Do you have parents against religion?

[enwiabe]

I flat out refuse to read anything by that man.

Then you are voluntarily ignorant to a prolific writer on the subject, for seemingly no valid reason.

[Mao]

I flat out refuse to read anything by that man.

Then you are voluntarily ignorant to a prolific writer on the subject, for seemingly no valid reason.

I also think Richard Dawkins is rubbish.

[enwiabe]

I flat out refuse to read anything by that man.

Then you are voluntarily ignorant to a prolific writer on the subject, for seemingly no valid reason.

I also think Richard Dawkins is rubbish.

Substantiate that claim?

[Russ]

I should clarify and say:

As an evolutionary biologist, he's a brilliant writer (there's a reason the Selfish Gene is on the curriculum of most introductory biology courses).
As a social commentator on religion he's...less brilliant. I read the God Delusion but didn't even bother opening his latest

[Eriny]

I echo those thoughts on Richard Dawkins. I'm an atheist and I find him obnoxious! I think that religion is a very personal thing and should be kept out of politics and schools and such, but what people think of existence/God/the universe, etc. is entirely their business and if they aren't hurting anybody and it works for them, so be it. Richard Dawkins may be right in saying God is a delusion, but he takes it too far by insulting the majority of religious people who are private in their belief in God.

[enwiabe]

I echo those thoughts on Richard Dawkins. I'm an atheist and I find him obnoxious! I think that religion is a very personal thing and should be kept out of politics and schools and such, but what people think of existence/God/the universe, etc. is entirely their business and if they aren't hurting anybody and it works for them, so be it. Richard Dawkins may be right in saying God is a delusion, but he takes it too far by insulting the majority of religious people who are private in their belief in God.

If you don't think it's important to expose the fact that religious belief is a delusion, then you are missing the point. It's about building a more reasonable society. You appear like you've never read Dawkins at all. He crafts his book in a very polite manner with some abrupt statements about the dangers of religion and the damage that religion does to people. I challenge you to find me a passage in the God Delusion where he's simply being "obnoxious". You can also choose to show me a youtube video if you'd like!

[Mao]

I echo those thoughts on Richard Dawkins. I'm an atheist and I find him obnoxious! I think that religion is a very personal thing and should be kept out of politics and schools and such, but what people think of existence/God/the universe, etc. is entirely their business and if they aren't hurting anybody and it works for them, so be it. Richard Dawkins may be right in saying God is a delusion, but he takes it too far by insulting the majority of religious people who are private in their belief in God.

If you don't think it's important to expose the fact that religious belief is a delusion, then you are missing the point. It's about building a more reasonable society. You appear like you've never read Dawkins at all. He crafts his book in a very polite manner with some abrupt statements about the dangers of religion and the damage that religion does to people. I challenge you to find me a passage in the God Delusion where he's simply being "obnoxious". You can also choose to show me a youtube video if you'd like!

No Dan, there is a difference between educating people and being a douche. Just because you are justified in your beliefs do not imply you can hunt down and ridicule others. That would be like me saying anyone who doesn't use linux don't know what a computer is.

[enwiabe]

I echo those thoughts on Richard Dawkins. I'm an atheist and I find him obnoxious! I think that religion is a very personal thing and should be kept out of politics and schools and such, but what people think of existence/God/the universe, etc. is entirely their business and if they aren't hurting anybody and it works for them, so be it. Richard Dawkins may be right in saying God is a delusion, but he takes it too far by insulting the majority of religious people who are private in their belief in God.

If you don't think it's important to expose the fact that religious belief is a delusion, then you are missing the point. It's about building a more reasonable society. You appear like you've never read Dawkins at all. He crafts his book in a very polite manner with some abrupt statements about the dangers of religion and the damage that religion does to people. I challenge you to find me a passage in the God Delusion where he's simply being "obnoxious". You can also choose to show me a youtube video if you'd like!

No Dan, there is a difference between educating people and being a douche. Just because you are justified in your beliefs do not imply you can hunt down and ridicule others. That would be like me saying anyone who doesn't use linux don't know what a computer is.

Dawkins doesn't 'hunt down' people. All the people he debates are professional theologians, and all of the questions he gets at panels are from people wanting to ask HIM questions, so you tell me how that's hunting down others.

Again, you're all just playing on hysteria. I challenge you to find me the Dawkins quote or video or whatever where Dawkins is obnoxious.

None of you have been forthcoming with such a piece of evidence. It has become quite fashionable, hip, almost, for atheists to go "I'M AN ATHEIST, BUT, DAWKINS IS A DICK!1111" without being able to substantiate it at all.

Substantiate it.

[lynt.br]

Christopher Hitchens on the other hand....

[Russ]

Should I try Hitchens?

Dawkins doesn't 'hunt down' people. All the people he debates are professional theologians, and all of the questions he gets at panels are from people wanting to ask HIM questions, so you tell me how that's hunting down others.

I don't think he hunts down others, but publishing a book called The God Delusion is inflammatory, regardless of his explanation/justification of the title inside. I will find my copy later and reread to see if there's anything specific, but my problem is with how he comes across in his writings on the matter/issues. He was on QandA last year apparently and his description of religion, the Bible etc. could be softened to be more palatable...that is, I suppose, a largely personal tolerance issue but it's enough for me to not want to keep reading him.

Also, as far as I'm concerned, I don't like his writing based on my experiences with it not because of any one, specific incident.

[enwiabe]

Should I try Hitchens?

Dawkins doesn't 'hunt down' people. All the people he debates are professional theologians, and all of the questions he gets at panels are from people wanting to ask HIM questions, so you tell me how that's hunting down others.

I don't think he hunts down others, but publishing a book called The God Delusion is inflammatory, regardless of his explanation/justification of the title inside. I will find my copy later and reread to see if there's anything specific, but my problem is with how he comes across in his writings on the matter/issues. He was on QandA last year apparently and his description of religion, the Bible etc. could be softened to be more palatable...that is, I suppose, a largely personal tolerance issue but it's enough for me to not want to keep reading him.

Also, as far as I'm concerned, I don't like his writing based on my experiences with it not because of any one, specific incident.

So what you're saying is, you've got nothing. Okay.

[mikee65]

Im so glad I brought it up

PS: For anyone who wants to see the irrational creationist mind at work,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YFjoEgYOgRo&playnext=1&list=PL3FB40FDF5A1401C2

oh that impudent laugh *face palm*

[Russ]

So what you're saying is, you've got nothing. Okay.

No, I just don't have a clear cut reason for it.

[bomb]

I echo those thoughts on Richard Dawkins. I'm an atheist and I find him obnoxious! I think that religion is a very personal thing and should be kept out of politics and schools and such, but what people think of existence/God/the universe, etc. is entirely their business and if they aren't hurting anybody and it works for them, so be it. Richard Dawkins may be right in saying God is a delusion, but he takes it too far by insulting the majority of religious people who are private in their belief in God.

I sorta get what your saying but I believe Dawkins has explained his reasons for being somewhat 'obnoxious'. He's explained that he believes that religion deserves no respect as it hasn't earned it in any way. But to be honest, I've read TGD and haven't felt that he's been unreasonable at any point. Personally, I prefer Sam Harris to Dawkins anyway.

Oh and I can't wait for Hitch to come down in September (I think) so I might get my book signed xD

[Eriny]

I don't think it is very important whether or not specific religions 'deserve' our respect. To me at least, it is about individual people, how they practice their religion, the compassion they show others, etc. Certainly some people acting in the name of religion are evil and stupid and evil and stupidity is sometimes justified by the name of religion, but it does not mean that every person who believes in God is deluded or hasn't come to their belief based on intense reflection. The majority of people who believe in God are reasoned, though perhaps not in the way Dawkins would like them to be.

And I have read the God Delusion, though because it was a long time ago and don't remember it well, most of my comments on Dawkins are based on his various media appearances. Here is one where he explicitly doesn't answer the question he is asked about how Darwin contributes to the way morality is understood and just goes into an auto-rant about the awfulness of religion which is essentially a straw man because I don't think that the only reason why religious people don't do bad things is based on a belief in God (even though I've joked that this might be the case in the past) http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p004y29f

Of course, one example does not an oeuvre make, but this is trivially related to the original thread anyway (plus I don't really have enough time to track down the particular media appearance I'm thinking of which I saw when I was abroad and I can't think of the name of the show!). In addition, even though I don't agree with Dawkins, I think his contribution to these debates have been important and worthy of some attention, I just don't feel, as an atheist, that he represents my views. But that's fine, he doesn't have to.

I find it offensive and baseless, enwiabe, that you think that the formation of my view is based on the trendiness of having it also.