achieving it...

Anywho, I am probably re-hashing points made already, but atheism doesn't have a doctrine. Everyone knows Stalin (an Atheist) was driven by his own religion (Communism) and Hitler (a Catholic) by his personal religion (Nazism). To believe that either of these men commited atrocities in the name of atheism needs to get their head checked.

Flamed Diving

I emailed RTE this:

Just a quick mail to say congratulations on the showing of this programme last night. Undoubtedly you will have been swamped by complaints, so I figured I would send a quick email to support its broadcast. Keep up the good work.

The response:

Thank you for your e-mail and your comments on the programme The Root of all Evil which have been forwarded to the people involved
Kind regards

Mary Byrne
Information Officer