Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Evolution -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: LLCF who wrote (3892)	4/27/2010 5:14:20 PM
From: Brumar89	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 69300

I questioned (didn't disagree out of hand, asked for more info) a LOT of YOUR conclusions: 1.) That Dawkins (and atheism) represents "science". (update: how much of the scientific community is jumping on board with his lawsuit?) I will stand by him being a spokesman for science .... that endowed chair at Oxford means something, the articles in scientific mags, etc. 2.) That Dawkins is "hateful"... (haven't heard back). Obvious. I'll stand by that opinion too. You can call him "angry" instead if you want. Ordinary people don't want to arrest the Pope for "crimes against humanity" or forbid religious instruction for kids. 3.) That atheism is somehow some great travesty with nothing of worth to be questioned and discussed. I think the reason for it and the emotion behind is more important. Dawkins and people like him (PZ Myers, Dennett, Provine, Steven Weinberg, etc) are obviously driven by anger at God. 4.) That Dawkins atheist writings are some sort of "transgression" equal to a pedophile. The thing about his positions I find most objectionable (applies to folks like him including the ones I just mentioned above) are the combativeness and rhetorical aggression toward religion. He also seek to instill his hostility toward God in young people - another thing to object to. As to whether he's "equal to" a pedophile, maybe not .... I'll just say both are similar in that they seek to corrupt youth. ---------------------- Hmm, you converted in order to figure out what they were being taught so you could counter it if necessary.> In part, yep. Just dreadful to take a real interest isn't it? Not the interest .... but one has to wonder if your conversion was honest. ---------------------- celibacy, marriage, female priests, birth control.... I have no problem telling my kids those and indeed ALMOST EVERYTHING are simply traditions that some follow and some don't. Yeah, the people who don't follow them are called non-Catholics. Nothing wrong with non-Catholic churches. There are Lutheran schools (just as an example - there are others) and their church doesn't have celibate priests, forbid birth control ..... they don't have an infallible leader ...