Atheist Arrogance Marches on Washington
Slate.com political reporter Dave Weigel tweeted with typical sarcasm yesterday "Excited for the Atheist rally tomorrow. It's usually so hard to find smug people in DC."
One of the stars of this rally is Richard Dawkins, author of "The God Delusion." In an article for the badly named "On Faith" website of The Washington Post, Dawkins displayed his contempt for the "ignorance" brigade led by Palin, Bachmann, and Santorum. Putting God aside puts the "sapiens" in "Homo sapiens," he wrote: "Sapiens literally means ‘wise,’ but we have deserved the accolade only since we crawled from the swamp of primitive superstition and supernatural gullibility and embraced reason, logic, science and evidence-based truth."
This "nonpartisan" rally (starring Democratic Rep. Pete Stark) is an effort to counter the stigma atheists carry: “Our goals in four words: social and legislative equality,” rally spokesman Jesse Galef said. It sounds almost like atheists can't get married.
Dawkins explained why the Reason Rally is something that ignorant people should not join:
Thanks to evidence-based reason we are blessedly liberated from ancient fears of ghosts and devils, evil spirits and djinns, magic spells and witches’ curses.
Who then would rally against reason? The following statements will sound all too familiar.
1. “I don’t trust educated intellectuals, élitists who know more than I do. I’d prefer to vote for somebody like me, rather than somebody who is actually qualified to be president.”
What other than this mentality accounts for the popularity of Sarah Palin, Michele Bachmann, Rick Santorum--politicians who flaunt their ignorance as a vote-winning virtue? You want your airline pilot to be educated in aeronautics and navigation. You want your surgeon to be learned in anatomy. Yet when you vote for a president to lead a great country, you prefer to choose somebody who is ignorant and proud of it, someone you’d enjoy having a drink with, rather than somebody qualified for high office? If you are such a voter, you will not join the Reason Rally.
2. “Rather than have them learn modern science, I’d prefer my children to study a book written in 800 BC by unidentifed authors whose knowledge and qualifications were of their time. If I can’t trust the school to shield them from science, I’ll home-school them instead.”
Such a parent will not enjoy the Reason Rally. In 2008, at a conference of American science educators in Atlanta, Georgia, one teacher reported that students “burst into tears” when told they would be studying evolution. Another teacher described how students repeatedly screamed, “No!” when he began talking about evolution in class. If you are such a student, the Reason Rally is not for you - unless you take the precaution of stopping up your ears lest a word of unwelcome truth might penetrate.
3. “When I am faced with a mystery, with something I don’t understand, I don’t interrogate science for a solution, but jump to the conclusion that it must be supernatural and has no solution.”
This has been the lamentable but understandable first recourse of humanity for most of our history. We have grown out of it only during the past few centuries. Many people have never grown out of it, and if you are one of those the Reason Rally may have no appeal for you.
- Tim Graham's blog
- Login to post comments
Comments
Which is it?
Submitted by DontFeedTheTrolls on Sat, 03/24/2012 - 7:03am.
I'd like to ask Dawkins what he thinks of Obama's proclamation of faith.
Does he think Obama is a superstitious, ignorant, gullible fool, or a superior human being who, through the use of lies about his faith, tricks the masses into voting for him.
He'd find a way around it,
Submitted by motherbelt on Sat, 03/24/2012 - 7:16am.
He'd find a way around it, I'm sure. Notice he include any Democrats in the "ignorance brigade" like "devout Catholic" Nancy Pelosi either.
Has anyone ever asked Pelosi what she thinks about evolution? No, because they don't care.
Liberals and conservatives can have the same beliefs, but liberals hold them with the best intentions (e.g. "social justice") while conservatives hold them out of ignorance.
"Committed Christian" Obama?
Submitted by Tim Graham on Sat, 03/24/2012 - 7:28am.
I would bet you the atheists believe Obama is really one of them, just like Obama's mother. Just as the lefties believe Obama is completely pro-gay, so his public stance is tolerated.
Wanna bet?
Submitted by iFight on Sat, 03/24/2012 - 8:38am.
And why does such a small minority threaten you?
Where did he suggest either
Submitted by Boudin on Sat, 03/24/2012 - 8:55am.
Was a threat.
What I do wanna bet, is you have many more straw-men
In the body of text I replied to
Submitted by iFight on Sat, 03/24/2012 - 8:59am.
Apparently atheists think Obama is an atheist. From what does one extract such an opinion, I just don't know. Obviously they wouldn't be written about if someone wasn't feeling threatened by the missing belief in God.
Nonsense,
Submitted by Boudin on Sat, 03/24/2012 - 9:18am.
Obviously they wouldn't be written about if someone wasn't feeling threatened by the missing belief in God.
Nobody said they were threatened that Obama was an atheist. Fact is, it's the atheist who seem to be threaten by folks of faith, or why else would they ridicule, and protest them? Now getting back to Obama, most folks would rather him be an atheist, then a muslim.
But the main point here is, Obama expresses his faith, and the atheist embrace him. Know why?
I do!
mind as god
Submitted by MidAmerica on Sat, 03/24/2012 - 7:44am.
I've been around a few people who could not understand abstract concepts and only dealt with the world as a collection of 'facts'. They are scary people.
A man I am aquainted with just recently had his junior high son suspended form school yet again for threatening to physically harm a fellow student in a violent maner. This kid is very smart, spends too much time on the internet unsupervised and sees the world in an atheististic and scientific way. He is amoral and that's what makes him frightening. To him considering how to blow up the school or shooting someone is just a reasonable response to whatever agitates him. He also makes fun of religion and superstitious people. Atheist want us to devolve to the law of the jungle where personal needs/wants are justification for any course of action.
Atheists hate.
Submitted by Mike Bratton on Sat, 03/24/2012 - 1:15pm.
They define themselves by what and Whom they are against.
A simple, unfortunate, lamentable world view. Pray for those caught up in it.
--Mike
Yes
Submitted by Eric the Fred on Sun, 03/25/2012 - 3:22pm.
They define themselves by what and Whom they are against.
Yes; much like - you guessed it - liberals/Leftists.
Fixed it for them
Submitted by Tugboat Phil on Sat, 03/24/2012 - 12:01pm.
3. “When I am faced with a mystery, with something I don’t understand, I don’t interrogate science for a solution, but jump to the conclusion that it must be
supernaturalman caused and hasnoonly a government solution.”I believe this is a plank in the DNC platform.
The God Delusion, Ok then explain life, how much does it weigh
Submitted by upcountrywater on Sat, 03/24/2012 - 1:54pm.
Your life Mr. Atheist.... the life inside of you, in science terms, where exactly is your consciousnesses, residing inside your head?.... What is it's dimensions, exact location, it's mass, it's charge..what sort of plug does it use to connect to the body, HDML mini plug? WHAT?
I'm sure the atheists in charge of many millions of people, in the past 100 years have had some SCIENCE experiments.... to find the "ghost in the machine"...
Oh maybe like setting up a scale to a hospital bed, that accurately measures the weight of the subject , while alive, then at the moment of death, all are watching the dials to see the slight loss of weight.... yea right.
God is Light... Maybe you should be looking for a little teeny tiny house of mirrors.
You Didn't Build That.
Hay, Mr. Science...
Submitted by CobraMan on Sat, 03/24/2012 - 2:27pm.
Hay, Mr. Science, current scientific theory says that the university erupted into being in a giant flash of light, energy, just as the Bible stated several thousand years prior to the invention of the telescope. Do you really thing that this is a coincidence?
Look at it this way: The Bible says: at first there was nothing, just as science contends.
And on the first day, God created light, just as science contends with the Big Bang (microwave background radiation, the echo of the Big Bang, ever hear of it? It's called "the first light." Science is actually mapping it! Mapping the First Light!).
And then God created the Universe, just as science contends with quantum theories of mass.
And then God created the Earth, just as science contends with astrophysical theories.
And then God created animals, just as science contends with evolution theories.
An then God crated man, just as science contends with yet another evolution theory.
And yet, despite science continually "proving" that the Bible was right all along (except for, arguably, the time scales involved), there is not "proof" of God, right? And you claim that the religious people don't adhere to "reason, logic, science and evidence-based truth?" Hay, you seem to be ignoring the evidence that's right in front of your face, you hypocrite!
The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States. The US Constitution
Unless you're a fetus. The US Supreme Court
Or Anwar al-Awlaki.
Dawkins
Submitted by mmilesll on Sat, 03/24/2012 - 3:27pm.
What a pompus asshole. Saw him on O'Reilly and Bill mopped the floor with him. The LSM will promote this group of wacko's little march more than they did the religious march last week, count on it.
If Dawkins
Submitted by HockeyKid on Mon, 03/26/2012 - 11:15am.
is the brightest mind atheists can bring to the fight, then atheism is doomed.
"Beauty is only skin deep, but liberal's to the bone." - me
not very logical
Submitted by Eric the Fred on Sat, 03/24/2012 - 8:28pm.
Atheists claim logic yet their demands for 'proof' of God's existence is illogical.
By all standard definitions, God is a non-material, super-natural being existing beyond the confines of our physical existence and mental capacity. Yet Atheists dismiss the God claim for lack of 'evidence'. By evidence they mean physical, measurable evidence of the kind existing in our 4d world of space-time/mass-energy. This is, of course, plainly absurd - you cannot test for non-A by only looking at A - and yet the absurdity seems to escape 'logical' and 'reason-based' Atheists at every turn.
The more intellectually honest position would be agnosticism, yet this is also just Atheism since agnostics acknowledge they would be ready to believe in a deity only if 'evidence' for such deity emerged. By 'evidence' they, of course, mean the physical, measurable kind that Atheists demand as well.
There are a number of other serious problems with the Atheist claim which I won't go into here. One of them is the definition of what Atheism actually means. For most , it means: the belief that there is no God. However, because it has been shown that this claim is actually unprovable, Atheists are now trying to change the definition of Atheism to mean 'without a God belief/God concept' or 'lack of belief in any god', etc. Yet these are also plainly absurd and dishonest since Atheists have a very clear and intractable position when it comes to God: they believe he does not exist.
A website for those who are further interested http://atheism-analyzed.blogspot.co.uk/ The author, Stan, is no short of brilliant.
The stigma surrounding Atheists is that they're insufferable,...
Submitted by Phryj1 on Sun, 03/25/2012 - 12:43pm.
...in-your-face, condescending, arrogant douchebags. So, what do they do? They invite Dawkins and other obnoxious, faith-hating famous Atheist jackasses to a huge convention where they make fun of religion and belittle people of faith.
Great idea. Problem solved.
And Atheists act like they're smarter than everyone else?
Progressives seem to be completely averse to facts and logic. Apparently, reality has a conservative bias.
Well-Reasoned Hate
Submitted by Jimi Streets on Mon, 03/26/2012 - 3:16am.
Dawkins and so many other prominent atheists seem to think that they can claim the "reason" issue to the exclusion of everyone else that is not an atheist. This represents not only poor logic but poor science when dealing with I.D.
Like so many other liberals, Dawkins will also employ the lamest of tactics to prove attempting to defend his points - ridicule, which of course proves nothing except the immaturity of Dawkins and the vacuousness of his ideas.
As a good friend of mine once
Submitted by HockeyKid on Mon, 03/26/2012 - 11:14am.
As a good friend of mine once put it, "I tried being an atheist for a while, but it required entirely too much faith."
"Beauty is only skin deep, but liberal's to the bone." - me