Derec
Contributor
Non-PC is not the same as dumb. What exactly do you think he said about Islam that is so dumb?
-
Features
Richard Dawkins "no platformed" at
- Thread starter TSwizzle
- Start date
Derec
Contributor
Blackwashing?
Already addressed.
Derec
Contributor
And is doing so by reverting to a pure form of Islam.
Wait, what? Donald Rumsfeld did not invent the conflict between the Followers of the Teaching of Mohammed and the Partisans of Ali.
Also, you are misusing the word "terrorist".
There is this myth that Mossadeq was some kind of textbook democrat. That is far from truth. In his last years, he ruled by decree and suspended elections of 1951 mid-way. He was also allied with the Soviet Union.
Sure, he was deposed with involvement of US and UK (he stole some of US/UK assets in the nationalization of oil industry) but to portray what happened as democrat being replaced by a dictator is extremely simplistic.
Well the alternative would likely be much worse. At least the monarchy provides some stability, which is important when more than 10% of oil production originates there.
It is also not the fault of the West. For example Muhammad bin Saud allied himself with Muhammad bin Abdul-Wahhab and thus with Wahhabi Islam in the 18th century, long before the West has any influence in Southwest Asia. And his descendant Ibn Saud conquered most of the Arabian Peninsula before any oil was found there.
The Shiite ideology of the iranian weirdbeards is also independent of the West.
- - - Updated - - -
No, it hasn't been.
What specific statements do you think are 'dumb' and why? Linking to another site does not cut it.
Dawkins spoke some inconvenient truths about Islam that cause folks like Warpoet to froth at the mouth. Like a moth to a flame indeed.
We know we have entered a land of woo when we see atheists defending backward Islamic doctrine and culture.
The irony of these cancellations of speakers is that the act of the cancellation often garners more publicity for the speaker than would have come from the speech.
We know we have entered a land of woo when we see atheists defending backward Islamic doctrine and culture.
The irony of these cancellations of speakers is that the act of the cancellation often garners more publicity for the speaker than would have come from the speech.
That's it? What exactly is the problem with those statements?
Yes, absolutely. Ever notice how many "people" only occasionally tweet, and how their tweets are always very clean and official-sounding? Many movie stars, musicians, and politicians? Yeah, they've hired PR flacks to do that. Twitter's a damn minefield hen you're famous. Even if you aren't, a single badly-worded tweet (and at 140 characters, it's not that hard to word something badly) can lead to a torrent of anger. Hell, even Neil Degrasse Tyson gets a torrent of anger over his tweets, and those are mostly just innocuous jokes.
TSwizzle
I am unburdened by what has been.
You're having a laugh.
Dawkins isn't wrong when he says religion is child abuse. He isn't wrong when he says Islam is backwards and evil. He isn't wrong when he says a man who actually believes Mohammed accended to heaven on a winged horse probably shouldn't be trusted to reliably convey the news.
As Dan Dennet would say, we need to break the spell. We really really need to break the taboo of criticizing religion and seeing it for what it is. We need to stop walking in these egg shells. Draw Mohamed while walking topless to a gay wedding.
People will call you a bigot for saying that Islam is poison. But Islam is poison. Religion is poison. Faith is poison. There is nothing respectable about it and those pushing these fairy tales need to be called out as the deluded and potentially dangerous people that they are.
Ridicule is the key here, as these religions are utterly ridiculous and gain power only if we low them to be taken seriously. People like Dawkins, Hitchens, and Maher do a great service.
There is such irony in painting the anti-religious as the big bad, after centuries of religious people slaughtering and burning us at the stake, and religious doctrine and holy texts still calling for our heads and declaring us evil and deserving of eternal torment.
As Dan Dennet would say, we need to break the spell. We really really need to break the taboo of criticizing religion and seeing it for what it is. We need to stop walking in these egg shells. Draw Mohamed while walking topless to a gay wedding.
People will call you a bigot for saying that Islam is poison. But Islam is poison. Religion is poison. Faith is poison. There is nothing respectable about it and those pushing these fairy tales need to be called out as the deluded and potentially dangerous people that they are.
Ridicule is the key here, as these religions are utterly ridiculous and gain power only if we low them to be taken seriously. People like Dawkins, Hitchens, and Maher do a great service.
There is such irony in painting the anti-religious as the big bad, after centuries of religious people slaughtering and burning us at the stake, and religious doctrine and holy texts still calling for our heads and declaring us evil and deserving of eternal torment.
TSwizzle
I am unburdened by what has been.
Whether Dawkins is right or wrong on these things is not the issue. The iissue is that some people want him shut down because they don't like what he said.
repoman
Contributor
I would say that he exaggerated Islam as far as top evils in the world.
I would put our civilization's complete enthrallment to being "resource spendthrifts" as maybe 3 orders of magnitude more evil than Islam. Nothing can even approach that alone in evil.
I would put our civilization's complete enthrallment to being "resource spendthrifts" as maybe 3 orders of magnitude more evil than Islam. Nothing can even approach that alone in evil.
That's a separate issue, yes. A private institution has the right to disinvite him. The irony though is that by doing so he gets more publicity than would have come from the interview.
Faith based (anti-science) thinking, tribalism, and authoritarianism are some top evils in the world, and religion encapsulates them all. Islam is a particularly virulent and stark example.
Last edited:
whichphilosophy
Contributor
- Joined
- Jun 10, 2004
- Messages
- 6,803
- Basic Beliefs
- Energy is itself a Life form
Any form of censorship of free speech that is clearly not incitement which in Dawkins case clearly does not propagate or incite violence or hatred, is undesirable.
You don't have the credibility to dictate what does or doesn't "cut it" when it comes to standards of evidence. You can read through the link and see a number of dumb ass things tweeted by Dawkins on multiple subjects.
Anyone who repeats the tired canard that moderate Muslims don't condemn terrorism, compares Muslims to Nazis and praises the work of Geert fucking Wilders, is a dumbass who doesn't deserve to be taken seriously.
You should find yourself in good company with him, Mr. "polls proving me wrong about Muslims don't matter because they're all lying stealth jihadists."
As for moths to flames, pretty sure you stick your snout into any thread where you get to preach about liberal intolerance more often than I do on any subject, boss.
whichphilosophy
Contributor
- Joined
- Jun 10, 2004
- Messages
- 6,803
- Basic Beliefs
- Energy is itself a Life form
I think you mean free speech from the point of view of a learned Scientist. I'm not an Atheist myself by the way.
And herein lies the problem, and the hypocritical stupidity that you, Dawkins and others don't even seem to recognize you engage in all the time: you think that a Muslim holding irrational religious views disqualifies him from conveying the news, but say fuck all about any Jew, Christian or Hindu holding comparably irrational views. Just like you harp on and fucking on about all the "regressive" views Muslims hold but give everyone else a pass for the same behavior.
It makes you a dishonest axe grinder at best, and a bigoted asshole at worst. I'm not sure you're smart enough to recognize this, but Dawkins ought to.
- - - Updated - - -
He's an evolutionary biologist. His pronouncements on issues like religion and terrorism don't hold any special weight or authority. Quite the opposite at this point given the amount of stupid shit he's tweeted.
Last edited:
TSwizzle
I am unburdened by what has been.
Your credentials are less than zero fella.
Run along and let the grown-ups talk.