Do you like how Dawkins, Hitchens et al. represent atheists?

S.A.M. said:
It has? You mean copy cats? Are they all against the Saud regime too?
Click to expand...

Yes, there are copycat groups, but I was talking about Al Quida itself. Hatred of the Saudi regime is a commonality, since Arabia is the holiest of Muslim places, and the royal family behaves in un-Islamic ways, besides being friends with America.
 
SAM said:
Is there something wrong with such an investigation? Are we allowed to come to conclusions contrary to the assertions of believers, and maintain them in the face of strongly abusive protest, without being accused of arrogance? ”

Not at all, let me know when you reach some conclusions.
Click to expand...
Dawkins has. But they don't seem to be well received, for reasons that are hard to pin down.
 
mikenostic said:
Actually, I find thiests' stubbornness and refusal to acknowledge any logical explanation of anything contrary to what they believe (no matter how absurd it is) just as annoying, if not more, than Dawkins' or Hitchens' arrogance.
Click to expand...

Dawkins and Hitchens are nothing is not the epitome of arrogance. Even before they jumped on this particular bandwagon.
 
You know what's arrogant? All the TV preachers all day long on Sunday telling me I'm going to be tortured for all eternity if I don't believe their crap.
 
spidergoat said:
You know what's arrogant? All the TV preachers all day long on Sunday telling me I'm going to be tortured for all eternity if I don't believe their crap.
Click to expand...

But that's all the Truth! And it's true because the BIble says it's true! And there's nothing arrogant about claiming to have a monopoly on truth!
 
spidergoat said:
You know what's arrogant? All the TV preachers all day long on Sunday telling me I'm going to be tortured for all eternity if I don't believe their crap.
Click to expand...

I think we've already concluded that both are equally evengelical.

As WB Yeats wrote..'the worst are filled with a passionate intensity whilst the best lack such conviction'..or similar..you get the drift.
 
iceaura said:
Dawkins has. But they don't seem to be well received, for reasons that are hard to pin down.
Click to expand...

I have heard almost everything he has said on the topic and for reasons plainly visible (see Xev's post for clarity of concepts) they are obvious attempts at disinformation.
 
SAM said:
I have heard almost everything he has said on the topic and for reasons plainly visible (see Xev's post for clarity of concepts) they are obvious attempts at disinformation.
Click to expand...
They obviousness is lost on me -I can sort of see the arrogance in the arguments being inferred from the objectionable hagiography of the support, but disinformation?
 
iceaura said:
They obviousness is lost on me -I can sort of see the arrogance in the arguments being inferred from the objectionable hagiography of the support, but disinformation?
Click to expand...

Better known as jumping to conclusions.:)
 
If there was a .000000001 percent chance that you just won the lottery, would it be jumping to conclusions to go out and buy a mansion?
 
spidergoat said:
If there was a .000000001 percent chance that you just won the lottery, would it be jumping to conclusions to go out and buy a mansion?
Click to expand...

No, just stupid lol
Jumping to conclusions can lead to disinformation but it doesnt have to.
 
S.A.M. said:
I have heard almost everything he has said on the topic and for reasons plainly visible (see Xev's post for clarity of concepts) they are obvious attempts at disinformation.
Click to expand...

No, what YOU just stated is disinformation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top