Feed on Posts or Comments 01 September 2014

Christianity emodude on 05 Dec 2006 11:03 pm

New York Times Article – A Modest Proposal for a Truce on Religion

Our humble website was mentioned in this recent NYTimes article by Nicholas Kristof. The full article can be found at Richard Dawkins website here:

A Modest Proposal for a Truce on Religion

And in response, here’s a letter from Sam Harris and Richard Dawkins, who also gives our site a nice mention in his reply.

Reply to Kristof

Is the recent resurgence of Atheism “obnoxious”, “intolerant”, “mean”, “contemptuous” and “fundamentalist” and this article would have you believe?  Or is  it the case that any criticism of religion is viewed as “intolerant”?

How did religion acquire its extraordinary immunity against normal levels of criticism as Richard Dawkins put it?

8 Responses to “New York Times Article – A Modest Proposal for a Truce on Religion”

  1. on 05 Dec 2006 at 11:49 pm 1.Peter said …

    The torrent of nonsense written about Dawkins recent book is evidence that a disturbing number of people buy the notion that religion is somehow above rational discussion, that it has immunity.

    Religion is immune from criticism because after centuries of brainwashing most people accept that to have “faith” is a good thing – as long as it’s faith in the religion they adhere to! It is also a sign of piety or virtue. Therefore to criticize the pious is to be extreme since no right minded or tolerant person would ever attack the virtuous. Somehow the religious have been able to present themselves as being genteel [they are so nice!], reasonable [they are so fair!], or moral [they actually have beliefs!], while all the time they are simply superstitious or delusional. When they are called on their delusions they respond with hysteria to try to distract from the logical strength of the criticism.

    Kristof’s plea for a truce is nothing more than an attempt to quiet the secular voice, and to stop the enquiry into the insanity that is religion. It wasn’t a bunch of atheists who drove those planes into the World Trade Center. It seems to me that we atheists haven’t been loud enough. To paraphrase the Bard: the faithful protest too much! Maybe they know we’re onto something.

  2. on 06 Dec 2006 at 7:58 am 2.Jimson said …

    Religion gives people hope. Why do atheists insist on taking hope away?

  3. on 06 Dec 2006 at 8:29 am 3.Patti said …

    Jimson, not everyone finds hope in religion. Hope is an optimistic yearning that everyone has that things that are beyond our control will ultimately go our way. All sorts of people, whether they are religious or not, have “hope”. Many of those people choose to fulfill their “hopes” by taking action and being positive, proactive people within their communities and societies. Others just sit around, disengage from real humanity, and “hope” that magical characters will arrange the universe to suit their needs and make them comfortable. You do not need imaginary gods to give you hope. You already have hope, you’re just waiting for your wants/needs/wishes to be fulfilled by someone else, rather than by yourself. Take action for yourself, be positive, do good works, care about people.

  4. on 07 Dec 2006 at 4:57 pm 4.john connore said …

    I’ve read many studies about the prison pop. being almost devoid of atheist and overwhelmingly housing christians. Would someone please comment on this, and why is this not a topic of debate.

  5. on 07 Dec 2006 at 5:59 pm 5.godma said …

    I’d love to see some of those studies, John. Do you have any links to share?

    The one’s I’ve seen so far are not entirely convincing. For one big thing, it depends on whether “atheist/agnostic” is distinguished from “unaffiliated”. Of course, unaffiliated doesn’t necessarily mean the person doesn’t believe in an afterlife.

  6. on 07 Dec 2006 at 6:45 pm 6.john connore said …

    Godma, just google atheist prison population you’ll get a ton of them. The one I found most credible was from the federal pris. bureau. Also google religious I.Q.s and find what group overwhelmingly and consistently holds the highest I.Q.

  7. on 17 Dec 2006 at 10:52 pm 7.Kerry said …

    I was gratified to see this site mentioned favorably by Dawkins. I, for one, discovered and enjoyed this site long before I knew much about either Dawkins or Harris. It seems Dawkins was unaware of it though, which suprises me.

    This is all just evidence, though, of just how uncoordinated we really are. If all of us who have independently reached the same conclusions about religion happened to compare notes and pool our voices a bit, perhaps we *would* constitute a movement, lol.

    I think in most cases, like the Admin here, we figure it out for ourselves, and *then* we go out and find the web sites, the books, and the videos that confirm that we aren’t alone in our crazy rejection of faith – scattered across every geographic and socio-economic strata in society there are others of like mind who do not need religion to find meaning or truth in life.

    In any case, I’m glad to see this site get some exposure, even if it was initially negative. Any rational persion reading this site will have a tough time clinging to the idea that God is real.

    Kerry

  8. on 19 Dec 2006 at 6:12 am 8.Joseph said …

    The smaller percentage of atheists (as a proportion of their numbers in the general population) in prisons vs. Christians is somewhat problematic. Since it seems to be the case that more educated people have a greater tendency to be atheist, the smaller percentage could be attributed to the fact that there are fewer well educated people in prison than in the general population.

    More study is needed.

Trackback This Post | Subscribe to the comments through RSS Feed

Leave a Reply